Time for another report on Frome Street or perhaps debating 1 metre matters, hi-viz - be safe be seen, MHL, riding on foot path/pedestrian crossing, registration or what is the next thing that can keep the eye off the ball?
I think you might benefit from reading the article. Maybe not.
I might need to change my mine on Adelaide not being cycling friendly.
I had a left turning car nearly take me out on KW Rd and after I said a shocked four letter word the driver chased me down and apologised for nearly hitting me.
Looking through the list of 20 cities, all seem to have gone through the experience of trying to appease the automobile, but have realised after wasting a lot of money that it was never going to work for them. Fortunately or otherwise, Adelaidians have never learnt this lesson, having been spared the disaster the MATS plan would have delivered. This might still happen when the North-South motorway finally gets built and gets to be a car-park at peak hour almost from day one.
From this point, the smartest thing we could do is stop squandering the space we have on the single occupant motor vehicle, the least space efficient mode of transport ever invented. In a nutshell, we need to prioritise walking, public transport and cycling.
I think Adelaide has developed just fine into a disaster for automobiles even without MATS, but perhaps (most probable) the disaster would have been greater with it. Unfortunately now is it bike unfriendly AND it takes half an hour on 60 kph roads through 20+ traffic lights to get from south/north - east/west to reach a freeway. And no mention about no trains to the airport and token public transport options. Poor traffic planning on every level.
It seems like this Government can find billions of dollars to build new freeways , expressways , motorways , call them what you like , to put even MORE vehicles on the roads , and like Bill says mostly single occupant motor vehicles. The more we continue to spread out from Victor Harbor to Port Wakefield to Murray Bridge the worse it's going to get . So it would surely have been much better to spend those billions on a decent public transport system , cycling and walking infrastructure . I know not everyone can catch public transport or ride their bike or walk to work or school , but putting more vehicles on the already congested roads is just so dumb. Is this one of the reasons they are spending even more billions of dollars on hospitals to “cure” more people of obesity , heart disease , etc etc from lack of exercise ?
Actually Ken, the 60 kph roads with 20+ signals works rather better than you credit for a number of reasons. 30 minutes to cross a city by car is not bad by any standards. While the lights can be a pain, they regulate traffic into platoons with clear space in between that allows for turning and cross traffic, including pedestrians and cyclists. Most North American cities laced with so called freeways rarely achieve average speeds of 35 mph for the average commuter. Not being regulated, flows on motorways can be very unstable, going from fast to virtually stopped for no apparent reason. Once stopped, motorists feel trapped and understandably frustrated, and blame everything and everyone but themselves. Of course, when motorways are flowing freely they are fast (> 60kph), but this creates false expectations and undermines the usually slower but far more efficient modes of walking, PT and cycling.
If you compare to Sydney and some US cities then you are probably right, but I don't understand why Adelaide/Australia constantly compares against be bottom.
Perhaps Adelaide should have looked elsewhere when the MATS plan was ditched and adopted the finger plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finger_Plan and http://www.scandinaviastandard.com/a-brief-look-at-urban-planning-i... and https://danishbusinessauthority.dk/sites/default/files/fp-eng_31_13... , which among other things gives freeways coming into 5 km of the city and ring roads in 2-3 layers on top of a well function PT network.
you just reminded me, public transport will be going up 2% soon.
I assume you're referring to the rise in public transport prices in the budget. But car transport expenses, like CTP insurance and licenses, have also gone up, so it's not as if public transport has been singled out. Given some of the spending, I think public transport has done ok (not brilliant, but ok) from the budget.