Monday 17 August 2015

Vol IV - Chapter II

-26-

II. WHEN IS A MAJOR ROAD NEEDED?

1. A QUESTION OF PHILOSOPHY: WHEN IS A ROAD NEEDED?

1.1 The Study Area

A Study Area was defined in the course of the
Inquiry. It is described in the following words
in the Joint Study Report (28):

"The study area (is) between Kyeemagh
and Chullora.. It includes all or part
of the municipalities of Bankstown,
Burwood, Canterbury, Hurstville,
Kogarah, Marrickville, Rockdale and
Strathfield. This area is predominantly
residential, with a few industrial
sites, with recreation areas along
the waterways, and with commercial
centres located on the major roads."

The Study Area is identified in figure 5. That map
also identifies the major land uses within the area.

1.2 The Issues Before the Inquiry

The transport needs of the Area can only be assessed
after the following issues have been examined:

  • There are questions of philosophy:
    When is traffic a problem? What
    can be done about it? When is it
    appropriate to solve the problem
    by means of a major road?
  • There are questions of fact: What
    are the present traffic conditions
    in the Study Area?
  • There are questions of prediction:
    What are the future traffic
    conditions likely to be?

These matters in combination should disclose whether
there is a traffic problem which needs correction.



28. Joint Study Report (DMR/PEC), page 3.



-27-




-28-


The Report will then concern itself with the
following:

  • the options available
  • the evaluation of each option
  • the recommended solution

It is important that we include in this Report a
brief statement of the principles which should,
in our judgement, guide the evaluation. We will
now do so. We will examine (29):

  • What is a traffic problem?
  • The interaction between land
    use and transportation planning.
  • Congestion.
  • The concept of accessibility.
  • The concept of a road hierarchy.
  • The ordering of priorities.

2. WHEN IS TRAFFIC A PROBLEM?

2.1 What is a Traffic Problem?

The question may seem odd. It may hardly seem
worth asking. We are all familiar with a traffic
jam. We have all experienced the irritation and
frustration of traffic at a stand-still or moving
at a snail's pace. We all know, in a general way,
what is meant by a traffic problem.

Regrettably the matter is rather more complex.
There are certain traffic problems which must be
addressed in order to satisfy the needs of the
motorist. There are others which must be tackled
because traffic impinges unduly upon residential
areas or other areas where it is unwanted (such

29. These matters are examined at greater length in
    Volume II (Transport Criteria) of this Report.


-29-

as shopping centres). Curiously, there are
traffic problems which are better ignored either
because the solution is likely to be counter-
productive (in a way which we will explain shortly)
or the ‘cure’ worse than the disease.

2.2 The Metropolitan Road System Will Continue to
    Function

It is not difficult to find passages within
transportation studies which suggest that unless
something is done, and done at once, the system
will cease to cope with the demands made upon it.

The impression of desperate urgency is created by
the Sydney Area Transportation Study published in
1974. It says:

"The magnitude of the transporta-
tion task is the Sydney Region to
the period of 2000 is almost over-
whelming."

Elsewhere it says:

"The congestion that exists suggests
that the highway systems cannot
cope with the current traffic
levels."

The very use of the word 'cope' suggests the
possibility of a complete breakdown in which it
will 'cease to cope'. In the public mind the
idea of traffic becoming hopelessly entangled and
grinding to a halt has a certain plausibility.
Having witnessed innumerable traffic jams, and
being conscious of increasing car numbers and
car users, surely the point will be reached where
demand so out-strips supply that the system will
cease to function?

-30-

The impression, plausible though it may seem, is
wrong. The system will continue to function if
the Department of Main Roads did nothing more
than maintain the existing road network without
adding one further kilometre to that network.

The point can be demonstrated in a number of
ways. The road network is under greatest strain
during the morning peak period. By nine o'clock,
or thereabouts, the peak subsides. Thereafter
the system accommodates the traffic with relative
ease. Professor Blunden makes the point in this
way:

"In most cities some 20-30% of the
total land area is devoted (to)
road space and this is necessary
just to permit a feasible layout
of land use activities and provide
for sub-division and access. In
fact it is this vast area of the
ground plan of a city devoted to
roads that has permitted the post-
war avalanche of motor cars to be
accommodated in cities, even though
there has been little addition to
the roads in most of them. One
can make simple calculations that
show that with all the running
around we do in cars the average
loading on the urban road system
is of the order of a hundred
vehicles per lane per hour a
very light traffic loading.”

There are two mechanisms involved:

  • one is the flexibility created
    by the difference between the
    Peak and the off-Peak so that
    the peak simply extends where
    the load is increased.

  • the other is the flexibility
    of demand. Congestion drives
    people away and they adapt

-31-
their lives by going some
other way or doing something
else.

It is because of the residual capacity of the
network, and its ability to simply extend the
peak period beyond 9.00 a.m., that the system
continues to 'cope' even when the demand rises
to an extraordinary level, as it does when there
is a public transport strike.

2.3 The Consequences of Doing Nothing

What, then, are the consequences of doing nothing?
How can it ever be demonstrated that a road is
'needed’. The following is a comment by the
Department of Main Roads:

"It is clear that because the
system will never "jam-up",
because people will continue to
adjust their lives and activities
as conditions worsen, it is not
possible to establish an
"absolute" need based on existing
conditions. It can only be
argued that efforts should be
made to improve conditions where
they are or are becoming saturated
in order to reduce travel times,
operating costs, to reduce fuel
consumption and promote safety."


The issue is not whether the system can manage the
job: clearly it can; the issue is whether it can
do the job well or whether it can be made to do it
better by a few additions and adjustments.
Professor Blunden puts it in this way:

"However, the equilibrium state
may not be as good as it should
be. There is thus plenty of
scope for the land use and
transport planners to 'trim the
ship’ but it can be done with
the assurance that the ship
will not capsize.

              (emphasis added)



-32-

3. TRAFFIC AND LAND USE

3.1 Statement of the Principle

Land use affects traffic. Locate certain land uses
within an area (an airport, a port, an industrial
zone, or a retail store) and it is predictable that
traffic will make its way to and from that area.

There is another side. The provision or absence of
transport facilities (whether road or rail) affects
land use. If you provide transport facilities you
will bring about land use changes. If you do not,
the land use pattern will be different.

The principle is one of interaction between land use
and transport facilities.

3.2 The Implications of the Interaction

The implications of this interaction are:

  • First, there is an obvious need
    for co-ordination between land use
    planning and transport planning.
  • Secondly, where, through lack of
    co-ordination, or for whatever
    reason, there is a traffic problem,
    it may be corrected by manipulating
    land use rather than providing
    additional transport capacity.
  • Thirdly, transport changes may
    cause significant land use changes.
  • Fourthly, land use changes may
    bring about significant transport
    changes.

3.3 The Aims of the, Land Use/Transport Planning Process

The aims should include the following:

  • The system should aim at inducing
    less travel rather than more (though
    a balance must be struck between

-33-

accessibility and minimisation of
travel).
  • The system should aim at reducing
    the length of the journey to work.
  • The system should aim at reducing
    journey time.
  • The opportunities within a region
    should be reasonably accessible to
    the population of that region.
  • The system, in short, should aim at
    reasonable self-sufficiency within
    regions. People should have at
    their disposal a reasonable range
    of opportunities. They should not
    feel impelled to make long journeys
    either to seek a job or satisfy
    their other needs (shopping,
    recreation and so on).
  • Roads and public transport should
    work in combination to handle the
    transport task of the region, rather
    than in competition.
These aims may appear so general as to be platitudi-
nous. They are not. A number of illustrations will
be given in the course of this Report in which we
will establish that one solution is demonstrably
better than another because it adheres to these tenets.

A number of 'negatives' can be stated. In some
cases they are simply the converse of the principle
already enunciated. A road may be self-defeating
as a solution to a traffic problem if:

  • it encourages more travel rather
    than less
  • it tends to increase trip length
  • it tends to encourage people to
    desert public transport in favour
    of their car

-34-
  • it encourages the expansion of
    the urban fringe

  • it encourages growth in a direction
    in which it ought to be discouraged

3.4 A Traffic Problem Need Not Be Answered by a Transport
    Solution

The manifestation of a transport problem is traffic.
Specifically it is congestion where too many vehicles
are trying to squeeze through too little road space.

It is tempting to remedy manifestations of inadequate
road capacity by the provision of more capacity.
However, two things can be demonstrated:

  • in certain cases land use or
    public transport solutions may
    be preferable
  • in other cases a transport solution
    to a transport problem may be
    undesirable.

Policies directed at employment relocation may be a
highly effective means of creating self-sufficiency
within a region. By this means, there is a reduction
in the need for long work journeys by residents
seeking employment outside the region because they
are unable to find a satisfactory job near their
home. Implementing such a policy is notoriously
difficult. There are vast tracts of land zoned
‘industrial' which await development in the West and
South-West (where jobs are needed).

Having acknowledged the difficulty, it is important
that the planners should resort to both ‘push and
pull’ factors to bring about the right result. The
‘pull’ factors, if they can be so termed, are the
creation of appropriate zonings in particular areas
where the growth is needed to encourage self-

-35-

sufficiency. The 'push' factors are the foreclosing
of other options in areas which are developed too
intensively, and where there is a surplus of jobs
compared to the residential population. That surplus
creates the need for travel from outside the region.

That travel, in turn, may induce a traffic problem.
The traffic problem may be alleviated, in other
words, by pursuing a land use solution: a policy
of greater self-containment and self-sufficiency.

A transport solution to a traffic problem may be
undesirable. The Sydney Area Transportation Study
suggested a series of freeways terminating in ultimo.
Accessibility to the city by car was to be made
easier.

Is that wise? Is that not likely to reinforce the
attraction of the Central Business District and
encourage commuters to use their cars (rather than
public transport). The suggestion has been rejected
by the New South Wales Government.

Instead of a transportation solution (such as
the freeways suggested by SATS) a combination of
policies directed primarily at land use has been
devised to cope with city traffic. First, limita-
tions have been imposed upon parking. Vehicles are
discouraged from entering the city by the relative
difficulty in finding parking. Secondly, residential
accommodation has been permitted and encouraged in
the city. A number of high rise buildings are
presently under construction or contemplation.
Thirdly, activities have been encouraged to disperse
to other regions. We have referred already to the
regional shopping centres. The establishment of a
Port at Botany will draw traffic away from the city.

3.5 The Options Before This Inquiry

The options presented to this Inquiry are, however,
somewhat lop-sided. There is a heavy emphasis on

-36-

road solutions to perceived traffic problems. Land
use (or public transport) alternatives have not
been first eliminated. The land use implications
of building certain options do not appear to have
been fully explored.

3.6 The Land Use Consequences of Transport Decisions

3.6.1 The Concept of a Travel Budget

We will shortly examine the way in which the provision
of transport facilities affects the size and shape
of the city. The concept of a "traffic budget"
furnishes a plausible explanation, or at least
part of the explanation.

The phenomenon was recognised by the Sydney Area
Transportation Study:

"This means that if the transport system
is improved, personal choice of employ-
ment, shopping, recreation and other
activities may be expanded, but the
time planned to travel is rarely
reduced. In other words, people are
prepared to travel further on better
facilities in order to take advantage
of better employment or shopping
opportunities
.”

3.6.2 The Influence of Transport Upon City Shape

In Miami (Florida, U.S.A.) a transport study was
undertaken to plan the transport needs of the city
to the year 2000. The exercise was similar to that
undertaken by the Sydney Area Transportation Study.
An elaborate freeway system was suggested and a
railway for good measure. Unlike Sydney, the plan
was executed. The freeways were built. The rail-
way system was, for the time being, postponed.

What was the result? It is graphically described
by Mr. K.W. Dobinson (DMR) in the following passage:


-37-

DOBINSON: You can beat demand - if
you have got enough money. You can
beat demand at least initially. But
there is a bigger fear.. that is that
you change the pattern of life style
in your city. And this has happened
in some American cities and (its)
quite a concern to them. The one
that intrigued me the most was Miami
where they built their entire freeway
system which they worked out ten years
ago. They have built the whole thing
in ten years for the year 2000.. But
the congestion on the roads in the
peak periods to my surprise - and
here's the freeways for the year 2000,
is just as bad as Sydney Habour Bridge.
And so that is a classic example of
trying to answer your commuter demands.
                          (emphasis added)

Mr. Dobinson then offered a plausible explanation.
He said:

"It isn't as if they didn't beat their
demand. They beat their demand well
and truly but people thought how nice
it would be to live in better parts
of Florida and so the city just spread
out and they created a much lower
level of development..the same as Los
Angeles..instead of keeping a fairly
compact city they allowed it to just
sprawl."
                      (emphasis added)

3.7 The Transport Consequeces of Land Use Decisions

The decision to construct two large container
terminals at Port Botany was a significant alteration
of land use. It was bound to generate dramatic
traffic problems. This Inquiry has been a response
to those problems.

A number of solutions have been suggested. Some are
in the nature of transport solutions. Others are
essentially land use solutions. On the one hand,
it was suggested that large container vehicles could
be accommodated by the construction of a high quality
road extending from the port to the western suburbs
or the South Western Suburbs. This was a transport
response. On the other hand, it was suggested that

-38-

containers destined for the Western Suburbs should
be sent by rail to decentralised depots. That is
a land use response. In the result, the Inquiry
preferred the latter course (see Volume I of this
Report). That is not to say that the other traffic
problems identified in the course of the Inquiry may
not, of themselves, demand the transport solutions
offered by the Cooks River Route or the South
Western Option or the other options suggested.
That matter will be examined in the evaluation of
each option.

4. CONGESTION

4.1 Medical Terminology

Traffic engineering has adopted, in part, the
nomenclature of medicine. It speaks of 'arterial
roads' and 'congestion'. Both terms are appropriate
as a description of the phenomena. Yet, the use of
the word ‘congestion’ is, in a sense, unfortunate.
It reinforces in the public mind (if not in the
minds of traffic engineers) that it is something
pernicious and unnecessary, signifying sickness;
something to be eliminated.

We do not doubt that on occasions it does signify
sickness in the system and should be eliminated.
On other occasions it does not. It is best ignored
or left alone,

4.2 The Attitude of the Department of Main Roads to
    Congestion

The following appears in the transcript:

"COMMISSIONER: Does the Department have
a view as to the extent to which, as a
matter of philosophy, the demand can be
legitimately suppressed, or does it take
the view that it should never be suppressed?

D.M.R.: The Department’s view in this
respect is that it is the road authority
to provide for arterial roads; it is not

-39-

its business to tell people, if you
like by its actions, what they should
and should not do in respect of travel.
It endeavours to, or aims to cater for
the demand as it appears, as it will be."

As a pronouncement of policy by the Department of
Main Roads we rather doubt that this statement can
be taken literally. It seems to the Inquiry plainly
wrong in principle. It will be the Inquiry’s
contention that there are three separate issues
which must be addressed:

  • First, where in the network is there
    a discrepancy between likely demand
    and road capacity, such that conges-
    tion can be anticipated?
  • Secondly, where there is such a
    discrepancy, is it desirable that
    traffic should be encouraged in that
    direction?
  • Thirdly, where it is desirable,
    should the discrepancy be answered by:
  • a transport solution (i.e., the
    provision of more road space or
    the implementation of the
    various other traffic management
    techniques);
  • a public transport solution;
  • a land-use solution.

We suggest that the statement by the Department of
Main Roads cannot be taken literally for a number
of reasons. Questions of policy, as opposed to
simple discrepancies between supply and demand,
necessarily intrude upon decisions made by the
Department to answer or refrain from answering a
call for more road space. The intrusion is through
a number of doors. First, the Department would
acknowledge, no doubt, that in certain situations
it is simply not possible to answer the demand. No

-40-

sooner it is answered than the demand grows which,
once answered, will grow even more and so it goes
on. Secondly, the Department would concede, at least
in certain areas, that it should discourage rather
than encourage travel in (or towards) those areas.
The Central Business District is perhaps the best
example. Attempts to facilitate motor vehicle entry
into the central Business District have all but been
abandoned. The Department, rightly in the Inquiry's
view, now concentrates upon by-passes. Thirdly, and
most importantly, the Department must be selective
in the calls which it answers because of the severe
restraint imposed by a shrinking budget.

4.3 The Expansion of Traffic to Fill the Available Road
    Space

The principle is expressed by Stephen Plowden in the
following way:

"..Providing more road space itself
generates more traffic.. Very broadly
speaking, the amount of traffic is
governed by what is regarded as a
tolerable level of congestion.”

It should not be inferred from this analysis that
high quality facilities (even freeway facilities)
are never appropriate. They may be. It does seem
that certain centres are so attractive in terms of
the job opportunities they offer (principally the
Central Business District and the Central Industrial
Area) that it would be futile to pursue a policy of
eliminating congestion. Demand, in the nature of
things, will always outstrip supply.

4.4 Congestion Must Be Accepted in Certain Areas

So where does that leave us? Does it suggest that
we should give up, and build no further roads? It
most certainly does not. It is a reason, however,
for abandoning free-flowing traffic as an ideal in
all areas. In some, it is neither achievable nor
desirable. The principle that traffic tends to

-41-

expand to fill available road space is, rather,
simply an illustration of the land use/transportation
interaction. It suggests that road building should
be directed rather to the following (amongst other)
situations:
  • It should seek to satisfy demand
    (and eliminate congestion) where the
    direction of that demand is
    compatible with the way in which
    the land use/transportation planning
    process suggests the city should grow.
  • It should seek to provide reasonable
    accessibility within a region so that
    job opportunities located in that
    region are accessible to the local
    population.
  • It should eliminate congestion where
    it can be traced to imperfections or
    irregularities in the system, such as
    the many discontinuities in the existing
    road network (where suddenly a four lane
    road narrows to three lanes or two, or
    takes a sharp bend (perhaps utilising
    some small connecting road) before
    continuing). In many cases inter-
    sections are unduly constricted inhibi-
    ting the utilization of capacity on
    the remainder of the road. Such
    measures are directed more at the
    smooth flow of traffic than increasing
    capacity as such.
  • It should seek to eliminate congestion
    brought about by the mixing of local
    and through traffic, by the creation of
    by-passes.

4.5 Other Reasons Why Congestion Must be Tolerated

A policy directed towards the elimination of
congestion, wherever it occurs, may destroy the

-42-

very character and fabric of the city.

Can it be doubted that a road programme of the sort
contemplated by the Sydney Area Transportation Study
1974 would destroy much of the inner-city of Sydney?

That area is presently undergoing a revitalization.
In the judgement of this Inquiry the City of Sydney
is the better for its preservation. Its destruction
in the pursuit of free-flowing traffic would have
been insupportable as a matter of philosophy
(accentuating, as it would, the attraction of the
Central Business District to motor vehicles) ineffi-
cient (in that it would almost certainly have failed
to bring about that result - as it has in the United
States) and would have left Sydney socially,
architecturally, and environmentally a great deal
poorer.

It is inappropriate to declare war upon congestion
and seek its elimination wherever it occurs. Its
elimination must be far more selective, and the
selection process based upon the interaction between
planning and transport objectives.

5. THE CONCEPT OF ACCESSIBILITY

5.1 Definition

Accessibility is a commonplace English term. Some-
thing is accessible if it can be easily reached.
Something is inaccessible if it cannot. A rather
more precise definition is furnished by the State
Transport Study Group:

"The term 'accessibility' (is the)
ability to move between places and
thus overcome the intervening
friction of space, time and/or costs..”

It is important to distinguish between:

-43-

  • accessibility for commuters
    travelling to work
  • accessibility for trucks (between
    industrial areas, ports and
    airports)
  • accessibility by public transport

5.2 Accessibility By Commuters

It would be wasteful, undesirable and ultimately
self-defeating to pursue the abstract ideal of
maximum accessibility to every nook and cranny
within the metropolitan area.

First, it would require a massive investment in
road facilities. There is simply not the money
available. Secondly, it would encourage more
travel rather than less. Thirdly, it would cause
the consumption of greater energy resources. In
today's uncertain energy climate that would be
folly. It should not be encouraged.

It would ultimately be self-defeating because it
would cause the city to sprawl. It would accentuate
the attraction of the Central Business District. It
would be likely to undermine public transport. It
would be likely to accentuate the disadvantage
suffered by those who do not have access to a car.

5.3 The Benefits Opened Up By Maximizing Accessibility

Is it not the fact that the creation of a great many
facilities, maximizing accessibility, would open up
a range of opportunities simply beyond reach without
them? We rather doubt that it would. People do not
seek a job in the way they select a wine, sipping
this one, and savouring that, in order to choose the
very best. They view a number of jobs in an abstract
way (based upon advertisements) and choose one. They
adjust their sights according to the advantages and
limitations of their position.

-44-

One must be careful not to over-egg the pudding. We
do not doubt that the provision of a vast network of
facilities would advantage some, and that they would
appreciate the advantage. We simply say that a
transportation philosophy dedicated to accessibility
as some abstract ideal can only be achieved at a
price which is too high (in monetary and human terms),
will create inequities which are too great (between
the carless and those with a car), and the advantages
are likely to be ephemeral anyway since the city is
likely to spread out.

5.4 Contrast A Plan Dedicated to Reasonable Accessibility
    Within Regions

The aim is to foster self-containment rather than
large dormitory suburbs serving a few intensive job
centres.

The policy aim can be pursued first, by encouraging
(in the way already described) industry to locate
in areas where jobs are deficient, and secondly, by
improving accessibility within the region. In the
present Inquiry one of the issues is whether the
Cooks River Route will encourage cross-regional
commuting and prejudice regional self-containment.
Will the South Western Option encourage people to
travel long distances to get to work? Will it
(because of its essentially radial orientation)
cause the urban fringe to further expand?

One is really seeking to encourage an attitude of
mind. When surveying the 'positions vacant' columns
in the Sydney Morning Herald certain locations would
be ruled out because they are difficult to get to,
or because substantial traffic congestion is likely
to be encountered.

It should be remembered that regions are not being
separated, one from another, by the equivalent of
the Berlin Wall. If people want to travel from one

-45-

region to another in search of work, or a better job,
they are free to do so. The issue is whether they
should be encouraged to do so by the provision of
high quality, high speed links.

5.5 Where There is a Problem of Accessibility, What Can
    Be Done?

The accessibility disadvantage of a region can be
answered by providing greater road capacity within
that region: by providing a number of direct
intra-regional links making one part of the region
accessible to another.

Alternatively, the problem may be addressed by
correcting poor public transport connections within
the region so that access to job opportunities
within that region is made easier. Again people
are more likely to perceive such opportunities as
desirable if they can be reached effortlessly.

The problem may be addressed by a land use solution.
Industry should not be encouraged to locate anywhere
within the region. It should be encouraged to
locate in those areas where the job shortfall is
the greatest.

5.6 Accessibility for Trucks

Trucks pose a special problem for land use transport-
ation planners. They make an impact upon the public
mind and upon the environment far greater than the
impact made by cars. It is desirable that they should
have an adequate road network, providing connections
between major traffic generators including the large
industrial areas.

What, then, is the problem? The problem is that no
sooner is a road provided to serve trucks than it
becomes cluttered with cars: that in providing
adequate truck connections between one region and
another, one automatically compromises the policy

-46-

of self-containment, encouraging cross-regional
commuting.

There is the suggestion in the present Inquiry that
there is a missing east-west link in the road network.
There is no adequate cross-regional router so it is
said, between the City and King Georges Road which
is 15 kilometres from the city. The argument will
be examined in the evaluation of each option.

5.7 Accessibility May Have to be Sacrificed to Other
    Objectives

A simple illustration can be given. It may assist
transportation problems in Sydney if Sydney Harbour
were filled in. The North Shore would then not be
separated from the South. Sydney Harbour is
perceived, rightly, as one of the City's greatest
assets. It is unthinkable that it should be
sacrificed in this way.

There are less extreme examples. One is presented
by this Inquiry. The Wolli Creek Valley is a
unique asset to the suburbs which surround it. It
is the last remnant of natural vegetation to be
found in this heavily urbanised area. It is unthink-
able to some that it should now be used for the
purposes of a road. Others view it differently.
They see the benefits to be derived from a road as
being substantially greater than the sacrifice
involved. Ultimately a judgement must be made.
It will be made by this Inquiry.

There are occasions (and the Wolli Creek Valley
may or may not be one) where accessibility must be
sacrificed in the cause of something which is thought
to be more important.

-47-

6. CONCEPT OF A ROAD HIERARCHY

6.1 The Functional Classification of Roads

The Metropolitan Road Network performs two distinct
functions:

  • the through traffic function:
    it enables people to get from
    one place to another;
  • the access function: it enables
    people to gain access to various
    facilities or buildings (whether
    shops, factories or homes).

The concept of a road hierarchy is the concept of
classifying roads according to their function. It
seeks the separation of:

  • through traffic from local traffic
  • even cars from trucks
  • pedestrians from both

Its aim is the elimination of conflict. The conflict
arises through basic differences in the behaviour
of a vehicle moving through an area, to a vehicle
which is seeking access to an area.

6.2 The Concept of Truck Routeing

There is a companion concept known as truck routeing.
It recognises that trucks make a greater impact upon
the environment and upon the public mind. It seeks
to confine trucks to a particular designated road
system. Primarily it, seeks their exclusion from
residential areas. It seeks their exclusion from
local roads, though it recognises that on occasions
trucks must use local roads to effect delivery or,
in an industrial area, to pick up goods.

The principle is universally applauded. Notwithstanding
the esteem in which the principle is held, however,
progress is slow. It is slow because a truck network

-48-

cannot be superimposed without consultation. Local
councils and trucking bodies should be permitted to
have a say. Progress towards the completion of the
hierarchy is necessarily slow because the consulta-
tive process is slow.

6.3 The Use of a Road Hierarchy to Improve Residential
    Amenity

Various road options have been promoted on the basis
that they are able, inter alia, to remove traffic
from residential areas. The Canterbury Council
maintains that it can achieve the same objective
by less drastic means, namely a road hierarchy.
The Chief Engineer and Town Planner describes the
Council's strategy in these terms:

"SHEFFIELD: The Council has adopted
a policy of precinct planning whereby
the municipality is divided into over
100 precincts. Each precinct is now
being examined in turn to determine
whether the street system can be
modified by a system of road closures,
pavement width reductions, and other
traffic management measures to elimin-
ate through traffic and to force that
traffic back onto the arterial roads."

6.4 The Opportunity Offered by SCAT

SCAT is an acronym for Sydney Co-ordinated Adaptive
Traffic System. It is a system of co-ordinated
traffic lights which is controlled by computers.

We, as motorists, have all had the experience of
watching traffic divert from a road in response to
a congested intersection and the prospect of a
prolonged wait. There are individuals well known
to all of us who take the most tortuous paths in
order to avoid a red light. The philosophy
encapsulated in 'as long as it moves, it's okay' is
familiar to all motorists. SCAT has a particular
appeal to such individuals because it will make the
arterial roads much more attractive.

-49-

SCAT will therefore present an opportunity to
implement a road hierarchy in which the option
of using side streets is, in some cases, closed
forever. The following appears in the transcript

"COMMISSIONER: And doesn't this offer
an opportunity, in conjunction with
the hierarchy, to take advantage of
the fact that traffic should be removed
from residential streets (which should
then be) redeclared if you liker as
residential streets?

DOBINSON: Most definitely.

COMMISSIONER: So it is very important
that SCAT does proceed hand-in-hand
with the development of the hierarchy?

DOBINSON: Yes. SCAT reinforces the top
level of the hierarchy, and offers the
option to do something about the low
level by relieving the street system.”

7. ORDERING OF PRIORITIES

7.1 The Road Construction Budget is Shrinking

The Department of Main Roads has very limited
construction money at its disposal. It must use
its funds sparingly. It is only too conscious of
this limitation. It says:

"..the annual rate of expenditure on
arterial roads in the Sydney area
has been far below that required to
overcome the large backlog of
improvements which are urgently
needed. It seems unlikely that
this position will change in the
near future."

7.2 The Issues to be Addressed

We have been at pains to stress that a traffic
problem need not be answered by a transport solution.
In every case one must ask the questions:

  • What are the land-use
    implications of doing something?
  • What are the implications of
    doing nothing?

-50-

  • Is it, therefore, desirable
    that something should be done?
  • If it is, should that 'something'
    be a transport solution (such as
    the creation of more road capacity)
    or a public transport solution, or
    a land use solution?

Assuming these questions have been addressed, and
that a transport solution is thought appropriate,
there is a further series of questions which must
be answered:

  • Is the need so pressing (compared to
    other perceived needs throughout the
    Metropolitan Area) that scarce money
    should be devoted to finding a
    'solution'.
  •  Assuming there is a need, and
    assuming it is pressing, is the
    preferred solution disproportionate
    in cost to the problem which it
    addresses?
  • If the problem is essentially loca1,
    and the cost of solving it is high,
    does it throw out of kilter the even
    spread of scarce funds throughout
    the entire Metropolitan Area?

Are there other ways which are less
costly (and perhaps more equitable)
of solving the problem?

7.3 The Equitable Allocation of Funds

The road system is rather better in some areas than
it is in others. There is an expectation on the
part of the community, nevertheless, (and especially
their elected representatives in Local Councils)
that a reasonable share in the road funds available
will be allocated to each area. If they perceive
neglect they feel it keenly.

-51-

Ultimately, in the evaluation of options, we will
have to examine how bad the congestion is within
an area which may be relieved by building one or
other of the options (assuming it is thought, as
a matter of land use policy, the congestion is
best eliminated). We will examine how poor
accessibility is from the viewpoint of commuters
and truck drivers. We will express a view as to
whether the expenditure contemplated (in excess of
$50 million) is disproportionate to the problems
revealed by the evidence.

7.4 The Need to Examine a Range of Alternatives

Where a transport solution is thought appropriate
to a traffic problem, it may take one or a number
of forms:

  • Providing additional facilities
  • Expanding existing facilities.
    This can be done by:
  • road widening
  • widening intersections (since
    intersections are usually the
    weak link in the chain)
  • adding right-hand turning bays
    to assist the capacity of the
    intersection and the flow of
    traffic
  • Improving the efficiency of existing
    facilities. This may include:
  • traffic management measures
    (e.g., clearways, priority
    roads, one-way systems etc.)
  • preference to high occupancy
    vehicles (e.g., bus only
    lanes, transit lanes)
  • the installation of park and
    ride facilities at railway
    stations and other inter-changes

The Inquiry should be in a position to consider
each alternative. The following was suggested by
NAASRA:
-52-

"A range of alternative solutions is thus
possible to most transport problems. The
following generally needs to be considered:
*        Alternative scales of improvement
*        Alternative rates of improvement
*        Improvements to alternative modes
*        Regulatory and licensing alternatives
*        A land use change
*        Combinations of the above
*        Making no improvement."

A range of alternatives was considered by various
road inquiries in Melbourne. This Inquiry is
concerned that a range of options has not been put
forward for consideration. The only solutions
suggested are in the nature of major surgery. A
band-aid may be inappropriate. But something in-
between may do the job.


Go to Chapter III -->