What do you think of our proposals to manage cars, cycling, walking and public transport in the city?

I think that the cycling proposal is way too limited. Given the pa growth rate in cycling to the city identified in the paper, the timeframe for the plan and the scope for escalating the increase in cycling by adressing safety concerns of travellers a much more ambitions plan is required. For example the current levels of bike travel in Pultney street and the accident rate in this street are not adressed in the plan. Creating a cycle only path in King William street will not divert this cycle traffic as cyclists will usually travel the shortest viable route to their destination. Significant work throughout the city is required to create a network of cycle only paths.

‘Formalise road typologies for all travel modes (including walking and cycling) to appropriately share the street space’ – pg12, Discussion Paper 1 - Managing the network.

This could be an effective idea but the sequence of execution will be important. I think that much of the street calming & additional public transport infrastructure (e.g. tram loop) would already need to be in place before this concept could successfully be phased in.

‘Short cycling of traffic signals to favour pedestrian movements’ pg14, Discussion Paper 1 - Managing the network.

I think this is a good idea - particularly due to the current temptation to ignore the traffic signals so you do not miss a tram.

'..modifying & strengthening War Memorial Drive' pg 16, Strategy 1.7. I disagree with this idea for the following 6 reasons:

1) It negates the other key strategy options: i.e. a) reduce trips to city by car b) improve the ring route c) explore policies to reduce through traffic

2) It introduces a significant increase in car traffic too near to Linear Park (one of the few transport corridors exclusive for pedestrians/cyclists)

3) It creates a significant transport barrier between Linear Park and Nth Adelaide (Adel Oval, Sports Grounds, O'Connell St)

4) Straightening the section east of Frome Rd would likely require significant alteration/reclamation of community sporting grounds (see map)

5) It introduces significant complexity to intersections at Port Rd & Hackney Rd (see map)

6) Car focused solution that attempts to shift congestion issues from North Tce in the city elsewhere

The bus priority corridor is a good idea to enable a co ordinated approach.

I would like parking meters to have card payment possibilities.

I don't think improving the ring route is a good long-term strategy. The ring route is already a barrier to entering the city and accessing the parklands, particularly for cyclists and pedestrians. Many intersections (e.g. Fullarton and Greenhill) are very unpleasant places for pedestrians and cyclists. Signalised crossings are welcome, but they often take a long time to change to the pedestrian and cyclist crossing phase (e.g Fullarton and Grant Ave intersection). As a cyclist, I would like to see it made easier and safer, not harder, to access the city proper..