How to fix Syd, Melb and Bris congestion - Page 2

**Polyal** · 08-05-2012, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tranquilized

I think Melbourne has outgrown its trams. Traffic holds trams up and trams hold traffic up - and its only going to get worse.

Sydney, and more so Melbourne, lack what every other large major city around the world has - a decent subway system. Its beyond pathetic that in 2012, all Melbourne has is the city loop and barely even any talk of building a subway system.

Add in the fact that this state is run by developers who are continually allowed to build what ever they want where ever they want in a completely market driven building industry without even a hint of planning, and yeah, Melbourne's commuters are in for a lot of hurt.

So very true.

But in saying that the issues I see are all outer suburbs getting in, so having a really good metro system only fixes half the problem...it needs to be integrated.

tranquilized · 08-05-2012, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Easy solution is to increase the price of petrol to $10 per litre. You would see most people finding alternative means of transport, including public transport, walking and bike riding. You would also see people either moving closer to their work, or changing work to be closer.
It's not a popular solution, but it would work....

If you wanted to go down this route (not that anyone here would, but lets face it - one of the most effective ways of changing peoples behaviour is to hit the hip pocket) perhaps an inner city congestion charge such as what London has would be more appropriate? Tackle the problem at the source rather than punish everyone in the whole country?

tranquilized · 08-05-2012, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

So very true.

But in saying that the issues I see are all outer suburbs getting in, so having a really good metro system only fixes half the problem...it needs to be integrated.

Again just look to other cities around the world - the underground network is only in the inner areas, the lines then continue above ground where there is more space and less congestion. As the city grows more dense the underground portion of the system extends gradually to accomodate.

Our problem is that first step - how do we bury the entire inner city network in one go? Cant see it ever happening, but it needs to.

Ben73 · 08-05-2012, 04:25 PM

After driving in Los Angeles peak hour, I wont complain about Australian traffic again.
It makes Sydney peak hour look like a nice Sunday drive.

One afternoon/night it took me almost 3 hours to drive 15 miles.

HUNTER8 · 08-05-2012, 04:51 PM

Outsource everything to India and only manufacture in China then there'll be no jobs for people to go to anyway......... end of problem.

burnz · 08-05-2012, 04:55 PM

congestion charge and what those companys in the city go broke.
and then the city will shortly follow.

how many jobs are done on computers now?
how many computers are in home's?

Nikked · 08-05-2012, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Yes - increasing the cost of smokes is associated with a measurable decline in smoking rates.

Wont be the cost bringing smokes down, but the increased awareness of health issues and better support for quitting.

Most people i know who smoke, complain about the cost, but still find a way to buy a packet.

Yellow_Festiva · 08-05-2012, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burnz

congestion charge and what those companys in the city go broke.
and then the city will shortly follow.

how many jobs are done on computers now?
how many computers are in home's?

It's not only about jobs. People still need to get around.

We are a country run by bufoons... said this many times and it has been proven time and time again. We were once a nation of ideas and hands-on problem solvers, now we just tax it, blame someone / something else or pass the buck to a different department.

We have much of the infrastructure in place, or it can be easily modified... why this is not done... who knows?? Even the Monorail in Sydney. Due to be scrapped. It was only an overpriced tourist attraction to begin with. I think I have caught it once in the 32 years I have been alive, and that was entertaining tourists lol.

Why doesn't the NSW government buy the hardware, and use it as a means to get around the CBD.. $1 per trip. Nice and simple. Will I used it then? All the time, will all the trendy people who get a cab to club hop around the CBD use it? Hell yes.... Continue the network and add the 'inner west' suburbs. Has been done countless times, I think a suspended rail system is the most cost effective if memory serves...

Would cost more to pull down and repair the scars......

What would I know......

I still find it funny that the Sydney Harbour Bridge was thought about when people were getting around in horse and cart, yet is almost 50m wide and has a bunch of lanes / rail... M5 tunnel?... What a joke... Like I said, no forward thinking....

AWD Chaser · 08-05-2012, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbodewd

Sydney, Melb and Bris are congested. Well why not move the state capitals and virtually all the government employees to new cities thus spreading growth out. Bendigo or Ballarat would be the new Vic capital for example. Maybe Toowoomba for Qld? Newcastle for NSW?

This would be a boon for the town selected and help ease the congestion of these cities. I know the ACT government has about 22,000 employees...surely the NSW govt is much much larger. So moving those 10s of thousands of NSW employees is worth examination. It would also have a multiplying effect on the town's growth, so even more jobs would be created to support the new government departments.

You havent been to Newcastle lately have you?

Congestion is pretty much bumper to bumper as it is....

GTP owner · 08-05-2012, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mik

yes but the problem is the public transport system is a disaster at peak times , how is overloading it further going to make it better without substantial upgrading, the road network is not to badly laid out in Melbourne , but the bottle necks and over crowding of area`s on either public transport or road system is a problem, neither one on their own is able to cope.
people don`t mind using the rail if it`s not painful, but it sucks that`s the problem.

Fully agree there. More would need to be done to kick the public transport system in the bum, starting with deregulating the union control and public-service attitude to working.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SB076

I would suggest based on my very small sample size of mates who do smoke that they all try to quit for health reasons, they havent tried to quit because of monetrary issues (even though they do have them) I work with a lot of smokers and some are doing it tough (financially) and even though they know if they stop smoking they will get an extra $100+ per week they wont give them up.

Edit: If public transport was free I still wouldnt use it (no way I can get from work to home in a relatively short period of time)

Too small a sample size to be credible. I am quoting from large multi-centre research articles on primary care. (It's been a part of my medical degree).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

This has to be the worst idea listed so far.
Bus, rail and airplane companies would then make there fares 10x more expensive.

It would cost $10,000 to travel on a long haul flight.
Plumbers, lecos, builders and anyone else who drives to your house to perform a service would up their fees by 500% so they can afford to stay in business.
Then no one would do anything on days off because it costs to much to drive.

Fear-mongering. Makes for great front page of the local rag, but hardly the gospel for truth. It would however have a drastic impact on solving the congestion, which was the original topic. It would have an impact on the economy in the short term, but time now not spent in a traffic-jam would be better spent being productive, or with your loved ones...You did not suggest a sensible alternative though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

GTP owner is in TAS remember, so no traffic and close to no public transport

. Just poking a stick, but it is true, I was shocked when I heard TAS doesnt have a commuter train line running down the guts even though there is commercial train freight IIRC. All about demand I guess.

True. I have a bus that travels from my town into Hobart, but I could not use it for my night shifts and weekends. I would therefore have to relocate closer to the hospital, thereby reducing congenstion......

GTP owner · 08-05-2012, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

Wont be the cost bringing smokes down, but the increased awareness of health issues and better support for quitting.

Most people i know who smoke, complain about the cost, but still find a way to buy a packet.

Increasing health literacy does not work fully. Doctors are amongst the highest consumers of alcohol, and have the lowest fitness, and highest suicide rates in society. This is despite the fact that we know better than anyone else the deleterious effects of ethanol on the human body.
The research on increasing cost means some give up, some reduce consumption, and some will do without other consumables (such as food etc). However the overall effect is less people smoking, and reduced amounts of smoking by those who cannot give up the death sticks.

Sorry to go off topic, but the parallel is fairly accurate. Increase the price and most will reduce driving, some will stop, while some will do without other things in order to continue to drive.

**ebxr8240** · 08-05-2012, 07:54 PM

A 4X4 tax on fuel to fix our roads and more cycle lanes...Sydney..
Yea right...

My32Doors · 08-05-2012, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

And at the same time move the whole of Canberra up to the north of WA between Derby and Wyndam. That might help the mushrooms understand that Australia is a bit bigger than they think and would probably increase focus on some of the areas in defence that have been ignored for the last few decades......

No thanks Flappist---means that Can'tberra will be too close lol. But you're right!

Ben73 · 09-05-2012, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AWD Chaser

You havent been to Newcastle lately have you?

Congestion is pretty much bumper to bumper as it is....

That's true.
Every second day in the Newcastle herald are articles about how Newcastle CBD is dead and no one goes there.
Every morning there is still gridlock heading towards the cbd. I can't imagine how bad it would be if all the abandoned buildings were used as government offices. The traffic would be worse than Sydney.
It doesn't help that there is only one road towards the cbd from the south. And that goes from 3 gridlocked lanes into 1 lane within 700 metres

Gtp, my ideas to reduce gridlock are based on my drives around Newcastle, better and quicker public transport. More roads and upgrades to existing roads.

Ebxr, how will a 4x4 fuel tax reduce congestion. Does that extra 2 vertical feet increase congestion?

GTP owner · 09-05-2012, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

Gtp, my ideas to reduce gridlock are based on my drives around Newcastle, better and quicker public transport. More roads and upgrades to existing roads.

Ebxr, how will a 4x4 fuel tax reduce congestion. Does that extra 2 vertical feet increase congestion?

Better and quicker public transport is essential. The other key is that public transport does not have to run at a profit, as govco always asserts. The money is more than saved by reduced spending on roads, less costs for medical expenses from road trauma, and improved productivity from less time spent in gridlock.
Upgrading existing road - what do you mean by that? Widening? More lanes? Reduced speed limts?
And more roads - where do we put them? Underground would be th ebest place, but the cost is prohibitive.

Ben73 · 09-05-2012, 10:29 AM

Widening roads, contra flow, slip lanes anything that will improve the flow.

When I said adding roads, I was thinking of Hexham, just north of Newcastle. It becomes a parking lot each morning and afternoon. There is not any other alternatives to this road unless you want to drive halfway around the country side.
West of the main road at hexham is a massive swampy area that is wasted space. A few roads across it would ease traffic majorly.
I know a rail company will be using part of the land to build tracks to reduce rail congestion. Surely some roads could be also built.

**Mechan1k** · 09-05-2012, 10:30 AM

Yeah ... they need something like the Kiama bypass that was built a little while back.

flappist · 09-05-2012, 10:45 AM

I think GTP Owner is onto a winner......

Just extending on this amazing concept.

We also have an obesity problem so if we increase the price of food to make it unaffordable then people will stop eating and lose weight......BRILLIANT.

And as a extra side effect all of the people who are not over weight as well as people from low income backgrounds including children will starve to death which will reduce the load on other services such as hospitals, schools and also road congestion.

Of course this is a stupid idea that will never work in practice but looks pretty good in theory, especially if live in a world filled with rainbows and unicorns.

GTP Owner, I am just wondering if you are looking at taking Bob Brown's old job down there in Tasmania.........

RedHotGT · 09-05-2012, 11:16 AM

Just gonna put this one out there - from a Melbournian's perspective.

RAIL LINK TO THE AIRPORT - therefore reducing (drastically) the amount of cabs on the road - targeting cars that are coming in and out of the city, and commuting across from East to West.

A MORE SIMPLE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM - I'm aiming this one at the ticketing system, anyone who's used Myki will know where i'm coming from, and anyone who doesn't know what Myki is - also helps my point that nobody knows about it or understands it

BIGGER UPGRADES - If you're going to upgrade a road system, do it with a 5-10 year plan. The western ring road is a perfect example of a road that could have been built properly the first time (there are sections prior to the upgrades that had 4 lanes, that go into 2 lanes, and then back to 4 lanes - if this wasn't going to cause a bottle-neck then I don't know what will). They had the space to make that road 5 lanes wide both ways - and didn't.

It feels like when they do upgrades on a major highway/freeway in Melbourne, by the time they've finished the upgrade at one end, they need to start a new one at the other? Making it feel like the roadworks are never ending (again, anyone who's driven over the Westgate Bridge, or used the Monash Fwy will know what i'm talking about)

TOLLWAYS - They need to be more effective. I don't mind paying a toll if there is an advantage to using the system. But why are we using a tollway (which was designed to slow congestion and increase flow of cars) when you get the pleasure of a carpark every single morning and arvo in the same places.

5 YEAR RE-TEST FOR DRIVERS LICENSE - Yep, I said it. There are drivers out there who got their licenses in the 1970s, 80s and 90s, and have never had to prove that they've understood or adapted to any rule changes or trends over the past XX-years. You should have to resit a test (not the full test - but a condensed test) just as a refresher course to make sure you are still compitent. I say this, because currenty my father in law - who is legally blind (enough to have a guide dog) just recently renewed his drivers license for another 10 years. He also sat his boat license 3 years ago, and because he had a vaild drivers license they decided there was no need to give him an eye test (his eyesight was perfect when he got his drivers license in the 1970, so why would you think you'd need to test that again 50 years down the track?)

.00 BAC FOR ALL DRIVERS - This would reduce the amount of dangerous situations brought on by drink driving - sure it probably won't reduce the congestion in peak times (having said that - I heard on the radio today someone got booked at 10:30am in Melbourne with a BAC of .21). Nobody to this day has explained a logical reason why we accept the risk of a BAC of .05. Sure, it's hardly drunk - but it ain't sober. Even if it reduced your motor skills by 10-15%, is having 2-3 beers worth increasing the chance of you having an accident? We don't accept it with Truck Drivers, Taxi Drivers, Pilots, or Heavy Machinery operators, so why accept it on the roads where the majority of people drive. .00 BAC would mean that it's simple - if you've had a drink, you can't drive - FULL STOP.

MANDATORY DEFENSIVE DRIVING TESTING FOR NEW LICENSE HOLDERS - Sure, we've missed the boat on us 'old timers' but it couldn't hurt to make all new license holders complete and pass a defensive driving test before they are OFF their P's. They have to do 120 hours prior to getting their license, and can't have more than 1 passenger for the first 12 months, so lets make them pass a defensive driving course - before we lift the power restrictions off them.

Ok - so I moved a little bit away from the OP - but road safety does have a little to do with road congestion (you'll notice the traffic builds when accidents happen - right?)

Feel free to pick apart my suggestions - or add to them.

flappist · 09-05-2012, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loftie

.00 BAC FOR ALL DRIVERS - This would reduce the amount of dangerous situations brought on by drink driving - sure it probably won't reduce the congestion in peak times (having said that - I heard on the radio today someone got booked at 10:30am in Melbourne with a BAC of .21). Nobody to this day has explained a logical reason why we accept the risk of a BAC of .05. Sure, it's hardly drunk - but it ain't sober. Even if it reduced your motor skills by 10-15%, is having 2-3 beers worth increasing the chance of you having an accident? We don't accept it with Truck Drivers, Taxi Drivers, Pilots, or Heavy Machinery operators, so why accept it on the roads where the majority of people drive. .00 BAC would mean that it's simple - if you've had a drink, you can't drive - FULL STOP.

This can never work as it is a measure of BAC not how many drinks you have.

Anyone who works in an area where there is alcohol in the air such as breweries, distilleries, ethanol plants and any of the many and varied industries that use alcohol including medical will quite ofthen have a BAC of 0.01 or 0.02 even if they have never had a drink in their lives.

Many medicines contain tiny amounts of alcohol as does quite a lot of naturally occuring food.

0 is 0 so how would you like to lose your license because you were driving through a tunnel behind truck full of ethanol that had a leak so when you were tested on the other side you were 0.006 (which rounded up is greater than 0?

Like many of the other ideas that have been put forward here the total effect of the community and possible practical problems seem to be less important than the agenda.....

Mr Hardware · 09-05-2012, 11:37 AM

Aren't there some studies that show small amounts of alcohol can actually increase skill levels?

blownvn · 09-05-2012, 12:20 PM

I did my bit for Sydney's congestion problem by moving away.

I'm a big fan of decentralisation. I couldn't see the point in spending 3hrs per day in the car (and that was a good day) getting to and from work to sit a desk and get distracted by workmates. Plus spending money on food and fuel.

Working from home is much better and living in a rural environment I don't actually need to earn as much to survive. Plus we're only a 35min drive from a major rural centre.

SB076 · 09-05-2012, 12:34 PM

I would prefer to have hubs set up with fast rail links between. For instance you would have a hub set up at Dandenong near a freeway. and other hubs would be in the city

Typically when I look at a freeway during peak hour all the traffic is going one way (the other direction has very little traffic) So with a hub instead of traffic all going one direction they would be going to which ever hub is more conveinent to them (which could be in the opposite direction to which they are going) Then once they at at the hub they are off the freeway.

As our suburban sprawl spreads you add more hubs.

Pro's get better utlisation of our freeways, and travelling shorter distances
Cons expensive and transport between hubs needs to be frequent and vey good.

Slugging motorists more for fuel, will push prices up and add to the cost of doing businesses.

Cheech · 09-05-2012, 12:35 PM

Might need to adopt the UK model.

Not on fuel prices, but by placing an electronic toll on where you go & when.
Eg. You want to take your car in into a CBD area mon to fri during business hours - you pay for it.
Exemptions to be made for taxis, hire-cars & couriers, etc.

GTP owner · 09-05-2012, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

I think GTP Owner is onto a winner......

Just extending on this amazing concept.

We also have an obesity problem so if we increase the price of food to make it unaffordable then people will stop eating and lose weight......BRILLIANT.

And as a extra side effect all of the people who are not over weight as well as people from low income backgrounds including children will starve to death which will reduce the load on other services such as hospitals, schools and also road congestion.

Of course this is a stupid idea that will never work in practice but looks pretty good in theory, especially if live in a world filled with rainbows and unicorns.

GTP Owner, I am just wondering if you are looking at taking Bob Brown's old job down there in Tasmania.........

That is funny because it is half true (which half depends on what breed of unicorn you ride).
The notion of a fast-food, or fat tax is in the pipeline. Same reasoning as used for smoking and alcohol fixed unit price.
The idea that people will starve to death is a nice headline, but far from reality. When was the last time you heard people HAD to eat rabbits and backyard veges to survive? We are so far up ourselves that we become indignant at the thought of having to wear a jumper instead of turning down the heating, or limit the time we spend on the phone/internet/shower! Or how about actually having to WALK to the shop instead of parking right out in front! We are better off than any time in history, but the whingers still make the headlines. And our addiction to the car is second only to the Americans.
The suggestion is one way to reduce congestion. It has merit, but is not popular. So what?
As for thinking I am a fundamentalist Green- you got it very wrong there. Describing or labelling someone who thinks differently, or outside the square as fitting a particular political ideology is foolish at one extreme, or dangerous and bigoted at the other. I don't think you are either, but just because Bob lives down the road does not mean I think like him or vote for his party

GTP owner · 09-05-2012, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

Aren't there some studies that show small amounts of alcohol can actually increase skill levels?

Yes up to 0.05 that is true, however it is negated by the decreased concentration levels. After 0.05 they both go downhill, and are then associated with a higher risk

flappist · 09-05-2012, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheech

Might need to adopt the UK model.

Not on fuel prices, but by placing an electronic toll on where you go & when.
Eg. You want to take your car in into a CBD area mon to fri during business hours - you pay for it.
Exemptions to be made for taxis, hire-cars & couriers, etc.

That seems to be the system that works in other places. And the extra funds received could be used to fund public transport and road expansion.

I would extend that to exempt motorcycles and scooters as they do not take up much space and use much less fuel that cars.

turbodewd · 09-05-2012, 01:27 PM

I was hoping this thread was more focused on spreading the population and jobs out geographically. Id like to see some of the people move out of the biggest cities to beef up regional areas, spread the wealth! If its done slowly it wouldnt be a shock to the new state capital.

RedHotGT · 09-05-2012, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

This can never work as it is a measure of BAC not how many drinks you have.

Anyone who works in an area where there is alcohol in the air such as breweries, distilleries, ethanol plants and any of the many and varied industries that use alcohol including medical will quite ofthen have a BAC of 0.01 or 0.02 even if they have never had a drink in their lives.

Many medicines contain tiny amounts of alcohol as does quite a lot of naturally occuring food.

0 is 0 so how would you like to lose your license because you were driving through a tunnel behind truck full of ethanol that had a leak so when you were tested on the other side you were 0.006 (which rounded up is greater than 0?

Like many of the other ideas that have been put forward here the total effect of the community and possible practical problems seem to be less important than the agenda.....

The mobile breath testers are not that sensitive - certainly not the thousandth - which is why they need to take you into the station for a proper 'breath test'.

So a reading of 0.01 on a hand-held breath tester may show signs of alcohol in your breath, may require you to go to the station for further test. Then - you'll come up with basically nothing on the REAL test (as with ALL of these tests there is a built in buffer for error) and you would have nothing to worry about.

So the argument of food/medicine/ethanol leaks would not be necessary, and sure it would be inconvenient for the very rare amounts of times you had to go to the station to justify your 0.01 (or lower) breath test.

But for the majority of cases (which is how the law works) then it would work quite fine.

GTP owner · 09-05-2012, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbodewd

I was hoping this thread was more focused on spreading the population and jobs out geographically. Id like to see some of the people move out of the biggest cities to beef up regional areas, spread the wealth! If its done slowly it wouldnt be a shock to the new state capital.

Australia already has one of the largest suburban sprawls in the world. As we move people out of the cities, we consume more arable land, and displace agriculture to less productive land. I don't know what would be achieved by spreading population out further does, apart from making people travel further, which would impact adversely on congestion by placing more people on roads already struggling with traffic volumes.