Sensational-Adelaide.com

Waewick wrote:

zills_86 wrote:Ok, here's what I think...

post of the year.

Post of which year...? This year or 2012 (the year it was posted)...? Holy thread-revival, Batman!

But, yes, it was a very good post!

Waewick wrote: I want the 1st ring route to actually be a ring route before any talk of a second one.

But this is precisely the reason we have gotten into such a mess with the south road debacle. There is no comprehensive plan for North-south /Inner ring/ outer ring, and how to connect all these components. We just stumble along and patch up the worst parts, which in turn then creates problems elsewhere, with no thought to how to deal with all the traffic funnelling off the good bits.
I have to agree with some though, that we are slowly piecing back the original MATS plan, so why not just come out and re release it already, or commit to spending billions on commuter rail to relieve commuter congestion and dedicated upgraded freight routes.

Claybro, it wasn't the concept of the MATS Plan that killed it. It was the detail of the MATS Plan that killed it. When people saw the detailed images of huge spaghetti junctions at Hindmarsh and the associated scale of property acquisition and land required to undertake the projects - that's what killed it.

Better that the public isn't given too much detail. The concept will do fine for now. That's why we're given artists impressions and video flythroughs today. It's vague. Nobody questions how many properties will be acquired or how many lanes or how wide the lanes are going to be. That's the detail that kills these sort of projects.

claybro wrote:or commit to spending billions on commuter rail

This is the key. I hope we don't see any more large-scale metropolitan road projects after the South Road upgrade as I'm pretty sure that the future doesn't lie with the private motor car to the extent that it does today...

i guess there is 2 things to consider here. One is commuter requirements, the other is commercial transport needs. Commuter needs can be met by heavy rail, light rail, buslanes, and consolidating people and employment around existing transport. (there is at least some effort to start doing this now).
However, like it or not, there will still be a need for large scale road projects, as commuter rail alone will never suit everyones needs (we are still building sprawling suburbs) and even the building of a dedicated freight freeway and rail away from the metro area still does not help the transport task of connecting the various manufacturing/ import/export/retail and storage facilities scattered all over the metro area.

Llessur2002 wrote:This is the key. I hope we don't see any more large-scale metropolitan road projects after the South Road upgrade as I'm pretty sure that the future doesn't lie with the private motor car to the extent that it does today

While catering entirely to the private car is not ideal, unfortunately in a growing city, efficient large scale roads are going to be part of the equation.

claybro wrote:While catering entirely to the private car is not ideal, unfortunately in a growing city, efficient large scale roads are going to be part of the equation.

Depends where and how that growth occurs. If we continue the move towards medium-high density city, city-fringe and public transport corridor-based living then a high level of investment in public transport will remove cars from the roads and enable us to better utilise the existing network without any further large-scale projects.

We already have enough large-scale roads (i.e. 6 lanes) to more than adequately service a city of Adelaide's size. We need to find innovative ways to shift traffic from them to make them efficient for those who absolutely *have* to use them (freight, business and those who genuinely have no viable public transport option). If we build bigger roads they'll eventually just end up gridlocked with even more cars as in LA meaning we'll need to build even bigger roads. This can't go on ad-infinitum so what better time to start making the change than now?

It pains me every day to see car after car after car crawling into the CBD all with single occupants, a huge percentage from the inner suburbs. Until we sort out that disgraceful situation I'll never support spending $billions on further road building just to give these same people an easier way to drive their single-occupant cars into the city on a daily basis.

Llessur2002 wrote:It pains me every day to see car after car after car crawling into the CBD all with single occupants, a huge percentage from the inner suburbs. Until we sort out that disgraceful situation I'll never support spending $billions on further road building just to give these same people an easier way to drive their single-occupant cars into the city on a daily basis.

In reality though, only a small percentage of commuters are travelling into the city. The CBD is probably the easiest place for any worker to get to by PT and yet poeple still drive. The vast majority are travelling to where they work in other suburbs, oh and ..that other wonderful brain fart...the super schools... yes, closing dozens of local schools and amalgamating everyone in some spot, far from their homes is also playing traffic havoc around these schools.
So, while investing heavily in PT is essential and will solve some issues, unless we also invest in some large road projects, conjestion will still stifle economic growth. The whole transport system should not compete, but be complimentary, but as far as I can see, there are no real whole system plans in place.

Llessur2002 wrote:

claybro wrote: We already have enough large-scale roads (i.e. 6 lanes) to more than adequately service a city of Adelaide's size. We need to find innovative ways to shift traffic from them to make them efficient for those who absolutely *have* to use them (freight, business and those who genuinely have no viable public transport option). If we build bigger roads they'll eventually just end up gridlocked with even more cars as in LA meaning we'll need to build even bigger roads. This can't go on ad-infinitum so what better time to start making the change than now?

Ah, the old LA argument. Sometimes I wonder if some people on this forum aren't nimby's and APPA members in disguise.
They abandonded the MATS plan decades ago, one argument being it would create ghettos and isolate suburbs. Well guess what South Australian's, we got ghettos anyway.

It pains me every day to see car after car after car crawling into the CBD all with single occupants, a huge percentage from the inner suburbs. Until we sort out that disgraceful situation I'll never support spending $billions on further road building just to give these same people an easier way to drive their single-occupant cars into the city on a daily basis.

Never mind the people you see banked up in traffic on main roads...what about the heavy vehicles which deliver the goods we buy from the shops?

For many people, using our roads IS their job.
No trucks = no food, no clothes, no consumer goods. The economy comes to a halt. You buy things online? A courier still has to deliver it to you.
Some of these people only make money per job/delivery/items. So the more they can do, the more of a living they can make.

We need better and more pt and better road infrastructure.

One problem we have here though is that nobody is going to be be bold enough, or have the "balls".
There are many options, with high costs. But we aren't starting with a blank canvas, we have a built up city and therefore it's going to cost big dollars to deliver positive results. So while we have to spend big bucks anyway, we may as well spend a little bit more and do things properly, be a little bold.
It's not just about better public transport or new freeways with other names. Big, bold projects can instill a sense of pride and confidence in the populace which has benefits of it's own. Sort of what Adelaide Oval has done.

A more extensive tram network through the CBD and inner suburbs should be a reality. There should be a detailed plan already on this and it should be in the process of being built.
A proper network of "motorways" that are interconnected should be a reality. Tunnels should not be ruled out or ignored as options. Tolls should be an option that's on the table, not ruled out out of political principal..especially when the industry who will benefit most from motorways/freeways is telling you they are happy for tolls to be introduced on their industry.
Fixing up regular roads should be a high priority as well.
And doing major road works, even resurfacing, should be mandatory to happen at night only.
To make all these infrastructure projects worthwhile, and to be able to start paying down the debt they would create to build it all, they need to create a positive environment for small businsess, and cut red tape and bureaucracy, and remove unnecessary regulation to make it easy to do business in this state. Not only to make it easy, but to make it inviting for businesses to setup here.

Yes, it will cost billions. Billions to fix our roads and create a network of "motorways", and billions to create a better public transport system with interconnected networks of various modes of transport.

claybro wrote:In reality though, only a small percentage of commuters are travelling into the city. The CBD is probably the easiest place for any worker to get to by PT and yet poeple still drive. The vast majority are travelling to where they work in other suburbs, oh and ..that other wonderful brain fart...the super schools... yes, closing dozens of local schools and amalgamating everyone in some spot, far from their homes is also playing traffic havoc around these schools.
So, while investing heavily in PT is essential and will solve some issues, unless we also invest in some large road projects, conjestion will still stifle economic growth. The whole transport system should not compete, but be complimentary, but as far as I can see, there are no real whole system plans in place.

It would be really interesting to see a % breakdown of peak-hour traffic in Adelaide to determine the destination (although presumably this would vary depending on location) i.e. % driving to CBD, % school run, % school run then CBD etc etc. Unless distance is huge, a large proportion of commuting traffic into the CBD could be removed with the right improvements to public transport. A US-style school bus system could reduce a lot of the school-bound traffic (especially with super schools). Even a significant proportion of the non-CBD bound commuting traffic could be reduced with public transport improvements.

I've said it before on this forum but I think that in Adelaide the problem does not really lie with bad public transport - it is with people's perception of public transport and the 'I have the God-given right to drive everywhere in my car so help me God' attitude that is entrenched in our society. These problems need addressing urgently but building more roads will only be a band-aid solution and won't help the situation in the long term.

With regards to our existing road network - I agree that efficiencies are needed in terms of intersections, traffic priority etc. But I think there are far better long-term solutions for metropolitan Adelaide than more highways and freeways.

One of the problems with the MATS Plan was that Adelaide was/is such a small city that had it been implemented in full, pretty much everyone would have been within earshot of a honking great freeway. Does anyone really want to live in that sort of city?

We're only going to expand North and South so a good north-south freeway will be beneficial I agree. Everything else will be fine with the aforementioned improvements to efficiency if we can just significantly reduce the volume of traffic using it.

rev wrote:Sometimes I wonder if some people on this forum aren't nimby's and APPA members in disguise.

APPA member? Hardly. I'm only 34.

rev wrote:what about the heavy vehicles which deliver the goods we buy from the shops?

This was part of my point - the roads we have (which, by most international standards are pretty large - 6 lane highways through 60kph residential areas? You don't see that in many places yet we have loads of the damn things) are literally full of people who don't need to be using them, creating havoc for the people who do.

My opinion, and it's only my opinion, is that the clever thing to do is remove the unnecessary road users by giving them a viable alternative to using their cars then make improvements (not expansions) to the existing network to make it as efficient as possible for those who *do* need to be using it such as freight vehicles, couriers, emergency services and those who genuinely have no viable alternative etc etc.

It just seems silly to me to build more great big roads in metropolitan areas when we could achieve the same end result by changing how our society uses the existing infrastructure, with the added benefit of not having to rip up vast swathes of our city in the process.

I'm far from a nimby, I just consider myself environmentally astute.

I never said you were an APPA member..

This was part of my point - the roads we have (which, by most international standards are pretty large - 6 lane highways through 60kph residential areas? You don't see that in many places yet we have loads of the damn things) are literally full of people who don't need to be using them, creating havoc for the people who do.

Who says they don't need to be using them?

My opinion, and it's only my opinion, is that the clever thing to do is remove the unnecessary road users by giving them a viable alternative to using their cars then make improvements (not expansions) to the existing network to make it as efficient as possible for those who *do* need to be using it such as freight vehicles, couriers, emergency services and those who genuinely have no viable alternative etc etc./quote]

And what if I don't want to use public transport but prefer to drive my car to work?

I agree with you about the better/more public transport, I'd love to see an expanded tram network in my life time, full electric train network, and all integrated with each other and the bus system.

But we also need better roads and a network of motorways that are linked together, and a proper city ring route and even a suburban ring route.
People need to understand we are playing catch up with these things.
It's going to cost billions, but these things are necessary and long, long over due.

It just seems silly to me to build more great big roads in metropolitan areas when we could achieve the same end result by changing how our society uses the existing infrastructure.

Just because you build better public transport doesn't mean everyone will abandon their cars on the side of the road and jump on the nearest train or tram or bus.

When you look at the facts and case studies of other cities who have built roads endlessly it is clear that more roads will = more demand from car users and more congestion:

http://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traff ... ed-demand/

I completely agree with Llessur2002 in that diversifying modal transport rather than spending billions of dollars favouring one form of transport is the way to go. And modal share spending has favoured only one mode of transport over the last 50 years (hint: it's motorised vehicles).

I should be clear and echo previous comments: Motorised vehicles have a place on our roads, and are, as has been said, for many people a necessity for livelihood.

BUT the amount of people that drive <10km to work when they could easily ride a bike without raising a sweat and need for a shower would significantly reduce traffic on our roads, even between suburbs not just suburbs and cbd locales.

Instead of kids getting dropped off in SUVs at school why not ride or PT? Imagine the health/wellbeing benefits!

Make other modes of transport attractive, appealing, cool, cheap, efficacious and maybe people will stop and think about whether they absolutely need to be taking the car everyday. They could even save money on gym memberships if their commute is an active form of travel.

If you travel less than 5kms to work everyday in a car by yourself then you are absolutely kidding yourself that the automobile is essential for you, unless you are a tradie who relies on tools for your occupation.

All points are valid, except there seems to be a perception, that spending money on a train will magically make cars dissapear from the roads. This is not the case due to the way Australian cities have evolved and as everyone has different travel needs. Case in point is here in Perth, where the Northern and Southern freeways were constructed with high speed trains in the median. Now during peak hour the freeway is packed, but so are the trains...they are at crush point. Adelaide could build another 3 train lines...it still will not resolve the need for tradies, delivery drivers, couriers, trucks, buses and yes commuters to use well planned well placed and uninterupted road corridors of which Adelaide have .....NONE. (yet)

I don't believe in the 'build more PT and they will come' mentality. Can't simply change long-term behavior. But there's a stronger behavior out there - avoiding financial expenses.

Maybe the solution is two words - Price signal. Make PT financially attractive compared to driving (via whatever method works best. i'm no expert but maybe a congestion tax on certain roads, at certain times of day. Scan registration plates and you receive a monthly 'peak traffic road user' bill - exclude commercial vehicles).

The challenge is two more words - Lost votes.

Democracy is so 20th century.

Our tram network will have no credibility until it goes to the two most densely populated areas in the city, being Parkside/Unley and Norwood and gets legitimate scale

Instead of getting more people to drive their cars to port rd the team extension should have been towards Greenhill Road, given how many businesses are there then into surburbia.

I live around 10kms from the city and have 1 irregular bus (not a criticism), so i drive.