monotonehell wrote:Aidan wrote:I think you're worrying a bit too much about street running. Yes there are clear advantages of reserved track, but the presence of shared sections need not be a major problem if the trams have priority at the traffic lights.
Trams would only benefit from priority at traffic lights if they had a reserved track. If there's even one car in front of a tram, it still cant advance.
No, that would only be true if the trams were on a separate phase. If they're on the same phase, the car and tram can both advance.
Just as bus priority lights only work where the bus has a bus lane to sit in to get a jump on the other vehicles.
But B lights are not the only way of giving priority to buses. There's also the option of keeping the light green until the bus has gone through. Similarly with trams, you can ensure they're at either the front or the back of the traffic platoon, and if the tram stop is before the traffic lights you can time the red phase to coincide with the time the tram is picking up passengers.
Go sit on Jetty road for a while to see how traffic affects a tram's progress.
(Edit: perhaps you should sit NEAR Jetty rd rather than on it...)
Obviously Jetty Road's not a good example of how to do it. There are probably some much better examples in Melbourne, though I admit its a while since I've been there.
rubberman wrote:
It is not just priority at the traffic lights, there is also the banking up at right turns.
There are two solutions for this: either put sufficient space for right turning traffic to the right of the trams, or allow hook turns.
It is also the fact that while buses duck into the bus stop and cars can then pass, cars behind trams cannot do the same. ie there is a significant negative traffic effect.
Yes. This also means that while buses keep getting overtaken then held back by regular traffic, trams would not and may be able to catch up with the cars in front.
"The economics of parking stations are such that plenty are built in the CBD where land prices are much higher. So a parking station that serves the CBD but on somewhat cheaper land on the fringes is just as economic."
No it isn't. The reason parking stations in the CBD are economic is that they can charge a lot for parking. A parking station on the fringe is less convenient, so they won't be able to charge anywhere near as much.
Well, obviously if the tram cannot provide a quicker trip into town than driving, there is no point in having the tram. Full stop.
I strongly disagree, and refer you to the Glenelg tram as a counterexample - the daytime offpeak journey times are much quicker on Anzac Highway, yet the trams run full!
People may as well stay in their cars. However, IF the tram can be made faster than driving, then it is more convenient - not less - because the total time is less. ie if parking plus tram time is less than driving plus parking time, then is not parking plus tram more convenient. I am sure the car does not have an opinion about where it gets parked, merely the total time to get to the CBD.
The car doesn't, but the driver does, and there's a lot more to modal choice than either journey time or convenience (which is not the same at all).
A car is often more convenient because you don't have to walk so far at the end. But that's not its only advantage - you can carry a lot more in a car than on a tram, and that can be a major factor in people's decisions. Where there's a time advantage to park and ride, it usually disappears if you have to make intermediate trips to your car.
But often it doesn't even provide a time advantage for single journeys. Nor does it provide a comfort advantage, especially our trams are usually overcrowded, and some idiot in TransAdelaide insisted on having hard seats.
But the trams are very competitive on cost.
I disagree. As long as there's still parking, more commuters using the street is a very good thing for the shops there, as more people notice them. When the computer shop from North Adelaide Village (trading under the dual names of Mac Solutions and PC Emergency) moved to O'Connell Street, its trade doubled. And while that wasn't enough to get them through the economic downturn, most of the other shops in the vicinity seem to be doing OK.
That is quite correct up to the point where the section of road reaches its capacity - at that point travel times dive and the point I made becomes painfully obvious. However, by that time it is too late to stop the angst and loss of revenue.
Why would there be a loss of revenue? You still have just as much traffic, even if it does move much more slowly.
But let's just wait and see how the experiment at the Entertainment Centre goes. If it works a treat, then we can look at what it might take to make a tram along O'Connell St viable. If it does not work all that well, then forget trams along O'Connell St - they will just remain a tramfan's dream with no hope of ever getting off the ground while people prefer using cars. Till we see how the EC experiment goes, we are all just speculating really.
What do you expect the EnterCentre experiment to tell you? A route on reserved track in road medians to a park and ride site would be totally different to an on street route serving the homes and businesses within walking distance.
. If you really want to persue some of these argements in detail maybe you should take it up in 'the pub', I think these threads are for actual development not argueing points of difference.