Sensational-Adelaide.com

beamer85 wrote:Did anyone read Anne Moran's comments

JAKJ wrote:If the government was serious about light rail transport in the city, the line should be submerged at Victoria Square and run under King William Street and North Terrace. It could form the initial stages of a city loop which will be necessary one day.

bdm wrote:...Voters have amazingly short memories.

bdm wrote:
If you're going to bash the "conservatives", at least know what you're talking about when you do. It is always Liberal governments that have had to clean up the mess that Labor has left for them to inherit, both in 1979 and 1993. Voters have amazingly short memories.

If we must have trams to the railway station, make them horse-drawn. Then they would be a really good tourist attraction and no ugly wiring required.

Will wrote:Howie, I read your letter in the City Messenger!

Well done on getting it published, and you raise a very good point.

THE US inspiration for Adelaide's $31 million tram extension has failed to boost public transport or kick-start urban growth five years after it opened, a US economist says.

Randal O'Toole, a Portland resident and Adjunct Fellow of liberal policy think-tank the Cato Institute, has warned the State Government against following Portland's lead and building a "Disneyland ride" through the CBD.
The Rann Government is modelling its tram ambitions in part on the Oregon city's 9km tram and its light-rail system.

Premier Mike Rann was reported in April, 2005, as saying Portland's tram had increased passenger numbers and improved economic development in Portland.

But Mr O'Toole, an ardent light-rail critic who has 30 years' experience in urban planning and has lectured at Yale University and the University of California, said this had not happened.

He said a Portland Chamber of Commerce survey, sighted by the Sunday Mail, revealed that in 2005 just one per cent of the city's 80,000 workers used the tram to get to work – a figure that has not changed since the line opened in 2001.

And the survey showed since the tram began running the number of workers using public transport had dropped by 21 per cent in five years and those driving had increased.

Portland has seen a $2.9 billion development in apartments, shops and offices since 1997 when the tramline – which connects the city's north and south downtown districts – was first announced.

But Mr O'Toole said this would not have happened without huge taxpayer-funded tax subsidies and grants given to developers to encourage them to build along the tramline.

He said this week these subsidies had been at the expense of essential services such as police, hospitals and libraries which had experienced budget cuts.

And, in turn, the high cost of running the service had led to budget and service cuts in Portland's bus and light-rail schedules, he said.

"In short, the streetcar (tram) had nothing to do with the new construction, they could subsidise development without the streetcar line, really it's just a real-estate scam," he said.

`We are giving hundreds of millions of dollars to these developments and that's getting a lot of people angry, not counting the cost of the streetcar or the 10 years of property tax waivers the city routinely grants to new construction along the streetcar line.

"There are 80,000 downtown workers, less than 1000 use it to get to work.

"There is no reason to expect that the (Adelaide) tram will have any effect on the regeneration of the neighbourhood it serves, trams carry too few people to have an impact on property values."

Mr O'Toole said South Australian taxpayers should "hold on to their pockets", with Portland's city tram costing $114 million, or $16 million for every 1.6km of track.

He said the State Government should put more money into buses and operate existing rail lines as long as the infrastructure lasts and replace those with buses.

"Streetcars are not a transport solution, while they do not particularly attract new development they give cities an excuse to subsidise development," he said.

"It will, however, add to roadway congestion which could hurt retailers on the street."