News & Discussion: O-Bahn

[Kasey771]

Citywatcher you are arguing against around sixty years of experience and observation. All those who have studied this in detail are onboard with the fact of induced demand. More freeways leads to more traffic, it might seem counter intuitive, but it's a verified fact.

This is why current PT efforts all over the World (including in LA, where they arguably have better PT than Adelaide now) are focused on taking people out of their cars and putting them on PT.

The O-Bahn takes an estimated 12,000 cars or 310 busses off the roads each peak period. Imagine 12,000 more cars all pouring off an exit ramp and into the CBD on top of what we already have in the peak periods.

unfortunately for our city and our country there are still a significant number of decision makers in transport departments that believe like citywatcher does. You did point out that it is counter intuitive which means the average Joe Blow in their car stuck in traffic wont get it and will continue to pressure pollies for useless and costly freeway projects like cross-city tunnels in other cities

[citywatcher]

Citywatcher you are arguing against around sixty years of experience and observation. All those who have studied this in detail are onboard with the fact of induced demand. More freeways leads to more traffic, it might seem counter intuitive, but it's a verified fact.

This is why current PT efforts all over the World (including in LA, where they arguably have better PT than Adelaide now) are focused on taking people out of their cars and putting them on PT.

The O-Bahn takes an estimated 12,000 cars or 310 busses off the roads each peak period. Imagine 12,000 more cars all pouring off an exit ramp and into the CBD on top of what we already have in the peak periods.

No
You're just arguing against population explosion and the huge majority of those people living in cities and then proceed with the generalisations about some perceived future world of high density living and how to move them about. People will always want a higher quality of living than that scenario can provide.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[citywatcher]

Citywatcher you are arguing against around sixty years of experience and observation. All those who have studied this in detail are onboard with the fact of induced demand. More freeways leads to more traffic, it might seem counter intuitive, but it's a verified fact.

This is why current PT efforts all over the World (including in LA, where they arguably have better PT than Adelaide now) are focused on taking people out of their cars and putting them on PT.

The O-Bahn takes an estimated 12,000 cars or 310 busses off the roads each peak period. Imagine 12,000 more cars all pouring off an exit ramp and into the CBD on top of what we already have in the peak periods.

unfortunately for our city and our country there are still a significant number of decision makers in transport departments that believe like citywatcher does. You did point out that it is counter intuitive which means the average Joe Blow in their car stuck in traffic wont get it and will continue to pressure pollies for useless and costly freeway projects like cross-city tunnels in other cities

And ofcourse you and your speculation know better. As in my previous post they will provide what people wish

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[Kasey771]

Citywatcher you are arguing against around sixty years of experience and observation. All those who have studied this in detail are onboard with the fact of induced demand. More freeways leads to more traffic, it might seem counter intuitive, but it's a verified fact.

This is why current PT efforts all over the World (including in LA, where they arguably have better PT than Adelaide now) are focused on taking people out of their cars and putting them on PT.

The O-Bahn takes an estimated 12,000 cars or 310 busses off the roads each peak period. Imagine 12,000 more cars all pouring off an exit ramp and into the CBD on top of what we already have in the peak periods.

unfortunately for our city and our country there are still a significant number of decision makers in transport departments that believe like citywatcher does. You did point out that it is counter intuitive which means the average Joe Blow in their car stuck in traffic wont get it and will continue to pressure pollies for useless and costly freeway projects like cross-city tunnels in other cities

And ofcourse you and your speculation know better. As in my previous post they will provide what people wish

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

What speculation? Induced demand exists. choose the Red Pill citywatcher It's not some communist Lefty fairytale to scaremonger against freeways and more cars. It exists. If you have a bit of a think about it it makes complete sense. The easier you make traveling by car the further people will be willing to go in a single journey. Hence Freeways lead to sprawl. If governments invest in PT, then there is no reason cars cant be a useful part of the transport mix. They are likely to be for a long time to come. The road network needs help though and building more roads isn't the 'help' it needs. Giving those people who want to ditch the car a viable alternative is the help that a proper PT network can provide to the road system. Imagine not having to spend billions on things like West Connex (Sydney) that are proven by study after study to not actually help.

[citywatcher]

unfortunately for our city and our country there are still a significant number of decision makers in transport departments that believe like citywatcher does. You did point out that it is counter intuitive which means the average Joe Blow in their car stuck in traffic wont get it and will continue to pressure pollies for useless and costly freeway projects like cross-city tunnels in other cities

And ofcourse you and your speculation know better. As in my previous post they will provide what people wish

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

What speculation? Induced demand exists. Its not some communist Lefty fairytale to scaremonger against freeways and more cars. It exists. If you have a bit of a think about it it makes complete sense. The easier you make traveling by car the further people will be willing to go in a single journey. Hence Freeways lead to sprawl. If governments invest in PT, then there is no reason cars cant be a useful part of the transport mix. They are likely to be for a long time to come. The road network needs help though and building more roads isn't the 'help' it needs. Giving those people who want to ditch the car a viable alternative is the help that a proper PT network can provide to the road system. Imagine not having to spend billions on things like West Connex (Sydney) that are proven by study after study to not actually help.

You talk absolute bullshit
People are already living where the freeways are being built
Eg west connex

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[Kasey771]

And ofcourse you and your speculation know better. As in my previous post they will provide what people wish

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

What speculation? Induced demand exists. Its not some communist Lefty fairytale to scaremonger against freeways and more cars. It exists. If you have a bit of a think about it it makes complete sense. The easier you make traveling by car the further people will be willing to go in a single journey. Hence Freeways lead to sprawl. If governments invest in PT, then there is no reason cars cant be a useful part of the transport mix. They are likely to be for a long time to come. The road network needs help though and building more roads isn't the 'help' it needs. Giving those people who want to ditch the car a viable alternative is the help that a proper PT network can provide to the road system. Imagine not having to spend billions on things like West Connex (Sydney) that are proven by study after study to not actually help.

You talk absolute bullshit
People are already living where the freeways are being built
Eg west connex

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

There are none so blind as those that wont see. I'm out. cant deal with people choosing ignorance.

[[Shuz]]

I'm not acting in defence of freeways, but if I can just give some historical context, it was actually railways that encouraged urban sprawl. Some research into how London (and locally - Melbourne) rapidly spread out in the 1850s through to the early 20th century by virtue of railways being extended out into what was the country areas surrounding inner cities will give people some fascinating insight into this.

Railways were the freeways of that era. Freeways (as we know it today) are the phenomena of the 1960s onwards.

Hence, my argument that the freeways of the future need to be thought of differently going future as a means of efficiency, not as a means of inducing urban sprawl and the theory of induced demand.

[Norman]

I'm not acting in defence of freeways, but if I can just give some historical context, it was actually railways that encouraged urban sprawl. Some research into how London (and locally - Melbourne) rapidly spread out in the 1850s through to the early 20th century by virtue of railways being extended out into what was the country areas surrounding inner cities will give people some fascinating insight into this.

Railways were the freeways of that era. Freeways (as we know it today) are the phenomena of the 1960s onwards.

Hence, my argument that the freeways of the future need to be thought of differently going future as a means of efficiency, not as a means of inducing urban sprawl and the theory of induced demand.

Not quite. Railways brought linear suburban sprawl along the lines and around the stations, but cars filled in the space been the rail lines where local roads were cheaper and fast to build. Fast forward to today, those freeways now act the same in giving rise to linear sprawl, but the local roads that lead off them create the suburban sprawl as we know it.

[Goodsy]

I'm not acting in defence of freeways, but if I can just give some historical context, it was actually railways that encouraged urban sprawl. Some research into how London (and locally - Melbourne) rapidly spread out in the 1850s through to the early 20th century by virtue of railways being extended out into what was the country areas surrounding inner cities will give people some fascinating insight into this.

Railways were the freeways of that era. Freeways (as we know it today) are the phenomena of the 1960s onwards.

Hence, my argument that the freeways of the future need to be thought of differently going future as a means of efficiency, not as a means of inducing urban sprawl and the theory of induced demand.

Not quite. Railways brought linear suburban sprawl along the lines and around the stations, but cars filled in the space been the rail lines where local roads were cheaper and fast to build. Fast forward to today, those freeways now act the same in giving rise to linear sprawl, but the local roads that lead off them create the suburban sprawl as we know it.

housing still needed to be within walking distance of a train station so the sprawl was kept under control to an extent. Not the case with the O-Bahn when the buses can service the sprawl.

[Kasey771]

The good thing about PT is in most cases a PT journey involves a short walk...at either end ( sometimes both!) of the journey, which is great for health benefits.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Algernon]

I'm not acting in defence of freeways, but if I can just give some historical context, it was actually railways that encouraged urban sprawl. Some research into how London (and locally - Melbourne) rapidly spread out in the 1850s through to the early 20th century by virtue of railways being extended out into what was the country areas surrounding inner cities will give people some fascinating insight into this.

Railways were the freeways of that era. Freeways (as we know it today) are the phenomena of the 1960s onwards.

Hence, my argument that the freeways of the future need to be thought of differently going future as a means of efficiency, not as a means of inducing urban sprawl and the theory of induced demand.

Not quite. Railways brought linear suburban sprawl along the lines and around the stations, but cars filled in the space been the rail lines where local roads were cheaper and fast to build. Fast forward to today, those freeways now act the same in giving rise to linear sprawl, but the local roads that lead off them create the suburban sprawl as we know it.

housing still needed to be within walking distance of a train station so the sprawl was kept under control to an extent. Not the case with the O-Bahn when the buses can service the sprawl.

Those hills tend to stop the sprawl around the obahn catchment fairly well.

[SBD]

Yeah like saying that eliminating food will solve hunger cos everyone would have starved to death

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

People that advocate for more roads and freeways are saying that buying bigger trousers will cure obesity.

No we're saying fat people need bigger trousers

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[Hopefully I am not too late to the party]
I think both trousers analogies are right:

1. Fat people get bigger trousers so they don't feel so fat
2. Bigger trousers give people permission to put on a bit more weight until their trousers feel "firm"
3. Go to step 1

It's the same with roads - they fill to capacity, so we build a new/bigger one, then that fills to capacity too. Unfortunately, it is a big step of faith to shrink a road or buy smaller trousers before you lose the weight to fit them.

[Kasey771]

People that advocate for more roads and freeways are saying that buying bigger trousers will cure obesity.

No we're saying fat people need bigger trousers

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[Hopefully I am not too late to the party]
I think both trousers analogies are right:

1. Fat people get bigger trousers so they don't feel so fat
2. Bigger trousers give people permission to put on a bit more weight until their trousers feel "firm"
3. Go to step 1

It's the same with roads - they fill to capacity, so we build a new/bigger one, then that fills to capacity too. Unfortunately, it is a big step of faith to shrink a road or buy smaller trousers before you lose the weight to fit them.

Seeing as we've stumbled across this analogy...The research I've read shows that forcing people into uncomfortably smaller trousers(ie if we make driving less fun and/or less easy)...it means they don't eat (drive) as much. (maybe I don't 'need' to drive - the bus or train might be the go here?). Less driving is great for overall road network health. I think in Adelaide just getting people to explore other options instead of defaulting to the one-person car journey is the big stumbling block.In my experience, people that have no real user experience of the PT network have an overly negative view of its capabilities. It's far from being a great system, but it does do some of the basics pretty well (getting large numbers into and out of the CBD for Adelaide Oval events) is proof of that.

[The Scooter Guy]

[adelaide transport]

Its official O-Bahn bus services will begin using the new tunnel from Sunday 17th December.
New timetables for all O-Bahn services are up on the Adelaide Metro website.PDF files showing starting date of 17th December.