News & Discussion: Public Transport Contracts, Service & Policy

[mawsonguy]

From the Sadvertiser on 14 July 2018 (https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sou ... 9b5f22a975):

SEGWAYS, EcoCaddies, Uber-style buses, ferries, ride-share bicycles and old-school trams.

Infrastructure Minister Stephan Knoll has vowed nothing is off the table as work begins on designing the best public transport system for greater Adelaide.

Almost 79 per cent of Adelaide commuters drive to work – the highest rate in the five mainland capitals – but growing congestion issues have many motorists reconsidering their commuting options.

Mr Knoll has told the Sunday Mail he wants to bring South Australia’s public transport service offering into the 21st century.
“Some new technologies are operating in other cities around Australia – and the world – with great success, delivering better service for commuters,” he said.
“If we can increase public transport patronage, it’ll help relieve traffic congestion and reduce commute times for everyone.”

Former State Government tram plans for Adelaide – including a line to The Parade, in Norwood, and an extension to North Adelaide – have been scrapped as Mr Knoll will ask the new South Australian Public Transport Authority (SAPTA) to consider anything and everything.

“Ultimately, the question we want SAPTA to answer is, how do we deliver the best, most efficient, reliable and cost-effective public transport system for South Australians?,” Mr Knoll told the Sunday Mail.
“That’s why we’re scrapping the AdelLink plan from the Infrastructure Australia list. Labor locked themselves into building an expensive tram network around metropolitan Adelaide and didn’t ask what is the best way to deliver public transport services?
“Labor had the blinkers on – they had a fixation on trams and closed themselves to other, possibly better, options.
“Now, trams may be one option as part of the broad plan but we don’t know that. There are a host of new technologies and we need to investigate them.”
He named uber-style buses, ecocaddies, segways as some of the technologies but how they could work - if at all - would be up to the authority to explore.
The important thing he said, was to have a fresh and modern look.

A survey by HERE Technologies in February revealed more than 60 per cent of Adelaide commuters would be willing to change their travelling habits to help ease road congestion and 53 per cent had considered doing so.

“We need to recognise all forms of transport can be part of our network – point to point, rideshare, bikeshare and on demand, first mile, last mile services as well as high-capacity services,” he said.
“At the heart of it, SAPTA will be customer-focused because our public transport network relies on hundreds of thousands of customers every day to be sustainable,” he said.
“SAPTA will provide fundamental advice about the best way forward for SA’s public transport network.
“We won’t leave any stone unturned as we look to get more and more people using public transport.”

SA Council of Social Services chief executive Ross Womersley said much of the public transport system in Adelaide was organised on an arterial basis. “The public transport system is okay if you want to come in and out of the city,” he said. “But if you want to go across suburbs it is really challenging.
“The other key issue for us is that we enhance affordability and accessibility.”

Public Sector Association secretary Nev Kitchin welcomed any conversation about enhanced public transport options.
“Thousands of public sector workers use public transport each and every day and any improvements in access to transport services would advantage the public sector workforce,” he said. Mr Kitchin said with many public sector workers using the train network it was important to make it easy to get to stations including options such as making more bike lockers accessible for the growing number of cyclists.

In November, participants in the Sunday Mail’s “Your State, Your Survey” listed many issues that kept them from using public transport:
FREQUENCY and hours of operation.
BUSES, trains and trams running behind time
DRUNK, obnoxious and unruly passengers.
DIRTY vehicles.

One in five of the 3585 people who responded to the survey said they never used public transport. Statistics from last year show that SA’s major public transport provider Adelaide Metro recorded 74.8 million boardings – a 1.1 per cent drop on the 75.6 million the previous year.
Buses were the most popular mode of travel, recording 51.12 million boardings last financial year. Trains recorded 14.38 millions boardings and trams, 9.25 million boardings, during the same period.

[citywatcher]

From the Sadvertiser on 14 July 2018 (https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sou ... 9b5f22a975):

SEGWAYS, EcoCaddies, Uber-style buses, ferries, ride-share bicycles and old-school trams.

Infrastructure Minister Stephan Knoll has vowed nothing is off the table as work begins on designing the best public transport system for greater Adelaide.

Almost 79 per cent of Adelaide commuters drive to work – the highest rate in the five mainland capitals – but growing congestion issues have many motorists reconsidering their commuting options.

Mr Knoll has told the Sunday Mail he wants to bring South Australia’s public transport service offering into the 21st century.
“Some new technologies are operating in other cities around Australia – and the world – with great success, delivering better service for commuters,” he said.
“If we can increase public transport patronage, it’ll help relieve traffic congestion and reduce commute times for everyone.”

Former State Government tram plans for Adelaide – including a line to The Parade, in Norwood, and an extension to North Adelaide – have been scrapped as Mr Knoll will ask the new South Australian Public Transport Authority (SAPTA) to consider anything and everything.

“Ultimately, the question we want SAPTA to answer is, how do we deliver the best, most efficient, reliable and cost-effective public transport system for South Australians?,” Mr Knoll told the Sunday Mail.
“That’s why we’re scrapping the AdelLink plan from the Infrastructure Australia list. Labor locked themselves into building an expensive tram network around metropolitan Adelaide and didn’t ask what is the best way to deliver public transport services?
“Labor had the blinkers on – they had a fixation on trams and closed themselves to other, possibly better, options.
“Now, trams may be one option as part of the broad plan but we don’t know that. There are a host of new technologies and we need to investigate them.”
He named uber-style buses, ecocaddies, segways as some of the technologies but how they could work - if at all - would be up to the authority to explore.
The important thing he said, was to have a fresh and modern look.

A survey by HERE Technologies in February revealed more than 60 per cent of Adelaide commuters would be willing to change their travelling habits to help ease road congestion and 53 per cent had considered doing so.

“We need to recognise all forms of transport can be part of our network – point to point, rideshare, bikeshare and on demand, first mile, last mile services as well as high-capacity services,” he said.
“At the heart of it, SAPTA will be customer-focused because our public transport network relies on hundreds of thousands of customers every day to be sustainable,” he said.
“SAPTA will provide fundamental advice about the best way forward for SA’s public transport network.
“We won’t leave any stone unturned as we look to get more and more people using public transport.”

SA Council of Social Services chief executive Ross Womersley said much of the public transport system in Adelaide was organised on an arterial basis. “The public transport system is okay if you want to come in and out of the city,” he said. “But if you want to go across suburbs it is really challenging.
“The other key issue for us is that we enhance affordability and accessibility.”

Public Sector Association secretary Nev Kitchin welcomed any conversation about enhanced public transport options.
“Thousands of public sector workers use public transport each and every day and any improvements in access to transport services would advantage the public sector workforce,” he said. Mr Kitchin said with many public sector workers using the train network it was important to make it easy to get to stations including options such as making more bike lockers accessible for the growing number of cyclists.

In November, participants in the Sunday Mail’s “Your State, Your Survey” listed many issues that kept them from using public transport:
FREQUENCY and hours of operation.
BUSES, trains and trams running behind time
DRUNK, obnoxious and unruly passengers.
DIRTY vehicles.

One in five of the 3585 people who responded to the survey said they never used public transport. Statistics from last year show that SA’s major public transport provider Adelaide Metro recorded 74.8 million boardings – a 1.1 per cent drop on the 75.6 million the previous year.
Buses were the most popular mode of travel, recording 51.12 million boardings last financial year. Trains recorded 14.38 millions boardings and trams, 9.25 million boardings, during the same period.

Segways rickshaws minda buses
Fuck me and their being serious

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk

[Nathan]

So they've definitely scrapped trams outside of the CBD, but also "nothing is off the table". Right.

[Zills]

Well I'm glad that Adelink is no more, bring on common sense!

[citywatcher]

Well I'm glad that Adelink is no more, bring on common sense!

Like segways rickshaws minda buses no doubt

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk

[rubberman]

So they've definitely scrapped trams outside of the CBD, but also "nothing is off the table". Right.

The report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works had a benefit to cost ratio of 0.7 for the one kilometre $80m North Terrace extension. That's uneconomical, and the previous government would have been hard pressed to justify it to the general public if questioned. (People here might cheer, but the general public don't care quite so much, and might prefer more schools or police or ambulances etc).

So, if spending $80m for 1 kM was uneconomic, with a 0.7 benefit:cost, the extension to North Adelaide would be far worse at the plus $200m price tag. The new government can easily point to how uneconomic trams are, and how there are plenty of things needed to be done with much better economic returns.

If people want trams, they have to start looking for ways to make them economic. Get the price of the extension to North Adelaide down to say $70m, instead of $200m. Then, it's economic, and at that point people can criticise if they don’t do it.

However, at the present costs, voters out there can think of other things they'd rather spend money on.

I think that sort of pricing is achievable - we don't need to design tram tracks to take diesel railcars at 90kmh.

[Waewick]

So they've definitely scrapped trams outside of the CBD, but also "nothing is off the table". Right.

The report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works had a benefit to cost ratio of 0.7 for the one kilometre $80m North Terrace extension. That's uneconomical, and the previous government would have been hard pressed to justify it to the general public if questioned. (People here might cheer, but the general public don't care quite so much, and might prefer more schools or police or ambulances etc).

So, if spending $80m for 1 kM was uneconomic, with a 0.7 benefit:cost, the extension to North Adelaide would be far worse at the plus $200m price tag. The new government can easily point to how uneconomic trams are, and how there are plenty of things needed to be done with much better economic returns.

If people want trams, they have to start looking for ways to make them economic. Get the price of the extension to North Adelaide down to say $70m, instead of $200m. Then, it's economic, and at that point people can criticise if they don’t do it.

However, at the present costs, voters out there can think of other things they'd rather spend money on.

I think that sort of pricing is achievable - we don't need to design tram tracks to take diesel railcars at 90kmh.

That was always going to be the problem with the adhoc approach Labour took.

What would the extension have looked like including Norwood and North Adelaide.

[claybro]

Interestingly, the cost/benefit equation is always trotted out with the tram extensions. And yet, everyone in government is wracking their brains for how to get commuters out of their cars and into PT. Their own figures tell them, the single most popular mode of public transport is the existing tram. For whatever reason, people love it. It is a proven success. By area of coverage it far exceeds patronage of trains, buses and even the Obahn. So, to improve PT to the likes of the Eastern Suburbs, inner North and inner South and west there are only 3 options.

1. More buses. but Adelaide is already over serviced by buses and these are clearly not proving popular enough at attracting people away from cars. We already know this. Adding more buses will not result in the road upgrades required for proper BRT,-because on their own they don't require special infrastructure and so the extra buses will just end up stuck in congestion.

2. Underground metro style trains...talk about cost/benefit ratio, due to the billions involved, this is not really an option due to the low population density even in the likes of Norwood, Prospect etc. and won't be for many decades to come barring a population explosion. There is also no room for right of way for surface heavy rail in existing inner suburbs.

3. Trams. More expensive than buses, far less expensive than heavy rail, but can carry many more commuters in single vehicles than buses and if operated correctly are more efficient. Tramways require a comprehensive re-design of the road/right of way through which they travel and so force the hand of the planners to significantly improve the route to accommodate the different mode. They can operate on a mix of dedicated right of way, and street running.

So there's the choices. Best they find a way of getting some economy of scale for trams, which is currently lacking with the bit by bit extensions, and which have so far not been tied to any value adding, or even a proper vision. Other than that, the Liberals will be more than happy to throw a few more buses and some token bus lanes as their "modern solution". The general public will be thrilled with some new buses, and be fooled by some small additional bus lanes, but then stay in their cars anyway. I think we know where this is heading.

[rubberman]

Interestingly, the cost/benefit equation is always trotted out with the tram extensions. And yet, everyone in government is wracking their brains for how to get commuters out of their cars and into PT. Their own figures tell them, the single most popular mode of public transport is the existing tram. For whatever reason, people love it. It is a proven success. By area of coverage it far exceeds patronage of trains, buses and even the Obahn. So, to improve PT to the likes of the Eastern Suburbs, inner North and inner South and west there are only 3 options.

1. More buses. but Adelaide is already over serviced by buses and these are clearly not proving popular enough at attracting people away from cars. We already know this. Adding more buses will not result in the road upgrades required for proper BRT,-because on their own they don't require special infrastructure and so the extra buses will just end up stuck in congestion.

2. Underground metro style trains...talk about cost/benefit ratio, due to the billions involved, this is not really an option due to the low population density even in the likes of Norwood, Prospect etc. and won't be for many decades to come barring a population explosion. There is also no room for right of way for surface heavy rail in existing inner suburbs.

3. Trams. More expensive than buses, far less expensive than heavy rail, but can carry many more commuters in single vehicles than buses and if operated correctly are more efficient. Tramways require a comprehensive re-design of the road/right of way through which they travel and so force the hand of the planners to significantly improve the route to accommodate the different mode. They can operate on a mix of dedicated right of way, and street running.

So there's the choices. Best they find a way of getting some economy of scale for trams, which is currently lacking with the bit by bit extensions, and which have so far not been tied to any value adding, or even a proper vision. Other than that, the Liberals will be more than happy to throw a few more buses and some token bus lanes as their "modern solution". The general public will be thrilled with some new buses, and be fooled by some small additional bus lanes, but then stay in their cars anyway. I think we know where this is heading.

Well, yes. All of that.

However, a professionally done benefit:cost analysis takes all that into account, and if the ratio comes out at less than one, it means it's still not worth it.

Or, put another way, there's other projects with even better justification out there, with proponents putting THEIR cases just as eloquently for funding: schools, police, nurses, roads, public amenities and so forth.

You put a good case, but at the prices to extend the tramway, many other things that people value could be done. So, if it's a couple of kM of tramway for $200m, you have to put a really good case against some pretty compelling opposition.

On the other hand, if it was the whole way to Prospect, with many many more people positively impacted, for that $200m, it would look more attractive.

Personally, even as a tram lover from way back, I can't justify to myself spending $200m just to serve North Adelaide. Get it down to, say $70m, then maybe. Can't get it down there? Then, even as a long term tram fan, it's no dice for my vote.

Having said all that, I'd really be interested in the business case the former government did. The fact they didn't release it is highly indicative of a poor case.

[Goodsy]

The only way to get it down to $70m would be to spend hundreds of millions (possibly billions) building a vertically integrated publicly owned tram company. We'd have economy of scale on our side

[Nort]

The important thing he said, was to have a fresh and modern look.

Hearing a lot of buzz-words there..

The evidence from around the world seems pretty consistent. Make public transport cheap for commuters, safe, and reliable, and people will embrace it.

[rubberman]

The only way to get it down to $70m would be to spend hundreds of millions (possibly billions) building a vertically integrated publicly owned tram company. We'd have economy of scale on our side

Quite possibly. However, if a new tram system costing $2 plus billion were to be introduced, that would be one way to do it.

Christchurch New Zealand built a single track tramway in the CBD for $5m NZD per kilometer. That survived two earthquakes and carries trams with axle loads of similar orders of magnitude. Double it to $10m for double track. Add $12m for two top of the line trams per km. That's $22m. Add $8m per km for depots, power stations, stops and ancillaries. That's $30m per km. Add $5m per kM for unknowns and there's $70m for a 2kM extension.

Salisbury Council in SA built a short (couple of hundred meters iirc) concrete tramline about 25 years ago at St Kilda for the tram museum. I haven't been there for a while, but maybe any Adelaide tram museum folk would be able to say how trundling trams close to the axle loads imposed by modern trams has gone on that small section of track. Has it cracked? Has it corroded? Over 25 years at the tram museum, that's probably the same number of trams as the Glenelg line in 6 months. However, with concrete, if it's had that length of service, it's not likely to fail any time soon. The Salisbury Council did a great job, basically using footpath contractors. It was cheap as chips, and doesn't look anything different to conventional track.

Melbourne, in the 1960s used mass concrete and railway rail. Dirt cheap. 50 year life.

Just have to get out of the gold plating mind set.

[flaneur]

trams through the CBD aren't going to make money, WHY, because they are in the free travel zone, just look at the city students that travel from City West, Victoria Square, City South and South Terrace, too bad for a commuter in peak hour to travel beyond South Terrace and the number of fare evaders at Green Hill Road and if the Airport Link goes ahead it will need to avoid the current free zone stops

[claybro]

trams through the CBD aren't going to make money, WHY, because they are in the free travel zone, just look at the city students that travel from City West, Victoria Square, City South and South Terrace, too bad for a commuter in peak hour to travel beyond South Terrace and the number of fare evaders at Green Hill Road and if the Airport Link goes ahead it will need to avoid the current free zone stops

Trams, and any other public transport for that matter are not implemented to make money. They are a public service. Cost benefits are derived from keeping an urban area moving without complete gridlock of private vehicles, reducing pollution, encouraging community integration, linking areas of high population density, value adding of private property etc. Some countries/ cities get it...not all projects come down to hard dollars, they realise there are benefits that are intangible financially, but greatly improve amenity. That's the thing about trams. They are quiet, do not pollute (locally) and move vast amounts of people with very little fuss-but they can prove costly if not done by people who know what they are doing.

[Eurostar]

Its not "free" its more like buy now pay later because the money comes out of taxes etc