ADELAIDES

TRAFFIC CONGESTION:
TRAMS, BIKES & BUSES
Discussion Paper, May 2014
Whats the solution?
All truth passes
through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently
opposed. Third, it is
accepted as being
self-evident.
[Arthur Schopenhauer]
PREFACE

Debate has of late centred on Adelaides traffic congestion
and slowing vehicle travel times on key roads leading into
and around the city, with commentary by councillors, the
media and car lobbyists. Input from transport professionals
has been conspicuously absent. Without this input it has
been easy to point the finger of blame at bus and bike lanes,
parking taxes, speed limits etc. given their immediate impact.
InfraPlan, a leading transport and urban planning consultancy
undertakes the planning and design of all modes of transport
in metropolitan Adelaide as well as other Australian cities,
and has compiled a response to the current transport debate
in the City of Adelaide. InfraPlan is also a city based business
that does not represent a pro or anti car position and whose
staff use car, bike, train and bus transport to travel work.
This paper discusses the cause and effect of Adelaides
increasing congestion woes and examines possible solutions.
Compared to other cities, its easy to get around Adelaide.
Anyone whos travelled to other major cities knows that
traffic congestion in Adelaide is relatively minor and only
occurs during peak periods. But this peak period is intense
and largely driven by a car dependent workforce all arriving
at about the same time in the city. Students mostly arrive
by public transport on foot or by bike. The paper draws on
previous analysis undertaken for a number of strategies
including the Smart Move Strategy (2012, p. 1).
The Strategys key priority is to create a people-friendly
City by improving conditions for pedestrians, cyclists
and those using public transport. It strives to achieve
the right balance for accommodating these priority
users, while also addressing the needs for parking,
loading and car accessibility.
The inner metropolitan road network is a finely tuned
and interdependent system that ties the city to the seven
surrounding councils. While many recent policies and
projects in the city may not seem palatable to car dependent
motorists at first, they will be necessary if Adelaide is to grow
economically and into a vibrant capital city that equitably
supports residents, workers, students and tourism on a daily
basis. Policies to increase car parking, access and traffic
speeds through the city will have a negative impact on both
the city economy and inner suburban Main Streets, as will be
discussed.
P A G E 0 1
1. Data based on ABS (2011), ACC GIS data, 2011 and Uni SA, Adelaide University. 2. City User Population Research, 2012-2013, ACC, 57% of students take public transport a week and
53% cycle or walk once a week. 3. Based on PB Blu Trips Origin and Destination Survey for Victoria Square project. 4. ABS data 2003-2013. 5. Based on ABS employment data
6. City User Population Research, 2012-2013, ACC, 57% of students take public transport a week and 53% cycle or walk once a week 7. City User Profile Research, 2012-13, ACC.
Who contributes to city congestion?
1
The City of Adelaide supports a heavily car dependent
metropolitan workforce, in fact one of the most car
dependent in the western world. When compared
to other Australian capital cities of over one million
people, the percentage of people commuting by car is
the highest on the mainland (see Figure 1). The good
news is that car dependency has been falling across
all capital cities (between 2001-2011, as a percentage
of all trips) with Brisbane dropping almost 18% as
cities invest in public transport, pedestrian and bike
infrastructure. Adelaide has shown the most modest
decrease at 7% over this period.
Only 22,000 residents live in the City of Adelaide and
while a significant 42% walk or cycle to work, many
travel to work by car a few city blocks away. The
largest congestion impact however comes from the
120,000 workers who converge on the city every day,
about 60,000 of whom use a car. Add to that 88,000
city students, more than half of whom travel to the
city during the morning period on buses, by bike or
on foot
2
and the challenges mount. Efficiently being
able to get people in and out of the city is paramount
for a growing city economy. Twenty routes that cross
the parklands cater for around 220,000 vehicle trips
every day that move in and out of the city. Analysis
shows
3
that about a quarter of these vehicle trips
(55,000 cars) are through traffic that use the city as a
convenient shortcut. Without a properly functioning
ring road around the parklands these trips add to
Adelaides congestion woes.
While Adelaides city population grew quickly over
the past decade
4
this has been modest in absolute
terms (7,500 residents) when compared to the
employment and student growth rate. A growing city
employment base from just over 90,000 a decade
ago to approximately 120,000 today
5
and student
numbers growing from 51,000 to 88,000 (74%)
6

have been responsible for the lions share of trips.
Much of Adelaides white collar and service industry
employment is supported by growing inner and
middle ring suburbs (about 12,000 more people per
annum in suburbs located between Mawson lakes
in the north and Darlington in the south) who make
the relatively short trip by bus, tram, train, bike, car
or walk (60% of students and nearly half of all city
users come from the inner suburbs).
7
Indeed this
is reflected in the number of pedestrians on our
streets who inevitably delay left and right turning
traffic. Pedestrians increased by a significant 250%
on North Terrace, 50% on Rundle Street and 30%
on King William Street over the decade to 2011.
The Riverbank development has no doubt further
increased pedestrian movements. Rundle Mall has
up to 50,000 people on some days.
FIGURE 1: PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO TRAVEL
TO WORK BY CAR (ABS CENSUS 2011 DATA).
With only a set amount of road space both within
the city and on routes leading into the city (many at
the limit of their capacity) peak hour congestion has
been steadily increasing. At close to capacity levels,
congestion and delay times begin to rise exponentially
as you add more traffic. Transport planners more
than a decade ago would have imagined a city driven
to gridlock by about now. The employment increase
alone should have theoretically led to 50-60,000 more
car trips in and out of the city every day and if parking
were cheap and plentiful for students add to that
about 30,000 car trips. But this has not eventuated
for an important reason. Figure 2 shows that while
car as driver trips and therefore dependence has
been increasing over the past decade the share of
public transport trips has been increasing at a much
faster rate in absolute terms. Some of that increase
can be attributed to cultural change supported by
cycling infrastructure, safer walking routes, the tram
extension and improved train and bus services.
Transport Planning 101:
Efficient Use of Road Space
Cars
Trucks
Bus
Bikes
Cars
Bus
Bus
Cars
2014 (Survey)
Transport planning 101 the world over tells us that
as a city congests you either widen roads and build
freeways or find more efficient ways of moving the
same amount of people (mass transit systems). Or a
bit of both. For example, one bus can replace up
to 30-40 cars and one tram up to 150-300 cars as
passengers, while 4 cyclists take up only as much
room as one car and so in effect remove 4 cars
(see Figure 3). This in turn also frees up road space
for cars which hopefully also diminish in number
because they now use these alternative transport
means.
Indeed, the primary reason for bus lanes on Currie
/Grenfell Street was the need to move people
more efficiently (see Figure 4). Before the bus lane
was introduced, transport planners observed that
the corridor catered for up to 85% of its traffic in
cars, which effectively only moved 25% of the people
who drove it. They also noticed that the other 12% of
traffic (buses) moved up to 75% of the people.
It showed that road space was not efficiently being
allocated to maximise the movement of people who
needed to get to their place of work, lessons or to
connect with other services. Without a bus lane, and
given growing traffic demand, congestion was about
to get a lot worse.
FIGURE 2: THE NUMBER OF CITY WORKERS BY TRAVEL METHOD OVER A 10
YEAR CENSUS PERIOD.(Note these figures represent journey to worktrips only.
student trips if inluded would significantly add to public transport and walking
trips).
FIGURE 3: ANALYSIS OF HOW MANY PEOPLE CARS
AND BUSES MOVE ON CURRIE/GRENFELL STREET
NEAR KING WILLIAM ROAD.
VEHICLE MOVEMENT PEOPLE MOVEMENT
P A G E 0 3
8. If we assumed full trams during the peak hour and 150 people per hour
FIGURE 4: THE ROAD SPACE REQUIRED FOR DIFFERENT MEANS OF TRAVEL.
It would seem that bus and tram lanes catering for
people movement is essential for a growing modern
city like Adelaide. Surprisingly, the reaction to these
projects was largely negative when they happened.
Indeed, Adelaide introduced just 11 tram movements,
catering for about 1900 people per direction per
hour, effectively replacing this car traffic on a 6 lane
boulevard, King William Street. In contrast, Melbourne
supports 500 trams, many on suburban high streets
(similar to Unley Rd), and a significant number of
services in its city centre. Swanston Street for example
supports 119 trams per hour during the peak hour
(theoretically moving some 17,000 people per hour
8

on single lanes). The street has now been shut to car
traffic while streets still open to traffic, such as Spencer
and Collins, support up to 82 movements per hour or
700% more than Adelaides city street lanes.
Adelaides tram network is ready to cater for significant
growth. In fact, when the light rail system is extended
to Port Adelaide and West Lakes as planned it could
easily cater for the 25 or so tram movements per
hour that will be needed, still well below some of
Melbournes busier tram streets. With high capacity
trams the system could move close to 7,000 people
per hour in one lane of traffic. The most one car lane
can support is about 1,800 vehicles, which if in single
occupant cars would be 1,800 people: almost 4 times
less capacity.
In an age where sustainable and efficient people-
moving transport or mass transit systems (buses,
trains and trams/light rail) is becoming the global
norm for solving congestion problems, Adelaide
again appears to be defying the trend with its
reaction to bus lanes. This may come back to how
ingrained car dependency really is in Adelaide, driven
by factors such as the ability to access cheap and
plentiful car parking.
P A G E 0 4
Amount of space required to transport the same number of passengers by car, bus or bicycle.
Photo: Des Moines, lowa. August 2010. Source: www.tobinbennett.com
9. Based on Colliers International, Australian CBD Car Park White Paper, 2012 for Melbourne, ABS data and ACC 2011 of-streetsurvey
How cheap and plentiful is CBD Car Parking?
FIGURE 5: OFF-STREET CAR PARKS PER 1,000 WORKERS IN AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL CITIES
The City of Adelaide has lots of car parking. There
are over 70,000 car parks, with 31% comprising
off-street commercial parking and 24% on-street
parking. The remainder is the ancillary off-street and
residential parking (ACC Land Use Survey 2008). A
2011 off-street parking survey indicated that there
are about 22,400 commercial off-street car parking
spaces in the city as a whole and approximately
23,700 other private business and ancilliary car parks.
Council own 10 U-Parks comprising about 6,200
commercial off-street car parks, around a quarter of
the total and therefore partly exert an influence over
pricing.
This is not only higher than most capital cities but up
to double the rate per thousand workers compared to
more car dependent US cities. The analysis
9
in Figure
5 shows us that Adelaide has the most generous
amount of commercial parking for its worker base in
Australia compared to other capital cities. If we add
the 23,700 other car parks, (ancillary parking and
private off-street commercial parking) the number
climbs to about 460 car parks per thousand workers.
Many view car parks as the largest contributer to
congestion in the city with queues of cars spilling out
into streets, further fueling city congestion.
Astoundingly, the Adelaide City Council continues
to uphold a Development Plan in some parts of its
jurisdiction that requires commercial developments
to include employee based car parking to be built on
small land sites despite the level of public transport
provision in the city. It appears to be at odds with the
principles of its own Smart Move Strategy. There are
also too many car parks, too close to the city core
causing pedestrian, bus, bike and car traffic to fight
for road space and signalised green time.
Growing the local employment base by another
50,000 workers by 2038 as planned by the State
Governments 30 Year Plan is not unthinkable
given that the City grew its population base at
twice the annual rate in just a decade. It is also
good news for the property sector given it will add
about 750,000 square metres of office space to
the already 1.3 million square metres in the city
square mile, taking the city to well over 2 million
square metres. But to provide parking for 50,000
additional workers from here would mean about
42,000 more car parks and 84,000 more car trips in
and out of the city. That could not happen without
peak periods being in constant grid lock for up to two
hours. Good public transport and more cycling and
walking commuter trips is the only solution short of
widening roads through our parklands and building
interchanges.
P A G E 0 5
10. RACQ, 2012 11. Based on a $750 charge imposed on one city car park over 250 working days per year. 12. Shopping Centre News, Pitney Bowes Business Insight 13. City User Popu-
lation Research, 2012-2013, ACC.
Adelaide
early-bird
parking
The City of Adelaide also has the cheapest car
parking by far when compared to Melbourne,
Sydney and Brisbane that have all day parking
charges that are up to 200-300% higher in cost
10
(see
Figure 6). Cheap and plentiful car parking may work
for a suburban shopping centre but it is a significant
challenge for a growing capital city that needs to
cater for a growing resident, employment and student
base. Adelaide simply cannot continue to develop
and provide even more cheap car parking without
driving city streets to a point of gridlock.
Does cheap parking underpin
retail performance?
Understandably, Adelaides city property sector often
ties cheap car parking to successful commercial and
retail models. A view that even a modest parking tax
which would add to daily rates would affect retailers,
given the competition with free parking in some
shopping centres
11
. Retail rents are a good proxy for
retail turnover of a CBD centre. Figure 7 demonstrates
that despite Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane having
significantly higher parking costs and less parking
than in Adelaide rental yields are up to 300% higher.
Notwithstanding this point, Adelaides streets are
relatively congestion free outside of its peak period
when businesses need their cars and shoppers most
want to visit retail opportunities in the city. The City of
Adelaide shopping sector is also larger than its suburban
competitors.
In 2011 the City of Adelaide supported a turnover of
$1.56 billion outstripping the next three largest suburban
centres being Marion ($762m), Tea Tree Plaza and
Westlakes
12
. However, this is not all concentrated in one
centre because the city has its own main streets and
other commercial precincts that play a role. Analysis
shows that city workers are in fact the most avid users of
the city with most using it for multiple purposes i.e. 90%
shop in the city, 54% visit the parklands and 75% use it
for other purposes including dining, culture/the arts and
recreation
13
.
Nevertheless, there may be a relationship between
city car parking costs / supply and retail performance
relating to specific retail niches in the city that compete
with inner city shopping centres and main streets.
This is because the City supports its own main streets
such as OConnell Street, Melbourne Street, Rundle
Street, Gouger Street and Hutt Street. Parking has to
be carefully considered in these quarters. A parking
levy while targeting employees who can most afford
to pay the small impost to subsidise better public
transport (many of these car users complain about
poor public transport provision as being the reason for
driving to work), could also be spent on supporting the
Citys Main Street retail sector. City retailers have
indicated that they prefer a broad based levy
because it will have a lower impost per car park
and is equitably applied to all suburban shopping
centre car parks and not just the city.
FIGURE 6: COMPARING 8 HOUR PARKING RATES ACROSS AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL CITIES
AND ADELAIDES EARLY BIRD RATE (2011).
The Ring Road, Urban Density
& seven surrounding councils
FIGURE 7: CBD MALL AVERAGE RENTS PER SQUARE
METRE REFLECTING RETAIL TURNOVER (2013)
A constraint that underpins city congestion is that
our founders laid out the city and its surrounding
road grid in such a way that all traffic is funnelled
into the city on no less than 20 radial routes that
cross our parklands. This was great for horses
and trams, not so great for the modern era of cars.
Without a properly functioning, uncongested
and high capacity parklands ring road, about a
quarter of this traffic (representing 55,000 cars
per day of a total of 220,000) will continue to use
the city as a convenient through route every day.
The slowing of traffic or winding back of access on
streets through the city appears to be the only way
to deter this traffic. Unfortunately by shutting down
city routes too quickly (some are blaming bike and
bus lanes in that mix) congestion on these streets
climbs as it does on the ring road. But that does not
seem to be the case with recent projects.
Trying to funnel even more cars into the city does
not work either and has the effect of traffic banking
up on main streets, such as: Unley Road, King William
Road, The Parade, Magill Road, Prospect Road,
Goodwood Road, Glen Osmond Road, Henley Beach
Road, Melbourne Street, OConnell Street and Hutt
Street. Less cars and more public transport along with
cycling and walking is the answer and therefore road
space has to be provided for these modes. Selected
widening of some roads along commercial strips is
possible and may be viable, such as ANZAC Highway
and Main North Road. Most western cities have inner
and outer ring roads, freeways or underground
bypasses to deal with this problem including
Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane not to mention
many US and European cities. But this problem is not
new, transport planners have been grappling with it
for over 50 years.
P A G E 0 7
The International Property Group Colliers in its
White Paper, Australian CBD Parking in 2012
concluded:
There are now very few new car parks being built
within CBDs, certainly not enough to keep up with
demand. In addition, most City Councils are actively
looking at ways to limit car access into CBDs. As
a result, daily parking rates are becoming more
expensive for commuters, although this is yet to have
a discernible impact on values...
...While the ratio of car parking to CBD workers is
declining, the importance of car parking is also
declining relative to other forms of transport. In
2010, an office tenant survey conducted by Colliers
International found that bicycle parking was seen as
just as important as car parking. This was a distinct
change from the same survey conducted in 2005 when
car parking was seen as far more important. These
are distinct changes in behaviour by tenants, and the
expectations for car parking.
The Colliers (2010) On your bike! How Office
Buildings can Accommodate More Cyclists report
quotes:
Ten per cent of all vehicles entering the Melbourne
CBD in the morning peak are now bicycles and the
total number is increasing by 20% each year. The
implications of this for companies and the property
sector are profound. Fit, bike-commuting workers,
according to research, are productive contributors
to any organization, the sort of employees that
companies fight to recruit and retain.
One would suggest that city property developers
want to be a part of the next wave of 750,000m2 of
office space that will underpin city growth over the
next 30 years they will have to embrace this latest
thinking.
P A G E 0 8
The MATS plan of ring freeways and interchanges
around the city was developed in the late 1960s to
improve cross city efficiency. Both city bound and
ring route traffic would have benefited. Unfortunately
it would have also been an ugly blight on the city
and parklands, and very costly, so was eventually
abandoned. A fall back plan by highway planners in
the 1970s and 80s was a program to widen inner city
radial routes such as Henley Beach Road that funnel
traffic into the ring road and the city. That decision was
viewed in some urban design circles as the destruction
of a large part of the main street fabric. Indeed, the
Metropolitan Adelaide Road Widening Plan (MARWP)
still exists today and still reserves the option to widen
many of these inner suburban roads and main streets
in the future. This is surprising given the current main
street movement.
At the end of the 1990s Journey to Work analysis
revealed to transport planners that Adelaides car
dependent city workers are not those who live in the
disadvantaged outer suburbs, who can least afford car
parking in the city, but those who reside in Adelaides
inner suburbs (including North Adelaide, the Councils
of Mitcham, Walkerville, Burnside and Unley). The
same car drivers who ironically have access to some
of the most frequent and direct public transport (Go
Zones). More recently, Australian Bureau of Statistics
Journey to Work data (2011) reveals rising public
transport, cycling and walking trips from many of
these inner city suburbs (including: North Adelaide,
Prospect, Magill, Norwood and Parkside, Unley and
Mile End/Thebarton), which nevertheless continue to
be car dependent. The tide is shifting.
Over the past decade inward city growth around the
city has resulted in a higher population density, and
hence more cost effective public transport. A minimum
target of around 3000 people per square kilometre
is needed to make public transport such as trams
and trains viable. Called the cost recovery ratio, the
proportion of fare income to running costs measures
the cost to tax payers to fund the gap. Adelaide has a
low ratio of 25-30% (i.e. tax payers fund the remainder).
Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane have densities of up
to 7000 people per square kilometre in some inner
city locations and therefore higher ratios, and in turn,
better public transport systems. Adelaide has only a
few scattered suburbs with a density of around 3000
people per square kilometre including Norwood, Unley
and Glenelg.
However, Adelaides current high infill rate to the north
and west of the city means that the metropolitan
area is making good ground largely due to its forward
thinking urban planning policies to promote corridor
growth, city apartment living, urban renewal and
redevelopment.
As these policies take effect this will go hand in hand
with a more viable and expanded tram, train and
bus network as outlined in the State Governments
Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan. Density will
also bring with it a larger city retail catchment and a
commercial investment sector to support a growing
city employment hub as previously mentioned
(750,000 square metres of office space and up to 50%
more retail spend in line with worker growth, who are
also a big contributor to daily shopping as previously
mentioned). This is also a positive outcome for the
economy and property sector.
The State Governments 30 Year Plan for Greater
Adelaide flags the City as the pre-eminent transit
oriented development to accommodate an additional
50,000 workers and 27,300 residents by 2038. These
targets will lead to around a third more people working
in the City and a doubling of the number of people
living in the City. Analysis undertaken, that informed
the Smart Move Strategy indicated that the total
number of trips could increase by up to 205,000 trips
per day by 2038 leading to about 684,000 trips per day
(all modes) made into, out of, and within the city (see
Figure 8). Again, if future city commuters continue to
be car dependent, the city entry points, city streets
and inner suburban main streets will be driven to
longer peak periods. Bus lanes, bike lanes and trams
solve this problem, but these have to be effectively
applied and used.
As the city grows more pedestrians will use the city,
many of whom are public transport users, such as
students and workers who walk their final leg to
university or work, or are shoppers. Indeed, pedestrian
movements across controlled left turns are necessary
to improve safety and priority. Unfortunately it further
delays motorist travel times through a city and in and
out of car parks, inducing congestion, which in turn may
lead to even more people shifting their travel mode. Its
an inevitable transition as Adelaides city centre grows.
Research shows that reducing city traffic speeds from
60 km/hr to 50 km/hr has significantly reduced serious
pedestrian accidents. But again an inescapable issue
is that car parks were traditionally built too close to the
CBD therefore Pedestrian conflicts are inevitable.
P A G E 0 9
FIGURE 8: TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS IN RESPONSE TO GROWTH IN THE CITY,
MIDDLE AND INNER RING SUBURBS (2011 INFRAPLAN).
ACC Internal
Current = 46,000
+ 63,000 by 2038
Rest of Metro
Current = 268,000
+ 37,000 by 2038
ACC Resident Trips
Current = 27,000
+ 38,000 by 2038
Inner Rim
Current = 138,000
+ 67,000 by 2038
What are Adelaides options?
1. Infrastructure to strengthen the current parklands
Ring Road in lieu of a ring freeway redistribute road
space is needed for critical right and left turns from radial
routes onto the ring route. Critical intersections require
free flow turns with single lane flyovers or underground
right turns, common in some European cities. Reversible
lanes may be required to cater for peak flows. Some
delays to city-bound traffic would still be expected
during the peak period but removing the 55,000 or so
through car trips would return city road space to all
road users (including pedestrians and bikes) and reduce
congestion. Meets principles (a), (d), (f).
2. Adelaides Coordinated Traffic System (ACTS)
to bias green-time away from city bound traffic
and reconfigured to the ring road (peak only) this
is already applied in part and could be effective and
inexpensive to implement. It would require modifications
to line marking at key intersections to favour city bound
buses but only to cars that turn right or left onto the
ring route Cars destined for the city would be delayed
during peak periods. This may lead to a backlash from the
employees who currently use city car parks. Giving more
green-time to pedestrians (including workers, shoppers
and students) is inevitable as the economy grows.
Meets principles (a), (b), (f).
3. Facilitate through traffic through the city during
the peak This is seen as a pro-car option in lieu of one
of the previous two options and might be detrimental to
city amenity. The city already has several north-south
and east-west routes that currently serve this purpose.
Higher posted speed limits and removal of bus and bike
lanes will only drive more through traffic which in turn
leads to city congestion. Careful modelling needs to be
taken to prevent accessibility for legitimate visitors to the
city from being deterred. It requires a staged approach.
(Drives car congestion, meets no principles.)
So what can be done? What can we find in a transport planners toolbox of policy options? These options
need to meet a number of key principles: (a) Remove/redirect throughtraffic from the city. (b) Reduce
employee based car dependence. (c) Move more people than vehicles. (d) Better manage city space.
(e) Promote and fund public transport. (f) Return road space to pedestrians and the public realm. No
single option can solve the challenges described and therefore a combination of options is usually required to
effectively meet all of those principles. Presented are 12 options; their level of effectiveness is not measured
given that a combination of options could be applied.
P A G E 1 0
4. Redistribute city street road space there are various
options that urban designers have cited to return streets
to pedestrians, cyclists and buses and to slow or deter
through car traffic. A grid system of streets such as
Adelaides could be managed differently during the peak
period compared to the off-peak period or as a one way
street system - Barcelona is a good example. Bus and bike
lanes can work in both directions and an internal ring street
system can provide priority to car traffic seeking car parks
(see Leeds City centre) while promoting a pedestrianised
CBD. Key spine roads such as North Terrace, Wakefield and
King William Streets need to remain two way. This option
could deter through traffic in quieter streets and return
main streets to pedestrians. Unfortunately the city built its
car parks too close to the city core.
Meets principles (c), (d), (f).
5. Car parking levy that only targets employee parking
Parking taxes have been successfully applied in many
western cities and is a way of decreasing car dependence
and raising funds for public transport (in Zurich the
levy represents a discount on the final ticket price - the
green ticket). While successful in other cities Adelaides
property sector has reacted to its impact on commercial
and retail activity. One problem is that a broad based
parking tax such as the one recently proposed for Adelaide
does not differentiate between visitors, shoppers and
employees. If parking taxes are too high it may also lead
to a decentralisation of office space, a good thing for
other main streets but bad for the city. The tax proposed
for Adelaide is very modest (less than the cost of a coffee
daily) but also affects retailers. A broad tax that also targets
suburban shopping centres is more equitable and spreads
the impact. Meets principles (b), (c), (e).
6. Better managed city car parking some of Adelaides
17,000 on-street car parks are devoted to free all day
parking (especially near the parklands). These could be
reconfigured to favour short term visitors or removed to
create road capacity. Of the 22,400 off-street commercial
car parks, about one-quarter are owned and managed by
the City Council (U-Parks). Council could remove all early
bird parking discounts for employees and devote these to
visitors and shoppers. There may be some revenue loss to
Council. Council could also change its Development Plan
to put an end to requiring developers to build car parks for
new employee based offices (in all zones). It should be an
option not a requirement. Meets principles (b), (f).
P A G E 1 1
7. City tram loops unlike trains delivering passengers to a
central station, trams can deliver passengers to a wider area
of the city (best door to door travel times). The extension of
the Glenelg tram further into the city significantly increased
patronage. The proposed system of new tram routes from
the city to the Port and West Lakes will significantly improve
patronage. Expensive to implement, light rail/trams can also
be a catalyst for urban renewal of a city. Value capture can be
used to collect some property value benefits to pay for trams
as per the US and UK. To note: traffic congestion caused by
tram extensions is a misnomer. Some of Melbourne streets
support 10 times more tram movements than Adelaides King
William Street and North Terrace service.
Meets principles (c), (d), (e), (f).
8. Congestion pricing charging motorists who drive into
the city during peak periods or use it as a short cut. It is
similar to a parking tax albeit not imposed on car parks who
have to pass on the tax on to motorists directly. Electronic
tolling would apply on all 20 roads that cross the parklands,
with buses, taxis exempted. The revenue could be used to
improve the ring route and city streets including tram and
bus services. This has been successfully applied in Singapore
but sometimes criticised as unequitable (London). A charge
that is too high may lead to the decentralisation of office
space, a good thing for other main streets but no so good for
the city. If applied carefully it can be very successful.
Meets principles (a), (b), (c), (e).
9. Bus and bike lanes - This is an effective way of improving
the trip travel times and safety of bus and bicycle users
therefore encouraging these sustainable and equitable
modes of travel. Removing a traffic lane for a bus lane or a
high quality protected bicycle lane demonstrates priority
to sustainable modes, leading to driver behavioural change
overtime. This strategy may lead to short term traffic
congestion but only during the peak period until behavioural
change occurs and/or traffic redistributes to other streets.
In some cases this occurs witihn weeks. Access to car
parks need not be compromised. Bus and tram priority at
signalised intersections focus on moving people rather than
facilitating car movements (mass transit priority). One has
to be careful to limit business impact outside peak periods.
Meets principles (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f).
P A G E 1 2
The options demonstrate that creating, or even promoting roads for vehicle traffic only, is a one-
dimensional approach. A holistic and multi-modal approach to transport planning is required to meet
future travel demands as well as current travel habits. Furthermore, this has to sit within an integrated
transport and land use framework and the city vision for economic growth and social development.
10. High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes are traffic lanes
reserved for the exclusive use of buses, taxis and cars with
one or more or in some cases two or more passengers. It is
a way of reducing the number of cars during the peak hour
leading into the city and traffic congestion. In the United
States a slug line is a queue of passengers waiting for a free
ride in a car so that the driver can also get the benefit of using
the faster HOV lane. One could imagine these on main streets
before the parklands at the entrance to the city.
Meets principles (c), (d).
11. Staggered school and working hours one of the
problems in Australian cities is that students and workers
arrive at about the same time in the morning (8-9 am) with
many connecting bus services also catering for school
trips. The NSW Business Chamber has suggested trialling
staggered starting times for schools to relieve peak-hour
traffic congestion. It has been adopted for decades in some
European countries and also makes better use of school
assets: the same school has a morning shift and an afternoon
shift of staff and students (good also given our growing
population city and inner suburban population). Some kids
are early risers and some are late risers and so it caters for
different time clocks. Flexi-time for public servants also works
in this way, to spread the peak hour and could be extended to
the private sector. Meets principles (d), (f).
12. Free travel on all city buses In some cities like Perth
a Free Transit Zone (FTZ) operates within the City of Perth
boundary. You can travel on any Transperth bus within the
boundary limits for free. Adelaide relies on a city loop bus
with a narrow range of stops and coverage. Have you ever
waited for a 99C and wished you could have boarded the
10 other buses that have just passed you? Adelaide does
not have a free city travel on all buses because of the way it
has set up its contracts with bus companies. A free service
would greatly improve accessibility and fill empty bus seats
(better use of assets) while deterring short car trips that add
to city congestion. New radio-frequency (RFID) technology
can be applied to prevent fare evasion. It works by wirelessly
charging your Metro-card but only if you leave the city cordon
within a certain time after boarding.
Meets principles (b), (c), (e).
P A G E 1 3
Conclusion
This paper demonstrates that a current view to wind
back some of the recent initiatives, including bike
and bus lanes, policies to increase the number of
city car parks and return city speed limits to 60 km/
hr will be a disaster for the city economy and social
well-being of its residents over time. It is akin to
the highways engineering approach of the 1960s
inspired by car dominated US cities that lost their
down town identity. This idea is not integrated with
the land use vision for Adelaide.
Cheap and readily available parking fuelling
car dependent employees (up to 3 times more
plentiful and cheaper than other Australian cities)
is a challenge for a growing capital like Adelaide as
road space approaches the limits of its capacity.
Ironically, Adelaides inner city suburbs, who have
high frequency public transport are also the most
parking dependent. About 55,000 cars per day use
the city as a convenient short cut making traffic
congestion a lot worse than it needs to be. The
State Government should now, in the same way as it
prioritised the north-south corridor, turn its attention
to the next most important city road project, fixing
the ring road. It has already highlighted this in its
visionary Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan.
Infrastructure solutions to strengthen the ring road
will be the most effective solution but there are also
other fixes and solutions that inevitably will require
more car users to switch to buses, trams, trains and
bikes.
The Governments 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide
flags the City as the pre-eminent transit oriented
development to accommodate an additional 50,000
workers and 27,300 residents by 2038. The property
sector will not be able to realise the 750,000 square
metres of office floor space required to support
these additional workers through more car parking
because there is simply no room left for that much
car parking in Adelaide, nor road space for the 80,000
or so employee based car trips that will be generated
every day. Add to that student, recreation and
tourism growth (in all about 200,000 more trips by
2038) and the city will be driven to grid lock enduring
longer peak periods with repercussions felt as far as
inner suburban main streets. Public transport is the
most sensible solution.
P A G E 1 4
Economic development means more students,
workers, day and night visitors and tourists in
the city. Between 2002 and 2011, pedestrians
increased 250% on North Terrace, 50% on Rundle
Street and 30% on King William Street. Rundle Mall
has upto 50,000 people on some days. That does
not even include the Riverbank development.
That will mean more pedestrians and bikes and
more delays at traffic signals to vehicles and at car
parks. Its what comes with a growing city centre.
Many of these pedestrians and cyclists are also
car users.
There is overwhelming research that shows
the seriousness and occurrence of pedestrian
accidents decreases as you lower speed limits
(from 60 to 40 km/hr. the risk of a fatality
decreases by 65%); beyond which it becomes
marginal. Restoring the speed limit to 60 km/hr
would make little difference to local city travel
times given that intersections dictate delays most
of the time. In fact it may promote more unwanted
through traffic in the city. Adelaide has by far
the most number of car parks of any capital city
(per 1,000 workers) but can better manage these
to assist the retail sector and visitors rather than
car dependent employees. Adelaide also has
the cheapest parking in Australia by 200-300%.
A moratorium on more commercial off-street
car parks in the Capital City Zone is however
appropriate as is the removal of Development
Plan requirements for more car parks (commerical
development) that will only drive more cars into
sensitive residential areas such as North Adelaide
and the southern city wards. Private commercial
office parking for employees should be an option
not a requirement. In most Australian cities it
is not even an option. Car park queues in many
cases create more congestion as they bank-up.
Planning and investment needs to shift towards
developing a transport network that will cater
for an increased number of people movements
(mass transit transport such as buses, trams and
trains). Private car travel has a significantly greater
infrastructure impact on cities in comparison
to buses, bicycles and pedestrians as it requires
more road space (widening of roads) to move a
smaller number of people (as most car trips to the
city are single occupant).
Photo: Pirie Street bike lanes and zebra crossing demonstrate priority given to sustainable modes in the city. Source: InfraPlan 2014
P A G E 1 5
The paper demonstrates that the thinking that went
into trams and bus lanes is sound. A lane devoted to
trams can increase the capacity of a car lane three
to eightfold (in people movement). The bus lane
on Currie Street represents only 12% of the total
vehicle traffic, yet moves up to 76% of the people
along this important corridor. Most bus and bike
users are legitimate visitors of the city (workers,
shoppers and students), many have registered
cars at home and do not need to pay an additional
impost. These users are actually saving tax payers
hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, in road
widening programs and infrastructure (including
the ring road and main streets) needed to service an
otherwise car dominated city. Not to mention the
cost to health, tourism and main street vibrancy.
The attitude towards bus and bike users largely by
some car users needs to change from treating them
as second class road users to responsible citizens.
In some countries these users are subsidised for
their contribution to the economy and public cost
savings because they use less of the road assets.
Without a balanced transport network which
includes bus and bike lanes, traffic congestion will
continue to grow as observed over the last decade.
The consequences of not acting now will lead to
longer queues on main street approaches into
the city (The Parade, Henley Beach Rd, Prospect
Rd, Goodwood Rd, King William Rd, Unley Rd,
Magill Rd, Glen Osmond Rd, Port Rd, etc.) and
longer wait times and traffic congestion within the
city. If Adelaide wants to build more car parks and
sustain the rate of car dependence it has enjoyed
over the past 4 decades it has to be prepared to
accept the consequences. This includes a return of
the road building program of the 1980s to widen
several inner suburban key roads and established
main streets that lead into the city. Current urban
design principles to return the road reserve to main
street activity would be compromised. One would
suggest this would be a dividing community issue.
The Adelaide City Council Smart Move Strategy
recognises all that has been mentioned above. The
Strategy summarises the importance of achieving
a balanced transport network and states if we only
plan for cars, all we will get is a City with cars. If more
people used public transport, changed to bikes and
carpooled, there would be less traffic on the roads
and that makes your driving experience better. Its
a logical transition. This is a transition that will
require measured and professional implementation,
and not unconsidered reaction to individual projects
or policies. Car parking supply and pricing, bus
services and bike lanes, traffic controls and speed
limits can be better managed and targeted to achieve
the objectives outlined.
The State Governments Integrated Transport and
land Use Plan provides a strong vision to improve
public transport into and within the city in line
with corridor growth. It also proposes to address
the problems associated with Adelaides ring road
around the outer-edge of the parklands.
The paper hopefully promotes intelligent debate
that is evidence based and not biased towards vested
interests or motorists alone. It is not an anti-car or
a pro-bike or bus proposition but a sensible way to
provide the best level of accessibility for a growing
Adelaide economy and community. Without bus or
bike lanes, slower speed limits and restrictions to
through traffic Adelaide will likely be in a constant
state of congestion, leading to an uninviting public
realm for its visitors. It will not achieve its economic
objectives (underpinning residential, student
and tourism growth). Over time, this could lead
to the decentralisation of commercial and retail
investment to shopping centres outside of the city
and the decline of its main streets in the city and
those of inner suburban councils. The debate needs
to be raised to one of integrated transport and
land use planning solutions that are holistic and
help to achieve Adelaides vision.
P A G E 1 6
p r e c i s e
*Please note that the views expressed in this paper are not
necessarily the views of these organisations.
George Giannakodakis is Managing Director of
InfraPlan, an established Adelaide and Melbourne
based Urban and Transport Planning consultancy.
InfraPlan has developed strategies, policies and major
infrastructure projects for the federal government,
state governments and councils across Australia.
InfraPlan has an extensive private sector portfolio
ranging from traffic engineering to design services,
including both parking and cycling design solutions
for a range of clients. Prior to establishing InfraPlan
(Aust) in 2005, George held several management
positions in the SA State Government within the
areas of metropolitan planning, urban development
and social policy, transport strategy and road
network planning. George has also engaged in official
study tours of 22 world cities. InfraPlan upholds the
principles of integrated transport and land use
planning, reflected in its portfolio of projects.
George is Vice President of the Planning Institute of
Australia (SA), and a member of the Property Council,
Engineers Australia and the Australian Institute of
Traffic Planning and Management.*
P +618 8227 0372
E admin@infraplan.com.au
Level 1, 22-26 Vardon Avenue
Adelaide SA 5000
www.infraplan.com.au
InfraPlan is an Adelaide and Melbourne based
consulting firm that focuses on urban research
and analysis research topics ranging from
economic and social demographics to planning
and urban development, providing clients
the impetus for quality change and economic
investement.