News & Discussion: Trams

[EBG]

People in general were in favour of trams until they discovered the gum trees would have to go , then they all changed their minds.
These trees were never suitable for traffic islands because their roots continually heaved up the road surface in the centre lanes.

[claybro]

Funny how people in Adelaide site the "horrors" of melbournes trams blocking roads and the like, yet most people I know in Melbourne love their trams. Ripping up their trams and replacing them with buses would be an absolute disaster conjestion and pollution wise and drive commuters back to their cars in droves. Trams hold more people, are quieter and less polluting than buses, and because they run on the Middle of the road make footpaths much more useable.

[Waewick]

Funny how people in Adelaide site the "horrors" of melbournes trams blocking roads and the like, yet most people I know in Melbourne love their trams. Ripping up their trams and replacing them with buses would be an absolute disaster conjestion and pollution wise and drive commuters back to their cars in droves. Trams hold more people, are quieter and less polluting than buses, and because they run on the Middle of the road make footpaths much more useable.

it is a sad position that people take, wanting less beneficial infrastructure.

[rubberman]

Funny how people in Adelaide site the "horrors" of melbournes trams blocking roads and the like, yet most people I know in Melbourne love their trams. Ripping up their trams and replacing them with buses would be an absolute disaster conjestion and pollution wise and drive commuters back to their cars in droves. Trams hold more people, are quieter and less polluting than buses, and because they run on the Middle of the road make footpaths much more useable.

Claybro,

That's an emotional answer. That's fine, because plenty of people base their decision on emotional factors, and planners should take those opinions into account.

However, while Melbournites love their trams, where's the evidence that Adelaide residents love trams so much they'd put up with doubled travel times down streets like the Parade, Prospect Road, O'Connell Street? In addition, in Melbourne, those narrow streets are a minor percentage of the whole tram system. The proposed Adelaide system would have narrow streets as a majority of the tram system, savagely increasing travel times wherever trams were running.....

....Unless there was a significant increase in speed the trams travelled at. This could be achieved by a simultaneous ban on on street parking, restriction of car usage along those streets, cycles and taxis only etc. Then it might work.

The question is, whether or not realistically, such measures would be acceptable to the community. If so, the tram proposals have a chance of proceeding. If not, the alternatives are: keep dreaming, or come up with some other method of increasing the travel speed, or just walk away.

[Waewick]

Funny how people in Adelaide site the "horrors" of melbournes trams blocking roads and the like, yet most people I know in Melbourne love their trams. Ripping up their trams and replacing them with buses would be an absolute disaster conjestion and pollution wise and drive commuters back to their cars in droves. Trams hold more people, are quieter and less polluting than buses, and because they run on the Middle of the road make footpaths much more useable.

Claybro,

That's an emotional answer. That's fine, because plenty of people base their decision on emotional factors, and planners should take those opinions into account.

However, while Melbournites love their trams, where's the evidence that Adelaide residents love trams so much they'd put up with doubled travel times down streets like the Parade, Prospect Road, O'Connell Street? In addition, in Melbourne, those narrow streets are a minor percentage of the whole tram system. The proposed Adelaide system would have narrow streets as a majority of the tram system, savagely increasing travel times wherever trams were running.....

....Unless there was a significant increase in speed the trams travelled at. This could be achieved by a simultaneous ban on on street parking, restriction of car usage along those streets, cycles and taxis only etc. Then it might work.

The question is, whether or not realistically, such measures would be acceptable to the community. If so, the tram proposals have a chance of proceeding. If not, the alternatives are: keep dreaming, or come up with some other method of increasing the travel speed, or just walk away.

Whilst I agree they need to take a holistic approach (eg improving both Kensigton and Magill Roads to pick up the slack) the focus of the trams needs to remain getting more people in quicker with less vechiles.

What should be taken into consideration is how many people will take the tram if we put it in and therefore reduce the cars, if that helps driving time then so be it. (and I'm a driver so I have a bit to lose here)

[claybro]

....Unless there was a significant increase in speed the trams travelled at. This could be achieved by a simultaneous ban on on street parking, restriction of car usage along those streets, cycles and taxis only etc. Then it might work.

This has been mentioned here a couple of times, but I must say it confuses me a bit. Trams have priority. They cannot deviate from their track, so how parked cars have an impact on the tram running times I am not sure. Ban parking-or don't ban parking, it wont stop a tram. Parked cars will stop other cars, but so does the parking at present, as do buses, as does right and left turns at intersections. Trams in Melbourne have peak hour priority so traffic cannot use the tram "lane" during certain times, if ever. Hook turns keep the intersections clear of right turning cars in congested spots. I think what you are getting at is that it will severely impact travel times of CARS. The Parade and Prospect road are destinations in their own right, and have no business being commuter thoroughfares into the city. It is through traffic which is preventing these streets from becoming true urban villages in their own right, and if a tram discourages through traffic, gets some noisy buses off the road, well that is surely a good thing for selected sites.

[Westside]

....Unless there was a significant increase in speed the trams travelled at. This could be achieved by a simultaneous ban on on street parking, restriction of car usage along those streets, cycles and taxis only etc. Then it might work.

This has been mentioned here a couple of times, but I must say it confuses me a bit. Trams have priority. They cannot deviate from their track, so how parked cars have an impact on the tram running times I am not sure. Ban parking-or don't ban parking, it wont stop a tram. Parked cars will stop other cars, but so does the parking at present, as do buses, as does right and left turns at intersections. Trams in Melbourne have peak hour priority so traffic cannot use the tram "lane" during certain times, if ever. Hook turns keep the intersections clear of right turning cars in congested spots. I think what you are getting at is that it will severely impact travel times of CARS. The Parade and Prospect road are destinations in their own right, and have no business being commuter thoroughfares into the city. It is through traffic which is preventing these streets from becoming true urban villages in their own right, and if a tram discourages through traffic, gets some noisy buses off the road, well that is surely a good thing for selected sites.

Thank You!

All I've been hearing on this argument so far is "A vehicle transporting 200 passengers is going to hold up my single occupant vehicle in my journey through back-streets to a central employment area and thus the world is going to end."

Everyone has been spouting the figure of trams travelling at HALF the speed of buses if they are introduced to existing streets without right-of-way, but no one has explained where this figure has come from. Unless someone has a reference to a study, I'm not buying it. With an introduction of trams to these routes, there a multitude of methods that can be employed to significantly increase the speed of public transport along these routes - such as banning right turns, giving trams priority at lights (the use of gps means traffic can be cleared in front of trams approaching intersections), full or partial tram-only lanes (again can be focussed around intersections) etc. All of these measures will aid in getting commuters out of their cars, on to public transport and to reduce congestion for all users.

[monotonehell]

All I've been hearing on this argument so far is "A vehicle transporting 200 passengers is going to hold up my single occupant vehicle in my journey through back-streets to a central employment area and thus the world is going to end."

10 points to Gryffindor!

People keep complaining how "buses cause congestion" and yet when cars are eliminated from KWS during events the buses work like clockwork. It's the cars that cause the congestion.

But yeah, we have a couple of challenges. One, to extract people from all their single-occupant, urban-four-wheel-drive vehicles in the inner east. And two, to convince them that it isn't their God given right to drive those vehicles the 10 metres down to the Parade and park right out-front of the restaurant.

(I can find you a reference to a paper that has the relative traveling speeds of the modes of travel. If I can remember the author...)

[monotonehell]

I give up. I think it's in this one... http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jpt/vol9/iss3/1/

But I can't find the page and I've run out of lunchbreak. It was defo Prof. G Currie of Monash Uni though.

[Waewick]

All I've been hearing on this argument so far is "A vehicle transporting 200 passengers is going to hold up my single occupant vehicle in my journey through back-streets to a central employment area and thus the world is going to end."

10 points to Gryffindor!

People keep complaining how "buses cause congestion" and yet when cars are eliminated from KWS during events the buses work like clockwork. It's the cars that cause the congestion.

But yeah, we have a couple of challenges. One, to extract people from all their single-occupant, urban-four-wheel-drive vehicles in the inner east. And two, to convince them that it isn't their God given right to drive those vehicles the 10 metres down to the Parade and park right out-front of the restaurant.

(I can find you a reference to a paper that has the relative traveling speeds of the modes of travel. If I can remember the author...)

I only use my car as i have multi drop offs but I have 4 occupants so I don't feel as guilty (drop offs can't be done via bus)

if we could get rid of free parking, we'd go a long way to improving PT.

[rubberman]

....Unless there was a significant increase in speed the trams travelled at. This could be achieved by a simultaneous ban on on street parking, restriction of car usage along those streets, cycles and taxis only etc. Then it might work.

This has been mentioned here a couple of times, but I must say it confuses me a bit. Trams have priority. They cannot deviate from their track, so how parked cars have an impact on the tram running times I am not sure. Ban parking-or don't ban parking, it wont stop a tram. Parked cars will stop other cars, but so does the parking at present, as do buses, as does right and left turns at intersections. Trams in Melbourne have peak hour priority so traffic cannot use the tram "lane" during certain times, if ever. Hook turns keep the intersections clear of right turning cars in congested spots. I think what you are getting at is that it will severely impact travel times of CARS. The Parade and Prospect road are destinations in their own right, and have no business being commuter thoroughfares into the city. It is through traffic which is preventing these streets from becoming true urban villages in their own right, and if a tram discourages through traffic, gets some noisy buses off the road, well that is surely a good thing for selected sites.

It's pretty obvious. If you don't eliminate the parking on those streets, then the traffic has to share the roads with the trams and can't get past a tram. Compared with the situation now where cars can pass a bus pulled into a stop. That means the whole traffic flow is stopped every time a tram stops. That then compounds when turning and slow vehicles hold up the trams where buses can just move round them.

As for the actual speeds on similar roads in Melbourne, it's a couple of google clicks away.

If people are really wanting trams down these streets, then anticipating the problems and finding strategies round them is the way to go. Sticking heads in sand and pretending they don't exist will ensure that trams never run there.

As I've said before, I've been a tram fan most of my life, and I'd like to see a system in Adelaide. But I'm not blind to the obstacles. Those who really want trams should recognise those obstacles and propose ways round them if they want a realistic chance of succeeding.

[Waewick]

would it be possible to establish some sort of hub that is a tram stop that the buses drive to?

If both frequencies are sufficient wouldn't that also elimiate the need to have park n rides?

I know people are going to throw the theory that people will be nervious about the time to destination, but if a tram is at the parade doing 10minute (or 5) loops and you have all buses to the east delivering passengers we could solve that issue?

you might then have less buses on Kensignton/Magill thus improving traffic movement on those roads?

[Norman]

In each direction there are two traffic lanes and one parking lane on The Parade between Fullarton and Portrush Roads. If one traffic lane is taken up by trams that still leaves one traffic lane and one parking lane.

[how good is he]

Due to the limited and narrow space available I would expect the Parade, Prospect Rd, Unley Rd etc if they ever get trams to be sharing the road with existing traffic like they do currently on Jetty Rd Glenelg.

[ml69]

Due to the limited and narrow space available I would expect the Parade, Prospect Rd, Unley Rd etc if they ever get trams to be sharing the road with existing traffic like they do currently on Jetty Rd Glenelg.

You're right about Prospect Rd sharing with existing traffic, because it's currently only parking lane + one traffic lane.

The Parade can be parking lane + one traffic lane + tram right-of-way.

Unley Rd can be bike lane + one traffic lane + tram right-of-way. Not enough space for a parking lane, anyone familiar with this road knows that you need to constantly dodge and swerve past parked cars from the left hand traffic lane.