News & Discussion: Trams

[rev]

How would peak hour traffic work down Unley Rd, Goody Rd or The Parade with fewer lanes for traffic when the majority of the journeys start from other areas?

The ideal outcome is a tram service and infrastructure would simultaneously encourage changes in travel behaviour and force driving to become less convenient. With a good service, this is highly possible.

Goodwood and Unley Roads in their present form should not be carrying the amount of traffic they do now.

That is not the ideal outcome.
The solution is not to disadvantage one group over others.

The ideal outcome is our transport infrastructure accommodating all users simultaneously in an efficient and safe manner.

[abc]

Infrastructure spending and urban planning has decided it.

you mean suburban planning
the great Australian dream

would you prefer to live in a Chinese city?

The market does not decide, it's driven by policy decisions which does not always align with public sentiment or demand. Our planning is very closely aligned with American cities urban form, not the Chinese model. Delivering public transport over such long distances at frequencies where people will actually be attracted to it is very, very, expensive and a logistical nightmare.

no kidding

[Nort]

Public transport is a logistical nightmare, not like the beautiful efficient road traffic that is funded to the cost of up to tens of thousands of millions of dollars on single routes alone.

Plan for efficient public transport from the start and it becomes a lot cheaper, and frees up more space for road users in the process.

[abc]

Public transport is a logistical nightmare, not like the beautiful efficient road traffic that is funded to the cost of up to tens of thousands of millions of dollars on single routes alone.

Plan for efficient public transport from the start and it becomes a lot cheaper, and frees up more space for road users in the process.

name one place in the world where this is the case that isn't Pyongyang

does Amsterdam have less traffic than Adelaide? I very much doubt it.

sure its 3x the size but that's not the point is it

[Nort]

Public transport is a logistical nightmare, not like the beautiful efficient road traffic that is funded to the cost of up to tens of thousands of millions of dollars on single routes alone.

Plan for efficient public transport from the start and it becomes a lot cheaper, and frees up more space for road users in the process.

name one place in the world where this is the case that isn't Pyongyang

does Amsterdam have less traffic than Adelaide? I very much doubt it.

sure its 3x the size but that's not the point is it

Which part do you want examples of being the case?

That PT is cheaper when you plan for it from the start and don't have to try and retrofit it into a space not designed for it?

Or that some people using PT are people who would otherwise be in a car?

[abc]

Public transport is a logistical nightmare, not like the beautiful efficient road traffic that is funded to the cost of up to tens of thousands of millions of dollars on single routes alone.

Plan for efficient public transport from the start and it becomes a lot cheaper, and frees up more space for road users in the process.

name one place in the world where this is the case that isn't Pyongyang

does Amsterdam have less traffic than Adelaide? I very much doubt it.

sure its 3x the size but that's not the point is it

Which part do you want examples of being the case?

That PT is cheaper when you plan for it from the start and don't have to try and retrofit it into a space not designed for it?

Or that some people using PT are people who would otherwise be in a car?

PT exists for people who are incapable (too old, too young, too poor etc) of driving a car. Its a complimentary service to private transport. Its not in competition.

[Nort]

name one place in the world where this is the case that isn't Pyongyang

does Amsterdam have less traffic than Adelaide? I very much doubt it.

sure its 3x the size but that's not the point is it

Which part do you want examples of being the case?

That PT is cheaper when you plan for it from the start and don't have to try and retrofit it into a space not designed for it?

Or that some people using PT are people who would otherwise be in a car?

PT exists for people who are incapable (too old, too young, too poor etc) of driving a car. Its a complimentary service to private transport. Its not in competition.

Ok boomer.

[mattblack]

name one place in the world where this is the case that isn't Pyongyang

does Amsterdam have less traffic than Adelaide? I very much doubt it.

sure its 3x the size but that's not the point is it

Which part do you want examples of being the case?

That PT is cheaper when you plan for it from the start and don't have to try and retrofit it into a space not designed for it?

Or that some people using PT are people who would otherwise be in a car?

PT exists for people who are incapable (too old, too young, too poor etc) of driving a car. Its a complimentary service to private transport. Its not in competition.

Interesting that you bring up Amsterdam. I can tell you that it has a lot less car traffic, although the traffic that is on the road is essentially constrained because the city was built in the 12th Century so impossible to accommodate more cars or an extensive bus system due to the narrowness of the streets. Heavy rail is used for accessing outer parts of the city. There's an extensive Tram network through the city as well to access the outer suburbs with frequent stops. The centre of the city only really started to establish a metro system from the mid 90's. The main difference is the number of bikes used for transport within the centre of the city. Something you would never see here due to the distances being travelled. It's the full mix of transport options available that makes it work and people's willingness to use multi transport options for a single trip, again not something that is well regarded in Adelaide. Car ownership and use is actually reducing in Amsterdam because of these fully integrated options.

Resigning PT to too old, too young, too poor etc is ridiculous and I think misses the point where cities that have a completely different urban form actually rely on different PT modes as the primary way of moving people. I would like to see your stats regarding patronage of Adelaide PT or is this your opinion?

[Listy]

Interesting that you bring up Amsterdam. I can tell you that it has a lot less car traffic, although the traffic that is on the road is essentially constrained because the city was built in the 12th Century so impossible to accommodate more cars or an extensive bus system due to the narrowness of the streets. Heavy rail is used for accessing outer parts of the city. There's an extensive Tram network through the city as well to access the outer suburbs with frequent stops. The centre of the city only really started to establish a metro system from the mid 90's. The main difference is the number of bikes used for transport within the centre of the city. Something you would never see here due to the distances being travelled. It's the full mix of transport options available that makes it work and people's willingness to use multi transport options for a single trip, again not something that is well regarded in Adelaide. Car ownership and use is actually reducing in Amsterdam because of these fully integrated options.

Resigning PT to too old, too young, too poor etc is ridiculous and I think misses the point where cities that have a completely different urban form actually rely on different PT modes as the primary way of moving people. I would like to see your stats regarding patronage of Adelaide PT or is this your opinion?

What's also interesting about post war Amsterdam is that the city hasn't always been 'different'. The Netherlands was subject to the same car orientated transport movement that swept the rest of the western world from the 1950's and by the mid-late 1970's the Netherlands was heavily car-centric. The roads in major cities were choked with congestion and parked cars, and large strips of Amsterdam were in the process of being demolished to make way for motorways and arterial roads. Then there was a series of high profile cases where children were killed by negligent drivers (called the Kindermoord or 'child murders'), and over the next decade a new parent led public / people orientated transport & social movement sprang up that has progressively transformed local councils, political parties and transport policy in the country ever since.

[rhino]

Ok boomer.

That's an insult to boomers. abc is talking crap as usual, he's a troll. Ignore him.

[mattblack]

Interesting that you bring up Amsterdam. I can tell you that it has a lot less car traffic, although the traffic that is on the road is essentially constrained because the city was built in the 12th Century so impossible to accommodate more cars or an extensive bus system due to the narrowness of the streets. Heavy rail is used for accessing outer parts of the city. There's an extensive Tram network through the city as well to access the outer suburbs with frequent stops. The centre of the city only really started to establish a metro system from the mid 90's. The main difference is the number of bikes used for transport within the centre of the city. Something you would never see here due to the distances being travelled. It's the full mix of transport options available that makes it work and people's willingness to use multi transport options for a single trip, again not something that is well regarded in Adelaide. Car ownership and use is actually reducing in Amsterdam because of these fully integrated options.

Resigning PT to too old, too young, too poor etc is ridiculous and I think misses the point where cities that have a completely different urban form actually rely on different PT modes as the primary way of moving people. I would like to see your stats regarding patronage of Adelaide PT or is this your opinion?

What's also interesting about post war Amsterdam is that the city hasn't always been 'different'. The Netherlands was subject to the same car orientated transport movement that swept the rest of the western world from the 1950's and by the mid-late 1970's the Netherlands was heavily car-centric. The roads in major cities were choked with congestion and parked cars, and large strips of Amsterdam were in the process of being demolished to make way for motorways and arterial roads. Then there was a series of high profile cases where children were killed by negligent drivers (called the Kindermoord or 'child murders'), and over the next decade a new parent led public / people orientated transport & social movement sprang up that has progressively transformed local councils, political parties and transport policy in the country ever since.

Dankjewel!!

[PeFe]

Goodwood tram overpass scrapped in favour of "smaller" improvements

From In Daily

New Goodwood bikeway overpass scrapped over tree concerns

Plans for a new $35 million Goodwood Railway Station tram overpass have been scrapped due to resident concerns about tree loss, with the government to instead fund a series of smaller upgrades at the same cost.


A computer image of the proposed $35 million overpass, which will now not go ahead. Left image: PTP Alliance. Photo (right): Thomas Kelsall/InDaily


The decision, announced by Badcoe MP Jayne Stinson over the weekend, marks the end of nearly eight years of planning work and consultation on the controversial project, which was originally intended to create a shared-use path for cyclists and pedestrians along the tram overpass above Goodwood Railway Station.

Instead, the government will widen two pedestrian/cyclist archways that go under the overpass and upgrade a dilapidated pedestrian underpass beneath the train station. The upgrade includes new asphalt surfacing, lighting, mirrors, painting and CCTV.


The Goodwood tram overpass. Photo: Thomas Kelsall/InDaily

The project cost remains at $35 million, according to the state government, which is splitting the funding 50/50 with the federal government.

The Weatherill Government first announced the Mike Turtur Bikeway Overpass Project in May 2016 at a cost of $10 million, saying it would remove the “last major impediment” for cyclists travelling along the Glenelg to CBD bike route.



The original overpass design which is no longer going ahead. Image: PTP Alliance

The decision to scrap the overpass has come as a disappointment to cycling advocates, who argue the new design will not address safety concerns and force cyclists to continue using the “steep” underpass below the railway station.

But residents and some local councillors were concerned about more than 40 trees that would have to be axed for the new overpass, which is located next to the Forestville Reserve. Opponents also argued the project design was “overengineered”.



The area for vegetation removal under the previous plan.

The former Marshall government put the project on hold in February 2022 – one month before work was due to begin – and a “community reference group” comprised of residents and cycling advocates was established.

The state government said today that no “clear standout preferred option” emerged from the reference group’s discussions in 2022.

It also said that after a review of design alternatives, there was “no feasible option that would not impact Forestville Reserve and result in tree removal”.

Stinson said the revised design has “saved Forestville Reserve”.


A computer image of the new overpass archways. Image: SA Govt/supplied


A diagram of the proposed archway expansion. Image: supplied

“The government’s listened to locals, undertaken detailed and meaningful consultation, along with engineering analysis of all possible alternatives,” she said in a statement.

“People in my community are serious about protecting – and growing – our canopy cover and green public spaces.

“We’ve fought hard to protect what makes our suburb special and I commend everyone for making their voice heard.”

But former Unley Bike User Group chair David Elliott said he was disappointed with the new project.

“It doesn’t look like anything is actually happening in the subway aside from a new surface, paint and lights, so none of the safety issues for cyclists are being addressed at all,” he said.

“It’s the status quo, just cleaner.”


The current Goodwood Railway Station underpass. Photo: Thomas Kelsall/InDaily


The underpass will be upgraded in the new project. Image: supplied

Elliott, who is also chair of Bike Adelaide and an Adelaide City councillor, said the key part of the overpass project was to remove cyclists from the underpass “because of complaints from cyclists it was too steep and they had to dismount”.

“Station users complained that cyclists weren’t dismounting and there have been some minor collisions,” he said.


Cyclists will still have to use this underpass ramp when travelling on the Mike Turtur Bikeway. Photo: Thomas Kelsall/InDaily

https://www.indaily.com.au/news/local/2 ... e-concerns

[SouthAussie94]

Landlord special is about right. Absolutely ludicrous decision.

How many trees are being removed (or have already been removed) for the North-South Corridor? Removing trees for roads is fine, but for active transport and improved accessibility to public transport, it's not okay?

[abc]

the government were probably looking for an out because of spiralling inflation in the building market this project would've almost certainly gone way over budget

[rubberman]

the government were probably looking for an out because of spiralling inflation in the building market this project would've almost certainly gone way over budget

Given that you could buy around 60 house and land packages for that much, you wonder if it's made of gold.

Or, put another way, house 60 families during a housing crisis, or build a bike overpass? Hmmm. Decisions, decisions.

Speaking generally, we need to have a really deep look into why infrastructure is costing so much. Some projects, like various tram extensions seem to have a lot of gold plating without any obvious benefit.