News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

[Howie]

How about reconstituted fish and chip variety oil? One of my workmate's dad goes around fish and chip shops asking to buy their oil and then goes about making diesel at home.. about 40cents / L it costs him to get around town.

[urban]

I'm with Wayno on this one.

Add a levy to all day parking within the city and use the money for green initiatives such as improving pedestrian and bike networks or buying green energy.

Another option is to cap the number of carparks at the current number. Any new developments wanting car parks will have to buy existing car parks to close down or pay for council to redevelop on-street car parks such as those around squares or streets which need wider footpaths.

[monotonehell]

Another option is to cap the number of carparks at the current number. Any new developments wanting car parks will have to buy existing car parks to close down or pay for council to redevelop on-street car parks such as those around squares or streets which need wider footpaths.

If I understand this correctly, me likey.

Do you mean that the council should count all the on street parking around town. Set a price for them to be "bought" by developers. Then once a developer "buys" X number of on street spaces and provides X number of in development spaces, the council will then take that money and close down X spots and turn them into wider footpaths.

Would be a wonderful thing for a load of economists to argue over how it would affect the market that it created.

Of course it would be an issue when a development includes residential and people want to house their cars in their building. So I guess it would only apply to casual and reserved parking?

[Wayno]

I'm with Wayno on this one.

Add a levy to all day parking within the city and use the money for green initiatives such as improving pedestrian and bike networks or buying green energy.

Maybe $1 for greater than 4hrs, and 50c for anything less than that?

How many cars use paid city parking each day? I have no idea but let's say 2000 all-day, and 2500 less than 4hrs. If true then this would raise ~$1million per annum for green projects...cool!

[Norman]

Also, just increase car parking prices fullstop, and let the proceeds go to more Tindo-style buses and PT in general.

[monotonehell]

You have to remember that the council is only responsible for the on street parking and the UPark branded off street parking. They have no authority to levy taxes on commercial operations.

[BenJ]

Great idea. It would be extremely exciting to have a completely green council.

In terms of implementation you could look at the following article from the New York Times which details similar efforts from around the world. I think the answer would already be in use out there somewhere, it's just a case of finding it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/autom ... utomobiles

Maybe you could offer a prepaid green parking pass which allows unlimited city parking between certain hours, for one week/one month/six months etc, at various rates depending on how environmentally friendly your car is. At the same time you increase the cost of general parking around the city to be slightly more than the highest rate on the green pass. This encourages people to start using the pass, where they can 'save' money. The increased proceeds of city parking can then be used for buying green energy or refitting existing buildings to be more efficient as the council sees fit.

You'd just need to come up with a way to ensure that you don't get an influx of new drivers coming into the city to take advantage of unlimited parking. There needs to be more of a disincentive.

[urban]

Another option is to cap the number of carparks at the current number. Any new developments wanting car parks will have to buy existing car parks to close down or pay for council to redevelop on-street car parks such as those around squares or streets which need wider footpaths.

If I understand this correctly, me likey.

Do you mean that the council should count all the on street parking around town. Set a price for them to be "bought" by developers. Then once a developer "buys" X number of on street spaces and provides X number of in development spaces, the council will then take that money and close down X spots and turn them into wider footpaths.

Would be a wonderful thing for a load of economists to argue over how it would affect the market that it created.

Of course it would be an issue when a development includes residential and people want to house their cars in their building. So I guess it would only apply to casual and reserved parking?

Economists could hold an entire conference on it

[AtD]

My proposal for you, Clr Yarwood:
A system currently exists in selected car parks in the Canberra City ("Civic"), which I feel would be suitable for your objectives. These selected car parks offer discounts based on vehicle occupancy, for both casual and all day spaces. If memory serves, a vehicle with just one occupant must pay full price for parking, a vehicle with two occupants pays a discounted price, and a vehicle with three or more occupants parks for free. While I wouldn't advocate the ACC offer free car parks, I suggest a similar scheme could be created for U-Park.

- (Issues of enforcement are discussed in further posts)
- The proposal conveniently side steps the difficulty of a measure of a vehicle's fuel efficiency, because one car will always be less efficient than two.
- By encouraging car-pooling and discouraging trips with single occupants, the over all level of traffic in the CBD could be decreased, and the pressure to build more car parks could also be decreased.

"Car-pool parking" would be a great way to reward those who seek to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from car use, but are not able to use Public Transport.

(Edits in regard to continuing discussion)

[monotonehell]

My proposal for you, Clr Yarwood:
A system currently exists in selected car parks in the Canberra City ("Civic"), which I feel would be suitable for your objectives. These selected car parks offer discounts based on vehicle occupancy, for both casual and all day spaces. If memory serves, a vehicle with just one occupant must pay full price for parking, a vehicle with two occupants pays a discounted price, and a vehicle with three or more occupants parks for free. While I wouldn't advocate the ACC offer free car parks, I suggest a similar scheme could be created for U-Park.

- The enforcement issue would be simple to address in manned car parks. In unmanned car parks, it may be possible for cameras to be used. “T3” and “T2” transit-ways interstate have cameras, which are capable (at least on paper) on determining the number of occupants in a car.
- The proposal conveniently side steps the difficulty of a measure of a vehicle's fuel efficiency, because one car will always be less efficient than two.
- By encouraging car-pooling and discouraging trips with single occupants, the over all level of traffic in the CBD could be decreased, and the pressure to build more car parks could also be decreased.

Not that easy in manned carparks either, only the few that still have the old booths at the gate systems (Central Market, Gawler, TAFE, Grenfell) most carparks these days have a central cashier who is very much removed from the action. Parkers walk up to them and pay before driving out.

It would need to be worked out on the way into the car park. So at the entry the ticket spitter would need to be aware of how many people in the car and issue the appropriate entry ticket. This would require that interesting technology you mention, which is no way near reliable enough to not cause headaches at the cashier or automatic payment machine.

It's a great idea but throwing heaps of technology at it will cost lots and wont solve the problem. If you can come up with a simpler low tech solution it would be better.

[AtD]

An alternative could be more manned booths. They'd only need to be manned for a few hours in the morning.

The same issue would be present for the other schemes suggested in this thread, which take into account a measure of fuel efficiency or the engine’s size.

[monotonehell]

An alternative could be more manned booths. They'd only need to be manned for a few hours in the morning.

They've mostly been ripped out for OH&S reasons. That's why most carparks have been converted to central cashiering. Also with manned booths you pay on the way out. Not on the way in.

What you'd need would be booths installed on the way in to keep track of the number of bodies in the car. Then issue a ticket that has some kind of indication on it. (Only problem there is there's no room for such things)

Either that or some poor sod in gas mask with a stamp pad standing next to the spitters.

The same issue would be present for the other schemes suggested in this thread, which take into account a measure of fuel efficiency or the engine’s size.

I pointed that out in my post above.

[Tyler_Durden]

I agree with the intention to encourage people to use public transport instead of driving a car to the city but I think there is a danger of turning people away from the city altogether where they have a choice, sending them to suburban shopping centres and avoiding the city where possible. I guess this could be overcome by targeting all day parkers and not affecting short term parkers, which Clr Yarwood did hint at. I don't have an answer to that but that risk needs to be considered.

Perhaps a levy of some sort could be charged to all day parkers, which could, in turn, go towards subsidising public transport fares. Personally, I think PT costs travellers too much.

At the moment I can drive into the city and park for not much more than it costs me to catch the bus. If I had a family member/friend to accompany me in the car it would be a fair bit cheaper to drive and park. That doesn't seem right to me, although obviously two people to a car is a better outcome to the city than one person to a car.

[AtD]

OK monotone, you've forced me to get out my thinking cap!

Being a discount, it would be something the driver would need to (and want to) apply for. It could be assumed the vehicle has one occupant, thus pays full price, unless informed otherwise. For a car park with multiple entrance gates, only one would be required to determine the number of occupants.

If we assume that manned gates (solution 1) or T2/T3 lane style cameras (solution 2) are not feasible...

A third possible solution: Each time a car drives in, a photo is taken of it at such an angle that the number of people can be determined. Then, the point of sale system used by the cashier could pull up the photo when the ticket holder requests the discount. This would obviously require all who wish to claim the discount to use the cashier and not an automated system.

A fourth possible solution: A variation of the above, but with after-the-fact enforcement. Like the above, a photo is taken of the vehicle as it enters. The ticket holder would be able to use an auto-pay machine or a cashier to exit as normal, and apply for the discount honestly. Like speed and red light cameras, the photos (or a random sample of photos) could be analysed at a later date and a fine for dishonesty issued via mail.

With solution 4, would it be legally possible for the ACC to 'pass the buck' of enforcement to the Department of Transport?

[Wayno]

c'mon guys, keep it simple. Can you really foresee a system working across private industry and the ACC involving mutliple manned booths, reviewing photo images, refund schemes, and/or determining "green-tax" fees based on engine size, no of cylinders, fuel-type, etc

And don't forget we need to consider the many hundred on-street parks!

What is needed is a simple and scalable approach. Simply add a small fee to park in the city between 8-6pm Mon-Fri. Use the funds to expand a green fleet of Tindo buses etc (as per Norman's suggestion) and be done with it.

If you don't want to disadvantage shops located in the Adelaide CBD, a levy could be considered across all Adelaide suburbia for paid street parking and public shopping centres. For example, Westfield could pay a green-tax of 20c per car spot per day in their suburban shopping centres. I'm sure there are many easy ways to pass this onto the drivers...