Message for the "anti-roads" fraternity

[chevypower]

Hmm when I read the article, I didn't get that it was saying public transport was no good. It was saying that people who think we should get rid of roads are forgetting they depend on that infrastructure even if they choose not to drive a car. Rail only makes economic sense if the trains are full, and they are frequent on the same line.

[mik]

Politicians are pushing australia to bring the population up, Victoria for example apparently is gaining 100,000 residents per year, and i suspect the majority of that figure would be close to or in the big smoke(melbourne).
These egg heads dont realize relying on one means of transport or the other is a recipe for disaster,
we need a quality road system and a decent public transport system across the country.
The lack of foresight by these boofheads charged with looking after our future and our kids future is truly staggering, and you dont have to be a university dude with lots of letters after his Edit: or her name to see that.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

That's where light rail would work much better than buses. To be effective, both would need dedicated corridors and in such an environment, light rail/trams are far more efficient at moving people between heavy rail lines and have a far lower impact on the environment.

In very rough terms, the heavy rail network in both Sydney and Melbourne needs to double in size, with orbital routes and cross metro area lines being prominent. Should the local divisions of govco in both cities see sense and actually build such a rail network, light rail can fill the gaps perfectly.

True orbital freeways (unlike the joke that is the Ring Road in Melbourne) are essential for efficient movement of freight and commercial vehicular traffic.

VLine services out here aren't bad for getting into Melbourne, as long as your destination is within walking distance of a CBD train station its the way to go IMO.

Takes me about 55 mins to 1hour to get into Southern Cross from Gisborne on VLine services, might only stop 6 times or so.

Its literally quicker from Gisborne with VLine than what it is to go 20km inwards and get on Metro services at Sunbury, and the VLine trains are much nicer, better seats, they still have a conductor and they aren't graffiti'd and damaged.

Cause the Metro trains stop at a lot of stations, and go in through the city loop, its about 15 minutes longer even though you are 20km closer to the city.

The only problem with VLine is the Bendigo line only has services running every hour, and on weekends its every 2 hours, some of the smaller stations are only every 2nd train as well even in peak times.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by mik

Politicians are pushing australia to bring the population up, Victoria for example apparently is gaining 100,000 residents per year, and i suspect the majority of that figure would be close to or in the big smoke(melbourne).
These egg heads dont realize relying on one means of transport or the other is a recipe for disaster,
we need a quality road system and a decent public transport system across the country. The lack of foresight by these boofheads charged with looking after our future and our kids future is truly staggering, and you dont have to be a university dude with lots of letters after his Edit: or her name to see that.

Our country is as vast as the USA with a squillion less tax payers. How do we pay for this?

[superyob]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

In a way yes I am. I guarantee the patient will stop complaining after a while!
the family will move on and maybe even find an alternate method to kill themselves than the burger and chips. Society will suffer less wasted money on health, and palliative care.
Of course a road system is nothing like the arteries within the human body. If blood stops circulating a patient dies, it cant find an alternative route and the patient still dies. A road network is a flexible thing. A road block causes some delay, the drivers find an alternate route, they earn less money but nobody dies, the city doesn't grind to a halt, it evolves, it decides to invest in public transport to eradicate the camry driving road cholesterol or it wastes money on more roads to also become clogged with traffic.
Bit like smoking, want people to stop because their habit is costing the taxpayer billions in health care, tax it heavily and more people stop. clog the roads and more people are forced to find alternatives, and a smart city provides the smartest mode to move more people...public transport.
There are bigger forces at play than your desire to commute in your car, societal engineering forces for the betterment of our economy and society.

I like traffic jams! they slow the cars down, making them slower and therefore safer so they don't get in my way when I smugly wizz past on my bike as I head to the local inner city cafe to sip my latte, with my gay, educated buddies while munching tofu burgers and burn effigies of **** poor decision makers and the self entitled natives as I plot to ruin your day!

JP.

Too many social discourses attached JP. My head spinneth...

[EB#]

" .....they put more particulate matter into the air of Sydney by a factor of four or five than heavy vehicles ever did."
Ahhh... don't ya just love politicians. They make stuff up and then blurt it out like a truth.

More roads? A narrow minded billion dollar band-aid solution IMO.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by zipping

So your argument is that we build roads, people use roads so therefore we shouldn't build any more roads (capacity).

Not at all. It's just that you never solve congestion by building more road capacity and it's ridiculous to think that. A balanced approach to roads and public transport is the only way to go, but presently it's not balanced.

Public transport capacity has been wound down in Australian cities since the days of the tramways that had vastly more capacity than the buses that replaced them and yet demand for public transport has been increasing steadily for decades now, following the post-war slump. The suburban railways have had some increase in capacity but not as much as they need.

Sydney rail patronage has increased by over 50% since 1980 but there has been nothing like the level of investment needed to reflect that and it's bursting at the seams. The buses move only half of what the trams used to move because of the inherent capacity limitation of buses and they are unable to meet anything like the latent demand. These are things that take the pressure off roads but political policy is in denial about what people actually want to do and is directed solely towards motorist-voters who think there's a magic wand solution to road congestion.

Inner city radial motorways are a particularly futile waste of money and have been rejected as an urban transport solution around the world. There is, however, a need for proper ring road systems and links to them.

[zipping]

Originally Posted by new2ford

Not at all. It's just that you never solve congestion by building more road capacity and it's ridiculous to think that.

That's a weasel argument often used by lefties to justify less road expenditure.

Better roads allow more people to travel in peak periods. it does increase demand and there is still congestion but far more people are able to move and get around and in non peak times these roads work extremely well.

In Melbourne a new train line to Rowville is being considered. Cost $2 billion. You know what the expected share of commuter using rail will be with the addition of this line. PTV say it will jump from 12.6% of the commuters using trains to 12.7%.

They should build it as they should build more roads. A city that can move its citizens and goods is a productive city that benefits all by increasing standards of living.

If we stopped building roads we are shooting ourselves in the foot by accepting lower standards of living.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by zipping

That's a weasel argument often used by lefties to justify less road expenditure.

Once again, nobody is talking about not expanding road capacity - except Ron Christie, a former director of the NSW Roads Authority who once said that the imbalance between road and public transport investment was so bad that road funding should be moved across to public transport for 30 years! So don't make it a black and white argument.

The problem is the imbalance of the investment priorities - that are also out of whack with current trends in the way people move. There is both solid growth and latent demand (limited by capacity) for public transport, whereas road use has stabilised.

The other point is that the roads are mostly already there - more capacity is icing on an existing cake. Public transport infrastructure on the other hand has something like a 60+ years backlog in most Australian cities.

The argument (that so upsets Gay and Abbott) against these negative cost-benefit monster inner city radial motorways is that they suck up huge sums of limited money (or deprive their investor mates of profits?) that would be more wisely invested in a better spread - both roads and public transport - across each city and state.

The first priority in terms of motorways should be to complete city ring road systems, connect intercity highways to them and develop park and rides along them where public transport corridors intersect these roads. Together with this, review freight routes.

[zipping]

Originally Posted by new2ford

The first priority in terms of motorways should be to complete city ring road systems, connect intercity highways to them and develop park and rides along them where public transport corridors intersect these roads. Together with this, review freight routes.

Totally agree with this. In effect you do agree that increased capacity helps.

[burnz]

they worry about road congestion, but close some lanes for bike only or bus only.

at least allow cars that car pool use those lanes..

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by zipping

Totally agree with this. In effect you do agree that increased capacity helps.

Absolutely - in the right places.

[xisled]

One of the main problems for traffic I see every day is the new estates that are going up around the place.

Currently in the west of Melbourne, there are thousands of people moving in yet the public transport system and road system is barley given a second thought.

Take the suburb of Point Cook for example. Point Cook has exploded in population in the last 10 years, but there is 1 main road in and out of point cook from the freeway. One of my friends who live in this area tells me if he leaves in peak hour it can take half an hour just to get out of his street.

Fixing public transport and roads is one thing, but I think business and such need to look at changing hours of operation. Opening a couple hours earlier or later may make a huge difference, instead of 9 to 5.

[jpblue1000]

land dedicated to the car (roads, on street parking, off road parking structures) account for about 30-50 percent of the available land in a modern western city...Depending on the actual city! do we realy need more roads?
Who pays for such an infrastructure, what of the lost productivity to society the lost rates etc.
Can we really afford new roads.
How about we better utlise the existing roads and get bang for our buck. As illustrated above, 1 bus uses 5-6 cars space yet gets so many more cars off the road and a benefit to most its cheaper, sure you have to walk a bit which is good for the countries health system, win, win!
Or we could let back room deals be done between unscrupulous road builders and dubious politicians lining their own nest to build unnecessary toll roads that we pay to use now and pay to reclaim in the future, lose, lose.
Roads are important, they are necessary, don't get me wrong, but a holistic approach to transport in growing cities is paramount.
From what I can gather the recent Victorian election, heavily biased by Melbourne centric issues was run and won on a roads vs public transport platform where the outcome would suggest a large percentage of the electorate wanted investment in public transport. The ABS statistics suggest nearly 50 percent of them used it in the last month and near half a million use it 3-7 times a week.

[mik]

Originally Posted by superyob

Our country is as vast as the USA with a squillion less tax payers. How do we pay for this?

More intelligent thought from decision makers, cut waste, stop giving away money like it grows on trees would be a start.

[mik]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

land dedicated to the car (roads, on street parking, off road parking structures) account for about 30-50 percent of the available land in a modern western city...Depending on the actual city! do we realy need more roads?
Who pays for such an infrastructure, what of the lost productivity to society the lost rates etc.
Can we really afford new roads.
How about we better utlise the existing roads and get bang for our buck. As illustrated above, 1 bus uses 5-6 cars space yet gets so many more cars off the road and a benefit to most its cheaper, sure you have to walk a bit which is good for the countries health system, win, win!
Or we could let back room deals be done between unscrupulous road builders and dubious politicians lining their own nest to build unnecessary toll roads that we pay to use now and pay to reclaim in the future, lose, lose.
Roads are important, they are necessary, don't get me wrong, but a holistic approach to transport in growing cities is paramount.
From what I can gather the recent Victorian election, heavily biased by Melbourne centric issues was run and won on a roads vs public transport platform where the outcome would suggest a large percentage of the electorate wanted investment in public transport. The ABS statistics suggest nearly 50 percent of them used it in the last month and near half a million use it 3-7 times a week.

You cant really go by that, you know as well as i do elections are rarely won on truth , usually its more about which party promises x and y and promotes it in the media the best.

that being said , i think getting rid of some rail crossings was a biggy, what was the count across melbourne ? 70 odd rail crossings causing bottle necks, the local council in my area has been taunting our local residents with removing one lousy crossing for thirty years , so imo that was a big vote getter, but our area still suffers with 3 rail crossings in close proximity in 3 different directions .

[chizzy86]

The polls before the Vic election said a majority of people wanted the E-W link but they were still going to vote labor anyway
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/vic...-1227137560265

[cheap]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

land dedicated to the car (roads, on street parking, off road parking structures) account for about 30-50 percent of the available land in a modern western city...Depending on the actual city! do we realy need more roads?
Who pays for such an infrastructure, what of the lost productivity to society the lost rates etc.
Can we really afford new roads.
How about we better utlise the existing roads and get bang for our buck. As illustrated above, 1 bus uses 5-6 cars space yet gets so many more cars off the road and a benefit to most its cheaper, sure you have to walk a bit which is good for the countries health system, win, win!
Or we could let back room deals be done between unscrupulous road builders and dubious politicians lining their own nest to build unnecessary toll roads that we pay to use now and pay to reclaim in the future, lose, lose.
Roads are important, they are necessary, don't get me wrong, but a holistic approach to transport in growing cities is paramount.
From what I can gather the recent Victorian election, heavily biased by Melbourne centric issues was run and won on a roads vs public transport platform where the outcome would suggest a large percentage of the electorate wanted investment in public transport. The ABS statistics suggest nearly 50 percent of them used it in the last month and near half a million use it 3-7 times a week.

Have you ever driven in Sydney, not just a casual tourist drive across town or a bus/ferry trip to Taronga, but tried to commute in peak hour traffic, Hornsby to Macquarie Park, Liverpool to Bankstown, Canterbury to Cronulla or Whale beach to North Sydney? Here is a news flash, the buses are already full, the trains are already full, the road system is FULL.

There is no point in adding buses to an existing road system which is already overloaded. New roads are required, some of these roads will be required to cut or burrow right through various suburbs.

Alternatively, we could send two million Sydney people to live in Adelaide. You'd be in favour no doubt.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by cheap

Have you ever driven in Sydney, not just a casual tourist drive across town or a bus/ferry trip to Taronga, but tried to commute in peak hour traffic, Hornsby to Macquarie Park, Liverpool to Bankstown, Canterbury to Cronulla or Whale beach to North Sydney? Here is a news flash, the buses are already full, the trains are already full, the road system is FULL.

There is no point in adding buses to an existing road system which is already overloaded. New roads are required, some of these roads will be required to cut or burrow right through various suburbs.

Alternatively, we could send two million Sydney people to live in Adelaide. You'd be in favour no doubt.

All those places you list have good public transport connections between them, in some cases rail. Wonder why the public transport is full? 60+ years of under-investment due to most funding going into roads. Have you thought that part of the solution is to invest in greater public transport capacity, not huge tunnelled roads that will quickly fill to capacity anyway?

After a point you're going to have to turn to the public transport option in a city that size. There's simply not enough room to support all those cars, not to mention space to park them, without displacing development and other activity on highly valuable land.

Sensible cross-regional road development yes, but you can't keep turning a blind eye to public transport investment or the city becomes grossly dysfunctional. Well actually Sydney already is.

[cheap]

Originally Posted by new2ford

All those places you list have good public transport connections between them, in some cases rail. Wonder why the public transport is full? 60+ years of under-investment due to most funding going into roads. Have you thought that part of the solution is to invest in greater public transport capacity, not huge tunnelled roads that will quickly fill to capacity anyway?

After a point you're going to have to turn to the public transport option in a city that size. There's simply not enough room to support all those cars, not to mention space to park them, without displacing development and other activity on highly valuable land.

Sensible cross-regional road development yes, but you can't keep turning a blind eye to public transport investment or the city becomes grossly dysfunctional. Well actually Sydney already is.

When was the last time you used public transport on any of the places mentioned?

[Trump]

Originally Posted by cheap

Alternatively, we could send two million Sydney people to live in Adelaide. You'd be in favour no doubt.

Ok, how do we make this happen?

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by cheap

When was the last time you used public transport on any of the places mentioned?

Pretty much all of them in the last few years. Yes it's crowded in peak but underinvestment is a significant contributer to this. Poor management of the bus system doesn't help of course.

There's been a proposal for a rail line to Warringah waiting in the queue for about 100 years. When do you reckon that might be allowed a place between motorway projects?

[cheap]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

Ok, how do we make this happen?

Simple, by marketting JP's charm and charisma, they will come!l

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by xisled

Fixing public transport and roads is one thing, but I think business and such need to look at changing hours of operation. Opening a couple hours earlier or later may make a huge difference, instead of 9 to 5.

Thats the way i see it.

Traffic is worse at peak times before and after work, therefore, rather than spend a fortune upgrading everything, encourage inner city office workers to work alternative hours where possible.
There must be thousands of people who contribute to the morning/evening peak who could fulfill their duties at different hours.

An interesting consideration if nothing else.

[Davehoos]

There has been countless studies that recommend abandoning large cities in Australia for greener pastures, wont see this occure-public servants need population to oversee and us in the bush don't want them here.

Road system-who is saying that the roads being built now will contain vehicles in 50 years time. Most are being purchased/reserved for future activity.

The biggest single failure in NSW planning-was the death of Wal Murray and the return of NSW labor. Something for Victoria to look forward to.

I have lived in Sydney in the 80-90's and often commute there, I recomend that people travel to populated cities before regurgitating dribble of congestion and road vehicle created pollution. I havnt been to Europe-stop people going into the cities-africa or south America.

.I have been to Melbourne only a few times-finding it like a collection of provincial cities. The last few trips with the motor way make it almost like Sydney with the drive straight through out the other side deal. I tried to use the vic public transport last trip there without happiness. I was dumped in Williamstown for a few days without transport. found it easier to use a taxi.

I never seen the congestion spoken about in media reports in sydney other than Friday afternoon evacuation out of Sydney and the sunday arvo return. Why would you drive into the city when all the mums go for a chat?

Traffic congestion-Im certain that If you mapped traffic flow in Sydney you could prove that may have a case-but there have been many reports and action to remedy poor traffic flow in the rest of NSW or new England hyway around coal mines.

I often have to park up to 3 city block from the services I attend in the rural regional centers of less than 1000 population during the day.

Almost all reports worth looking at have looked at productivity loss of sitting in traffic. You never see a positive study to recommend the raising of speed limit to 130 because the time loss cant justify the cost.

Newcastle Is fixing public transport.
How?-getting rid of it. since 1980's I heard year after year of academic B/S and witnessed a left political plan to bankrupt the CBD allowing the accademics to buy cheap inner city land. The right wing moved in to buy up the cheap land moving the lefties out. and buried the rail. SLAM DUNK. Too late for me as I moved out into the real world. should have opened a coffee shop.

My last few trips into Newcastle has been a dream. Traffic paciffiers-roundabouts and bottle necks are going. and the current public transport works. not that you read that in the paper.

Rule 1 Plenty of studies can be found in university towns. You can prove from these studied any case you want to pedal.

P/S
I live 75 Km north of Newcastle and the area that is not part of the hunter valley. Their are 8 public transport busses a day drive past my house-in a village of 75 partial occupied homes. Few times a week there are specialty charters and pensioner shopping transport. 3 Km from here is 4 railway busses that go from Taree to Sydney. The public transport interconnects to allow me to travel to any local regional centers, still not as cheap as buying a used car.

From the 1950's I have newspaper clippings of great grandma in Sydney with the education minister signing agreements on free bus transport for children. My understanding is that they closed the schools during the war and when it came time to reopen smaller communities purchased busses and took children to the larger better schools against then education policy-the local school had 13 students. What is needed in the suburbs is people to get up and produce business models to get them a public system that is usable with out waiting for someone to do it for you.

Rammble Prattle.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by cheap

Simple, by marketing JP's charm and charisma, they will come!l

Winning you over aren't I champ!

JP

[new2ford]

Here's a report that indicates that a public transport infrastructure project has resulted in a fall in road use:

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/...-1227364212928

The Federal government is refusing to help fund further development of this infrastructure because it will only fund roads. It simply refuses to accept that the solutions to road congestion are multi-faceted.

[zipping]

Originally Posted by new2ford

The Federal government is refusing to help fund further development of this infrastructure because it will only fund roads. It simply refuses to accept that the solutions to road congestion are multi-faceted.

That's because its not its responsibility to build PT never has been. Find me 1 PT project funded by the feds. They may have chipped in here and there but its not its responsibility.

If you want to give responsibility for PT to Canberrra well good luck with that plan.

In other news infrastructure Australia released yesterday that 7/8 of the worst congested roads are in Sydney.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/53-billion...21-gh6rzy.html
So commiserations to our Sydney motoring cousins.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by zipping

That's because its not its responsibility to build PT never has been. Find me 1 PT project funded by the feds. They may have chipped in here and there but its not its responsibility.

Quite a lot, but all under Labor - it's the Libs who don't consider it's their responsibility! (That's a comment of fact, not political bias - I'm apolitical and think both sides suck in different ways!) The existing section of the Gold Coast Light Rail was partly federally funded, when Labor was in Canberra.

The problem is nowadays it's impossible for the States to fully fund the public transport projects they need without Federal support.

So it's a matter of either pedantically sticking to the constitution and political beliefs, or taking a more pragmatic and proactive approach to the future functioning of the whole country and adopt a holistic approach to transport infrastructure improvement.

The thing about Gold Coast is that it's a typical Australian small city that you would instinctively write off as being hopelessly car-dependent. Yet one well-chosen public transport project kicks public transport usage up 28% and reduces car use (and congestion). Would a motorway along that corridor have done that I wonder?

As for those Sydney corridors, how different would the situation be in Warringah for example if a rail line had been built rather than never getting a look-in between never-ending (and never-solving-the-problem) motorway projects?

This isn't anti-car stuff, it's about making it easier to use cars where there is no alternative by taking the load off corridors where public transport is a real alternative.

[zipping]

Care to cite a PT project funded by the feds? I can't really talk for other states but certainly nothing here in Melbourne.

I would be very surprised. Gillard proposed to fund a rail tunnel in Sydney and that never happened as far as I'm aware first time a fed govt has gone anywhere near PT.

I would suggest you go look at some State budgets. They can fund PT if they so choose.

Where you say pedantically sticking to the constitution well yeh its the rules by which government operate so unless the High Court allows it the constitution rules. That's not to say feds can't fund PT but as a supporter of States rights and a competitive federalism I would hate to see bureaucrats in Canberra getting their mits into PT projects.