Urban Melbourne

Observe. Design. Build. Live.

Advertisement

Car Wars - Time For Trams To Strike Back?

Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away, lived a band of humble trams.  As Melbourne grew rapidly in the 1850's on the back of the gold rush, the trams tirelessly and loyally ferried the expanding population all around the city. With help of their big brothers, the trains, their future looked bright and assured.  But then in true Australian fashion, we introduced a foreign species into the natural habitat - the car.  Brought here in the misguided idea they would solve all our transport problems, they soon started to cause as much havoc as a cane toad.  Getting into every nook and cranny of our roads, it clogged them up like last night's Irish Stew stuffed down the plughole of the kitchen sink.  To prove we are nothing but consistent, to deal with this foreign introduced species gone rogue we introduced yet another foreign species - the freeway.  History shows of course that they did little to help the problem - in fact the concept of 'induced traffic' proved they did just the opposite - it just made it worse.

So where did that leave the hero of our story, the humble tram? Having had its natural habitat encroached on more and more by the car, it became slower and slower, its usefulness slowly diminishing.  So much so, that in the 1980's they approached extinction, with the Lonie report proposing to cull half their population.  Fortunately they were spared, and they are now the largest colony of their kind in the galaxy... err, world.

Fast forward 30 years and today trams are experiencing somewhat of a renaissance in Australia.  Up until roughly a decade ago the only commuter tram line outside Melbourne was the Glenelg tram in Adelaide.  Today Perth, Gold Coast, Sydney, Canberra and Adelaide all have light rail projects planned, under construction or recently completed.  All these projects will be true light rail projects - ie grade separated, with one line in Adelaide even planning to run dual voltage trams so that they can share track space with trains.  In Melbourne, we have seen no such innovation or upgrades in a very long time.  Despite the network's large size (about 250 km of track) and pedestrian slow average speeds of 15km/h (11 km/h in the CBD - I can actually run faster than that) we seemed to be content to leave this state of neglect as the status quo.

Then a few months ago we saw a glimmer of hope - Project 96.  No, not a reboot of the famously risqué 70s TV show Number 96, but an upgrade of the 96 tram line from East Brunswick to St Kilda.  With part of the route already grade separated as a legacy of conversion from heavy rail in the late 80s, and both termini located in high volume cafe/restaurant spots, it was an obvious choice to go first.  Once completed, it will be the first true end to end light rail line in Melbourne, with no shared road space of trams and cars, and tram priority at all traffic lights.  It seems everyone wins - trams will run more frequently, will be more reliable, and will have better access (and therefore be safer) through more level access stops.  Everyone, it seems, except one group - the people who in all likelihood, will benefit the most from this upgrade - The Acland Street traders.

Recently the St Kilda Village Traders staged a 'Don't let them kill Acland St' event in protest against the upgrade; an effort that would be paramount to a protest against the building of a childrens' hospital in a third world country.  At the heart of their concerns is the plan to remove about 50 car spaces from Acland St and ban cars from it altogether.  This, according to the traders, will be enough to drive all their customers away screaming like its the beginning of the rapture.  "We have surveyed our customers and found most drive" one trader was quoted as saying in The Age.  This begs the question - how is a scenario that relies on your customers being able to get a park out the front of your shop a sustainable business model? How will your customer base grow if the number of parking spaces in the street can't grow?  How can it grow if car usage in Melbourne has started to flat line, and in some cases, even decrease?

Lets do the maths.  Cars usually carry a maximum of 5 passengers.  With 50 spots and assuming an average stay of 2 hours, this means a potential 125 customers an hour.  The new E class trams have a capacity of 210 passengers, and will arrive/leave the new terminus at Acland St every 4 minutes.  That's a staggering 3150 potential customers an hour, delivered to their doorstep!  That's not just double or triple the volume of cars, but an order of magnitude higher; 25 times more tram passengers than car passengers to be exact. And that's not even taking into consideration people who walk and ride there, a number that will surely see a significant rise in the near future as the number of apartment developments steadily rises.

And to add further doubt to an already crumbling argument, the St Kilda Village Traders Association president, Chris Hickey, came up with this gem, "For every tram load of visitors that it brings, there is also a tram load of visitors that it takes away".  Of course it does - the visitors need to go home again, don't they!!!???  I can't begin to even make sense of this argument.  Do they think people in cars don't leave again?  This is possibly the worst argument to oppose it I've heard yet, and that's saying a lot!

Not to stop there, they keep digging. "We believe it would make St Kilda village a better place if we had the terminus outside O'Donnell Gardens, effectively acting as a gateway".  The whole point of public transport is to make it as easy as possible, for as many people as possible, to get to their destination.  Making it harder for tram users by having the terminus further away, and easier for motorists by allowing them to remain, does nothing to facilitate the migration from car to PT that Melbourne is desperately craving.

Of course we have seen this all before.  The East Brunswick traders at the other end of Route 96 have jumped on the same bandwagon.  Clearways were removed from High Street Prahan, as well as Victoria Street (Richmond), Sydney Road (Moreland) and High Street (Kew), all of which could have improved bus services no end, but for the protests of local traders.  And more recently, we had motorists cry like babies when a bike lane was added to Princes Bridge, claiming it would add up to 20 minutes to their daily commute.  But once it opened, what did the City of Melbourne's official study find?  The commute lengthened by a mere 48 seconds, whilst cycling increased by 40%.  A triumph of common sense over sanctimonious bleating.

For far too long, we have allowed cars, and parking spaces, to be an excuse not to upgrade public transport.  But this is a case where the traders, like a petulant child, need to be forced to take their medicine.  The community wide support and obvious universal benefits has to outweigh the unfounded protests of the NIMBY minority.  And not only that, but 12 months after this upgrade is completed, and the stats show there has been an increase in customers in the area, they should be big enough to take out a full page ad in a newspaper and apologise for their silly stunt.

Despite the clear room for improvement, our tram network remains the jewel in our PT crown, providing inner city coverage that even some subway systems around the world can only dream about.  With upgrades like this making our network faster, more reliable and more frequent, combined with the many planned heavy rail upgrades, Melbourne could quite conceivably have one of the best public transport systems in the world.  And this is why project 96 needs to be just a stepping stone.  Route 109, another partial light rail line, would be the obvious next cab off the rank.  An upgraded/extended Route 24 could be a viable alternative to a Doncaster rail line, while an upgraded/extended Route 82 from Docklands to Highpoint could provide Melbourne with its first fast rail link to one of its major shopping centres (The state government will probably build the Death Star before Southland railway station is built!).

Its time to bring back some balance to the force that is our tram network.  So to the PTV 'rebel alliance' team battling hard to have our trams upgraded - May the force be with you!

.

Rate this article: 
Average: 5 (16 votes)

Comments

James Adams's picture

Great article. Let's hope PTV, Yarra Trams and the State Government don't back away this time and finish the job. And minor point, but it would be Route 48 extended to Doncaster from Nth Balwyn. Route 24 only runs a few times during the peak using a mix of the 48 and 109 alignments. If it was upgraded to light rail standard, it could definitely be a good alternative.

Bilby's picture

Yes, a great article indeed! There was a time when there was no car parking in our great strip shopping areas, of course, and they were busier then than they are today! Fewer cars also means room for more street delights that cities need and their citizen can enjoy - trees, street furniture, wider footpaths, street planting, etc. Now let's make it happen in the inner north on Sydney Rd, Brunswick and Smith Streets \ (and while we're at it, let's bring back light rail to Johnston street.

Sinkilda's picture

Seriously, have you ever been to the area in question? The O'Donnell gardens tram stop is right at the end of Acland street. If people are too lazy to walk a few metres to get to Acland street, then society has a much bigger problem than tram stops. As locals we all agree, if Acland street is to become a pedestrian area then make it truly pedestrian and stop the trams at O'Donnell gardens. Where do you live Martin? Are they stopping cars from going to your local shops?

Alastair Taylor's picture

How does removing the terminus from its current location on Acland St provide better public transport for the hundreds/thousands of people who live east of Barkly Street?

Martin Mankowski's picture

SinKilda - I live in Footscray. And one of the upgrades i mentioned should happen in my article was Route 82 to Highpoint. This would require the removal of parking along Hopkins St and Droop St shopping area in the Footscray CBD. And I hope they do it! For all the same reasons I mentioned for St Kilda. With Maribrynong Council starting to make noises about removing all parking away from the CBD of Footscray (2 are being converted into public open space) I dare say its a good chance of happening.

I go to Acland St quite often. Its not just about being lazy - public transport should cater for everyone - the sick/injured, the elderly, the disabled. So having a rebuilt terminus, in a car free zone, right where the shops are, makes a huge difference for safety and accessibility. And how can you accuse people being too lazy to walk when the justification for having the tram terminus at O'Donnell Gardens is so people can continue to drive and park right in front of the shops! How 'lazy' is that?

The fact is people will still be able to drive there if they so wish - they'll just have to park nearby and walk to Acland St. Unless of course, they are too 'lazy' to do so. In which case they can catch a tram!

Chris Peska's picture

I would have to agree with the premise of the article and say that by removing approx. 50 car parks in front of the stores isn't going to make any difference to trade. There have been countless examples across the world which show that removing private vehicles and giving the streets "back to the people", have encouraged increased patronage, accessibility and safety. Further to this and happy to be proven wrong here, but if the terminus was at O'Donnell Gardens and not the end of Acland Street as it currently is, I reckon that would cause major congestion for both trams and cars at the intersection of Carlisle, Acland and the Esplanade?

By having the main retail section of Acland Street accessible for trams and pedestrians only, it would be akin to the Bourke Street mall in terms of public usage, which works just fine.

There is no need to drive down Acland Street anymore, drivers can easily go around along Carlisle Street or Jacka Boulevard and find car parking near by. It appears that the only people that are opposed to this are the ones that will benefit most from the changes... weird...

Observe. Design. Build. Live.

gobillino's picture

"And how can you accuse people being too lazy to walk when the justification for having the tram terminus at O'Donnell Gardens is so people can continue to drive and park right in front of the shops! How 'lazy' is that?"

This! And given the stats that the article presents on the capacity of tram vs cars parking in Acland, how can anyone logically argue for making the overwhelming majority walk further so that a tiny minority won't have to?!?

crank's picture

Great write-up. Seems a lot of parallels with the tenuous looking separated bike track for Wellington St in Collingwood (Mayor abstaining due to 'concerns' from local business). You should do a write up on that :)

Development & Planning

Thursday, April 17, 2014 - 06:46
Last week project partners celebrated the official start to works for Dandenong's new ATO complex, which spearheads an increased level of development in Melbourne's 'second city'. At the on-site ceremony EPC Pacific Chief Executive Patrick Smith stated “This development is achieving the vision of the Revitalising Central Dandenong project by...

Policy, Culture & Opinion

Friday, April 11, 2014 - 12:00
Height is perhaps the most contentious of all issues when discussing new building proposals. Maybe because it is readily quantifiable relative to the surroundings, or because fear of height has become a default response to any new development, it is often debated as a singular issue. Many ignore the other...

Advertisement

Visual Melbourne

Wednesday, April 2, 2014 - 13:56
Do you have an Instagram account? Do you like taking photos of buildings? Would you like to win a $500 voucher to dine on some top nosh? Well, follow @Elenberg_fraser on Instagram, take original photos of EF designed buildings, tag the EF Instagram account in your photo and use the...

Transport & Design

Friday, April 18, 2014 - 09:44
It’s hard to get past the feeling that we are stuck in 1970s thinking when it comes to planning infrastructure such as airports. The Federal government has finally announced Badgerys Creek in Sydney’s south-west as the city’s second airport, with an intention to go to tender - but without vital details on the role of the airport or its passenger prospects. Earlier this week, the Victorian government announced in vague fashion an intent to push ahead with delivery of a Melbourne airport rail link - costs, benefits, delivery timing and network integration issues all uncertain.

Sustainability & Environment

Image © tensile.com.au
Thursday, April 3, 2014 - 12:05
Last week the Australian arm of prominent global engineering firm Meinhardt released a white paper titled 'How Far Are We From Truly Green Façades?' via their Practical Imagination platform. The white paper delves into the issues currently surrounding the advancement of green facades which in turn allows the practice to...