News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

[Will]

It will be deleterious to the city if any scheme was introduced making driving into the city more expensive when public transport is not up to a decent standard. Before implementing any scheme which makes riving into the city more expensive or complicated, I think we should fix and improve our public transport system.

[monotonehell]

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

Very good!

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.

An expensive technology solution, but a more workable one. The storage and retrieval system for the 1000s of entries a day would need to be large! But it could be keyed into the ticket spitters so when the ticket is inserted into the point of sale reader it would retrieve the entry photo. Might be difficult to see into the vehicles, we might need to get all the occupants to open their windows and wave.

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.

Might work, again the storage would need to be large (even current simple ticket data is discarded a few minutes after the vehicle exits to save memory). There's an added administration cost of the enforcement activities. Random would be the way to go, could be difficult to enforce though, there's a wobbly legal issue calling up driver details from licence plates in off street compared to on street parking.

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

Absolutely not. Nothing to do with them at all. A car park is not a road.

You've come up with a load of good ideas, but I think the answer might lie in a much simpler no-tech solution. Simple things usually work better... look at me.


How do they do this in Canberra?

[AtD]

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...

I think we need to be clear of the scope of Clr Yarwood's idea and the ACC's power. We're only talking the U-Parks, 30% of all off-street parking within the CBD. Suburban, private and on-street is beyond our scope. It's not politically feasible for the ACC to impose much on the private operators, not logistically possible to impose much on street parking and not legally possible to impose anything on suburban centres.

[AtD]

An expensive technology solution, but a more workable one. The storage and retrieval system for the 1000s of entries a day would need to be large! But it could be keyed into the ticket spitters so when the ticket is inserted into the point of sale reader it would retrieve the entry photo. Might be difficult to see into the vehicles, we might need to get all the occupants to open their windows and wave.

I disagree that the technology for that option would be expensive, cameras, processing and storage is cheap as chips these days (1TB for $300). The costs would lie in the development, a good IT Solutions company should be able to achieve what we want.

As for cameras seeing into the vehicles, because the vehicle needs to be in the exact position for the driver to press the button, the angles required would be predictable. The cameras themselves are cheap and the space is confined so it should be simple to have a camera on either side, and in this sense there would be an advantage over existing T2/T3 lane systems.

I would be interested to find out how the NSW Road Traffic Authority solves this problem.

Remember, as this should be marketed as a discount, the user will be willing to go the extra to get the discount. But in reality, if you don't claim the discount, you're getting ripped. Just like the petrol vouchers at supermarkets, a lot of effort for what's just a perceived discount, but a scheme with massive uptake.

There's an added administration cost of the enforcement activities. Random would be the way to go, could be difficult to enforce though, there's a wobbly legal issue calling up driver details from licence plates in off street compared to on street parking.

Absolutely not. Nothing to do with them at all. A car park is not a road.

Fair enough.

You've come up with a load of good ideas, but I think the answer might lie in a much simpler no-tech solution. Simple things usually work better... look at me.

Nooooo I disagree! We live in the age of Internet Pizzas and self-service check outs! The most impressive car park I've been into was Westfield Chatswood, where each space had a red and green LED above it, and a sensor to determine if the space was occupied. Every row and every ramp had a sign telling you how many vacant spaces in each direction, so the system guides you directly from the gate to the last available space. No endless circling!

How do they do this in Canberra?

I haven't used them myself, only seen it advertised. Most of the CBD parking in Canberra is in open air, ground level, small scale car parks. There's only two large multi-stories in the city that I know of. I would guess it'd just be staffed, pay for the whole day on arrival, no casual parking. It's targeted at the daily office commuter.

Aaaaaaaaaaanway, now bear with me for this one...

Idea number five! (My partner's, not mine)

- This is aimed at the daily commuter, and not the casual visitor.

The discount system would require passengers to register at the cashier to claim the discount for the first time, and register the fingerprints of the driver and passengers (stay with me now...). The auto-pay station would have a fingerprint scanner, like those used in time-card systems in the back room of your local Woolworth's. To claim the discount, the passengers would need to scan their fingerprints too. The fingerprint would be associated with the vehicle while the vehicle is in the building, so the opportunity for abuse would be limited. No cameras, self enforcement.

I think this system is superior to the others because counting the number of occupants is left to the occupants themselves. The hardware is available, it just needs to be combined. I do foresee some "Big Brother" hysteria issues from this but in this day and age I think people will get over it. The ACC has the potential to be the leader in this area.

Either way, I feel the concept of car-pool parking is a sound way to reward those who seek to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from car use.

[monotonehell]

I disagree that the technology for that option would be expensive, cameras, processing and storage is cheap as chips these days (1TB for $300). The costs would lie in the development, a good IT Solutions company should be able to achieve what we want.

Possibly without realising it, you hit the nail on the head there. The people who own the intellectual property who supply the parking equipment technology charge megabucks for development.

Nooooo I disagree! We live in the age of Internet Pizzas and self-service check outs! The most impressive car park I've been into was Westfield Chatswood, where each space had a red and green LED above it, and a sensor to determine if the space was occupied. Every row and every ramp had a sign telling you how many vacant spaces in each direction, so the system guides you directly from the gate to the last available space. No endless circling!

You'd be amazed how simple that system is. Really low tech.

Idea number five! (My partner's, not mine)

- This is aimed at the daily commuter, and not the casual visitor.

The discount system would require passengers to register at the cashier to claim the discount for the first time, and register the fingerprints of the driver and passengers (stay with me now...). The auto-pay station would have a fingerprint scanner, like those used in time-card systems in the back room of your local Woolworth's. To claim the discount, the passengers would need to scan their fingerprints too. The fingerprint would be associated with the vehicle while the vehicle is in the building, so the opportunity for abuse would be limited. No cameras, self enforcement.

I think this system is superior to the others because counting the number of occupants is left to the occupants themselves. The hardware is available, it just needs to be combined. I do foresee some "Big Brother" hysteria issues from this but in this day and age I think people will get over it. The ACC has the potential to be the leader in this area.

I can see the dollars signs popping up in the software developer's eyes now. XD mega bucks *cha-ching*


I'm thinking something really simple like dated serialised single use vouchers are handed out to participant passengers, and the driver gets a discount for each passenger's voucher that they hand in when paying. The vouchers can only be used on the day that they are dated for. Low cost, No-tech solution. It could be abused by people giving their vouchers to drivers when they don't actually ride, but every system has cheats.

[Hoops]

Hmmm just speculating here but if it went to a system requiring a camera.. wouldn't a heat sensing(or whatever its called) camera be most effective.. as as long you have Living Bodies in your car they should be able to be seen. Thus you get a discount...

[Omicron]

I'll say this - use market research to be very, very sure that people will give up their cars for public transport before pricing drivers out of the city. If we seek an increased temporary population as well as an increased residential population for the CBD, we need to make sure that changes are going to have positive results for population numbers. What good is a pedestrian-oriented city devoid of pedestrians?

[Ho Really]

Hmmm just speculating here but if it went to a system requiring a camera.. wouldn't a heat sensing(or whatever its called) camera be most effective.. as as long you have Living Bodies in your car they should be able to be seen. Thus you get a discount...

You beat me to it. I was going to drive around with a bunch of dummies...

Cheers

[Clr Yarwood]

Wow, v impressed with some of the ideas…which need to be compressed and passé onto the staff – They after all do the REAL work!

Will add that it was Clr Henningson that wanted Hybrids as the only priority – I pointed out in the chamber that there are some 4 cylinder scars that cast heaps less that are nearly as good and you could buy some solar panels for the roof with the difference.

I can assure you I have no intention of favouring the rich plain and simple!!!

[Clr Yarwood]

Note to self - don't post when also on the phone...sorry bout the typos...he he!

[monotonehell]

Note to self - don't post when also on the phone...sorry bout the typos...he he!

*Monotonehell draws the councillor's attention to the EDIT button*

[AtD]

I can see the dollars signs popping up in the software developer's eyes now. XD mega bucks *cha-ching*

The ACC could put it to tender, and knock it back if it's too costly?

I'm thinking something really simple like dated serialised single use vouchers are handed out to participant passengers, and the driver gets a discount for each passenger's voucher that they hand in when paying. The vouchers can only be used on the day that they are dated for. Low cost, No-tech solution. It could be abused by people giving their vouchers to drivers when they don't actually ride, but every system has cheats.

How would the passengers obtain the vouchers?

Hmmm just speculating here but if it went to a system requiring a camera.. wouldn't a heat sensing(or whatever its called) camera be most effective.. as as long you have Living Bodies in your car they should be able to be seen. Thus you get a discount...

The problem with that idea is the cars themselves emit a lot of heat. The heat from the engine, exhaust, or even the cars heater, could create significant interference.

[monotonehell]

I can see the dollars signs popping up in the software developer's eyes now. XD mega bucks *cha-ching*

The ACC could put it to tender, and knock it back if it's too costly?

I'm saying nothing here ... nothing. It'd only get me in trouble.

I'm thinking something really simple like dated serialised single use vouchers are handed out to participant passengers, and the driver gets a discount for each passenger's voucher that they hand in when paying. The vouchers can only be used on the day that they are dated for. Low cost, No-tech solution. It could be abused by people giving their vouchers to drivers when they don't actually ride, but every system has cheats.

How would the passengers obtain the vouchers?

You'd need to promote this scheme. The best places to promote it would be with the occupants of city offices and other day workers. What better way to promote it but to invite participation by "giving away" valuable vouchers? Because it's a scheme that requires a degree of organisation amongst carpoolers there'd need to be a concerted effort in educating the public.

[AtD]

Wow, v impressed with some of the ideas…which need to be compressed and passé onto the staff – They after all do the REAL work!

Ideas put forward in this thread:
1. Discounts for low-emission vehicles, based on engine size, fuel consumption or type of fuel.
- Users would register for a "green pass" and have their vehicle assessed in some way

2. City wide levy on car parks.
- Would provide an income stream to the ACC to develop other environmental initiatives.
- Will reduce incentive for people to visit the city. Political influence from city business may prevent this option.
- The ACC already has a requirement that new apartment builds include car parks, so this would need to be addressed.

3. City wide restrictions on the number of new car parks
- In effect, this would be the same as (2) in the long run.

4. City wide restrictions on the number of new car parks, with developers being able to "buy" on-street parks from the council.
- This would provide the ACC with an income stream to convert on-street parks into footpaths, bike lanes or bus lanes.
- The same issues with (2) apply.

5. Discounts based on vehicle occupancy
- This would reduce city-wide traffic.
- No need to determine a car's fuel efficiency, etc.
- Could be applied by a number of means:
--- Tickets or vouchers issued to vehicles as they enter the car park to determine the number of vehicle occupants.
--- A camera system integrated with the cashier's Point of Sale system to determine the number of vehicle occupants.
--- A fingerprint system where passengers register for the discount.

[AtD]

You'd need to promote this scheme. The best places to promote it would be with the occupants of city offices and other day workers. What better way to promote it but to invite participation by "giving away" valuable vouchers? Because it's a scheme that requires a degree of organisation amongst carpoolers there'd need to be a concerted effort in educating the public.

Marketing, of course, would be required for any scheme. However, I think giving the vouchers away would be far too open for abuse.