Sensational-Adelaide.com

Aidan wrote:And yet it's still often hard to get a parking space!

So you haven't tried the carpark's top floor then?

I must admit, it's damn frustrating when people create queues behind them in carparks, just waiting for that one free spot on the 1st or 2nd floor while the previous occupier reverses out. What's so hard about going up to the top and getting your pick of many parks?

A while back on either this forum or a related one, someone had been suggesting freeways that feed into the CBD, etc. and then someone else sarcastically questioned if that implies that we have an excellent road system in the CBD. Having been to Melbourne for the 3rd time in 2008, this time I went by car and I must admit that while it was very smooth on the freeway with fantastic views of the city from the West Gate Bridge, Melbourne's CBD was utterly horrible to drive in! Hardly any right turns, one-lane-in-each-direction roads, etc. It was ridiculous! However Adelaide, unlike Melbourne is not congested with trams on very narrow streets. Adelaide was gifted with wide boulevards and even if we were to build more trams within the CBD (of which I am very supportive), there'd still be the 4 lanes for private vehicles to use, unlike Melbourne which only has 2 lanes for private vehicles. What I'm saying is that if freeways (or a better option for the Government -tollways) were to feed vehicles into the CBD, we'd be far better off than the other major Australian cities which have freeways feeding people into narrow CBD streets. Top that off with multi-story carparking spaces on the edge of the CBD that go below ground as well as above ground, the freeways/ tollways would serve people well. However people would not only use the freeways/ tollways for commuting to the CBD, they'd also use say the North-South Freeway for going to the Barrossa, Victor Harbor or the States North. Other freeways/ tollways like the shelved Hills Freeway, would divert freight from suburban areas... Anyway, I've said all that before and I grow tired of repeating myself.
Although while I support freeways/ tollways I also support the concept of having trains feeding the city and going beneath CBD roads such as Grenfell Street and Currie Street (as proposed by Norman) as well as having trams feed into the CBD.

On a slightly unrelated topic, I stumbled across this while googling 'Adelaide North-South Corridor': http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov. ... on_SUB.pdf Not sure if anyone's posted this on S-A, but I thought I'd post it anyway.

If you think West Gate or Citylink are a "smooth" drive, you obviously never tried to tackle Melbourne's peak hour. It feels like South Road moves faster!

I'd say the Eastern is far worse at the Hoddle Street turnoff in peak. I have never experienced such mayhem since.

AtD wrote:If you think West Gate or Citylink are a "smooth" drive, you obviously never tried to tackle Melbourne's peak hour. It feels like South Road moves faster!

Having spent a fair amount of time working in Melbourne, and having to regularly commute from Clayton to Laverton North in both am and pm peak times, give me Melbourne any day.

Though I have to say it's a struggle when something's going on at the MCG or Telstra Dome.

i've been living in melbourne now for the last 2 months and drove my car over from adelaide.

the freeways / citylink are quite nice drives in off peak, but basically everything is congested in peak-hour. Nepean "highway" is a joke. Monash Carpark is no better. The tolled Eastlink and Citylink are no exception either.

Basically, i avoid driving in melbourne during peak-hour, whereas in adelaide i never really thought it was too bad.

im not a fan of building of freeways to solve peak-hour traffic, however they are quite useful off-peak. eg. driving to the airport from the city would take forever if the Tulla wasn't a non-stop road (with no traffic lights).

i think the people of melbourne are starting to realise that freeways dont solve congestion problems.

the biggest positive of road congestion is that it makes people not want to drive, and therefore use public transport. while most melbournians think they have a bad PT system, being from adelaide i think it's fantastic. during peak while the roads are clogged and cars are going nowhere, trains fly through (making cars give way to them along the way), even if the carriages themselves are a bit squishy.

this leads me to the conclusion that PT is the answer to solving congestion, not freeways, although they're not ALL bad news

sacred_june wrote:while most melbournians think they have a bad PT system, being from adelaide i think it's fantastic.

I agree there, Melbourne's public transport system is heaps better than Adelaide's. But their Peak hour roads/freeways are a bit of a joke as said..

While I strongly support Public Transport as a commuting alternative to private vehicle use, not everyone is going to leave their cars at home. An example are my parents. Every morning my mum/ dad drive my siblings and I from Hazelwood Park to our schools at Linden Park and Glenunga. My dad usually goes and parks his car at Rose Park and then walks to Grenfell Street, however my mum drives all the way down to Ashford Hospital where she works as a Pulmonary Technician. The reason that she doesn't park the car somewhere on Conyngham St and then catch the bus down to Ashford is 1. The efficiency (try catching a bus down Greenhill Road -considering the amount of people that utilise it each day, the number of bus routes is appalling!) and 2. The time that it takes; The bus has to stop at the many bus stops along Greenhill Road; whilst the car can go straight from our schools to Ashford Hopsital. My parents aren't the only ones that have such a situation.
It should also be noted there are also many rich businessmen out there that most definitely won't substitue driving their Mercs and Audis down suburban roads for sitting in Adelaide's buses, trains or overcrowded trams.

Anyway, I also think that building Tollways would be a smater option for the Government than building underpasses, reversable freeways and regular ones because it would earn them revenue AND it would also give people the choice that people in other cities have. Do you want to pay a small fee and get to the city quicker? OR would you rather not pay and scuttle down narrow, congested suburban roads? OR would you rather catch public transport? Present people the options and if they want to continue to scuttle down narrow, congested suburban roads, then let them be. I remember reading the Opinion section of the Advertiser a few months ago when someone from Salisbury complained that while the Government is building an expressway for the Western side of the Northern suburbs, people in Elizabeth, Salisbury etc. are still going to be going down Main North, Bridge and North East Roads and that they'd be more than happy to be presented with a high-speed corridor such as a freeway. I think that they mentioned the MATS Plan as well, but anyway, it's not as if people don't want to use the freeways, the Governments of SA have for too long been studying and studying, have come up with no solution, while meanwhile all the other cities have progressed in leaps and bounds (as stated brilliantly by TooFar). After they've completed studying at our renown Universities and TAFE Colleges, etc. our youth are leaving Adelaide and heading to places like Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney. They eventually come back to retire here, but is that what Adelaide is destined to become? A retirement village with Universities and gourmet food precincts I'd hope to god that this isn't the case!

Hazelwood Park, Linden Park and Glenunga are all nearby to each other, Why can't you ride a bike to school?

Also are you advocating that Public transport should only be there to serve the mass unwashed?

adam73837 wrote:While I strongly support Public Transport as a commuting alternative to private vehicle use, not everyone is going to leave their cars at home. An example are my parents...

Anecdotes mean very little. Give me some empirical evidence to support your proposals.

It should also be noted there are also many rich businessmen out there that most definitely won't substitue driving their Mercs and Audis down suburban roads for sitting in Adelaide's buses, trains or overcrowded trams.

No matter how good public transport is, unless you are Manhattan or London, you wont find many high end earners on PT.

Anyway, I also think that building Tollways would be a smater option for the Government than building underpasses, reversable freeways and regular ones because it would earn them revenue AND it would also give people the choice that people in other cities have. Do you want to pay a small fee and get to the city quicker? OR would you rather not pay and scuttle down narrow, congested suburban roads? OR would you rather catch public transport? Present people the options and if they want to continue to scuttle down narrow, congested suburban roads, then let them be.

You're not taking any traffic off the roads in this "option". First you need to find the space to double the road system. Where would you find that on the corridors you mention? You want to create first class and second class roads, then charge those who can afford it (the ones driving their Mercs and Audis most likely) to continue to add to congestion. What's PT then? Third class? With all the concentration on creating duplicate car corridors, where's the money going to come from to improve PT? And don't tell me from the tolls, tolls barely pay for the construction of the roads over long periods of time. Usually there's a commercial interest that takes any profits left.

I remember reading the Opinion section of the Advertiser a few months ago when someone from Salisbury complained that while the Government is building an expressway for the Western side of the Northern suburbs, people in Elizabeth, Salisbury etc. are still going to be going down Main North, Bridge and North East Roads and that they'd be more than happy to be presented with a high-speed corridor such as a freeway. I think that they mentioned the MATS Plan as well, but anyway, it's not as if people don't want to use the freeways, the Governments of SA have for too long been studying and studying, have come up with no solution, while meanwhile all the other cities have progressed in leaps and bounds (as stated brilliantly by TooFar). After they've completed studying at our renown Universities and TAFE Colleges, etc. our youth are leaving Adelaide and heading to places like Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney. They eventually come back to retire here, but is that what Adelaide is destined to become? A retirement village with Universities and gourmet food precincts I'd hope to god that this isn't the case!

People in Adelaide think they want freeways. As the past 50 odd years have shown, freeways do not reduce congestion.

adam73837 wrote:. I remember reading the Opinion section of the Advertiser a few months ago when someone from Salisbury complained that while the Government is building an expressway for the Western side of the Northern suburbs, people in Elizabeth, Salisbury etc. are still going to be going down Main North, Bridge and North East Roads and that they'd be more than happy to be presented with a high-speed corridor such as a freeway. I think that they mentioned the MATS Plan as well, but anyway, it's not as if people don't want to use the freeways

The Northern Expressway is an example of a good Freeway, That's one that is built for freight, not for commuting.

Cruise - NEXY is part of the overall north south corridor plan, with the aim of linking it to the northern connector and onto south road. it should also be noted that the massive amount of housing development going on up here will also require a freeway/expressway type link. however, the intention was and still is to remove heavy vehicle traffic from main north and heaslip roads.

Really, if you look at the bigger picture - the North-South Corridor is already halfway complete - Northern and Southern Expressway at either end. The proposed Northern Connector (essentially an extension of the NEXY) will just bring that traffic closer to the city, and then its a matter of solving the central alignment (South Road)

There is neither a right way or a wrong way to approach this issue and "the great roads debate" cant and most probably never come to any formidable conclusion one way or another.

This is because we all offer our views and opinions within the confines of our knowledge and that knowledge is usually guided by what we perceive as being important to us and as such by nature we neglect everything else.

In my career i must as a professional display an open mind (as hard as it can be at times) to listen to all views an opinions and where needed think outside the box. Therefore by nature i try to extract what is the problem and treat the situation, not the person or his/her view. This is my attempt:

Cities such as Adelaide (but you can insert your Australian city of choice) that have grappled with urban sprawl are distinguished by their recognition that land use patterns and transportation investment (not just PT but all forms of transportation) must unfold together. The relationship is two way, close and complex. Added on top of this is that cities must cope with a land use pattern which is pre-determined by the market forces and devise and adapt transit to better serve people and the places they are. Examples that demonstrate this are the city of copenhagen that envisioned its future as five fingers of mixed use development radiating outwards and then built transit links to achieve it. Curitiba in Brazil opted to grow outwards only along defined axes of mixed use development, linked by cross cutting bus transit corridors. Today this city enjoys clean air, superb transit usage and a prosperous vehicle free city. There are countless numbers of cities across the developed world that demonstrate the opposite (shanghai, sao paulo, jakarta) where their energy consumption, emission levels are in a lock step with soaring rates of sprawl and vehicle ownership. It is the responsibility of leaders to be articulate, forceful and be willing to stake their political futures on urban developments and transportation appropriate to environmental, social and economic sustainability.

To do that we must be able to define our limits and opportunities and look at things from beyond an urban design perspective used in the 80's to get people out of cars and into PT. Importantly changing peoples behaviour is very complex and predicting commuter behaviour based on community design is not a really reliable tool to form policy. Further we need to look at demographic shifts. Just like most other countries, Australia is no different. The current baby boom is or soon will be over therefore our suburban explosion should slow or even stop. Moreover, Immigrants the engine of growth tend to and settle in the cities and are determined politically, which makes them an unpredictable variable in transport planning. Further, the huge increase in non family households and smaller households adds to the complexity. My biggest issue is how does one change Attitude?? I like to walk as much as possible and as such wont drive my car to the nearest supermarket, but the person next to me doesn't. I'm not saying that it is impossible to change attitude, but to change attitude by urban design will take a very very long time and one would have to provide a comprehensive package of incentives to make it attractive!

Breaking the cycle of development followed by congestion pursued by more roads requires a long term regional perspective which incorporates sustainability and harmonised land use and transportation decisions. In this view Business attitudes are vital!
How do you implement such a vision?? In my opinion one needs to impement value pricing to deter congestion, reduce parking availability, but if any politician did that it would certainly be a nail to his/her coffin in terms of re-election, so basically what we see is increases in transit finance which is unsustainable long term.

In Europe the EU tackles this by providing clear financial responsibility for transit operators, clear-cut and restrained governance and skilled management. They promote a smooth integration of all the different modes of travel. However, how to you curb the use of the car in advance of transit improvements??

These opinions and questions i raise juist touch the surface of the discussion..however what is clear in order to make a real and effective change is that one requires a vision and resolve to want to motivate voters to quit their cars. But for any individual to quit their cars requires that their self interest be fully informed about the financial, social, personal advantages of their choices. Moreover sending the right price signals requires education and consultation and citizen involvement...

Just my views with subtle help from people that work in infrastructure creation.. The important thing is that Adelaide can step up to the challenge as it is small enough in size to rapidly make changes

Ide be interested to hear comments

Hi Stelaras,

I agree with what you have written. It is most thoughtful and covers most of the points that planners should address.

However, I suggest that most members of the public do not have that overall vision, and need something to focus on before they can make informed comment.

This means that Government needs to get out there with various scenarios and the consequent plans so that people can see the bigger picture and how their interests sit in the scheme of things rather than focus on just one issue without context, or go off dreaming up impossible scenarios.

For example, we hear lots about global warming. OK what is the SA Government's plan for transport infrastructure in the event that Global Warming is happening? Even if there was a doubling of trips to town by public transport users, one would think that the present system would not cope...and if GW is real as some politicians state, then it is easily conceivable that road usage by private vehicle would plummet, and the present PT system would need complete overhaul. Just say that fuel prices went up by five times - would our PT cope? If not, what do we need to do, and how do we do it? The answer to these might be a bit daunting.

The point is, that we have been hearing about GW for some years now, Government Politicians give it some credence, and that would be a good point at which to start the process you have outlined above as ONE of the scenarios that transport infrastructure may have to face in SA. Apart from the involvement of the public that you have stated, it might also give the Pollies a bit of a better idea of what they might be up for long term.

Finally, such a plan also gives something for people to focus on. Various interest groups can focus on those portions of the plan that interest them, and the Govt would be informed through that involvement. (Not to mention public 'buy in').

If such a plan exists, I would certainly be interested in looking at it.