In November 2016, Bruno Spandonide presented at the 27th ARRB Conference in Melbourne on the topic of transport simulation in Alice Springs

1. Bruno Spandonide, Nick Holyoak, Branko Stazic, Rocco Zito
Flinders University
School of Computer Science, Engineering and Mathematics
Ninti One
Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation
Active Deserts:
Transport simulation in Alice Springs

2. Active transport: a wide definition
• Active transport is defined as physical activity undertaken
as a means of transport and not purely as a form of
recreation.
Simpson's Gap bike path
Courtesy Tourism NT
Rainbow Valley
Courtesy Tourism NT

3. Background of active transport in Alice Springs

4. Current situation
• Walking is the primary form of mobility for a high number
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (strong
socio-cultural significance).
• For non-ATSI people recreational uses dominate transport
uses.
Figure 2 Cycling participation in past week by
purpose and region
(Austroads and Australian Bicycle Council 2013)

5. Network
• In Alice Springs the inner city infrastructure is dense.
• It comprises 40km of shared walking and cycling paths,
split in four main corridors/routes (1.6m width). There is
one priority crossing, and over 50km of usable non-shared
footpath.
Shared footpath, courtesy: MPH Carpentry

6. Alice Active Transport Strengths

7. Weaknesses
• Limited intersections
& dangerous crossings.
• Bottleneck at
Heavytree Gap.
• No systematic access
to town camps
Map from Northern Territory Department of Transport 2014

8. Methodology
• Holistic cost benefit analysis with a combination of specific transport
initiatives and related assumptions of estimated active transport
increase.

9. Copenhagen index
High rating Average rating Low Rating
Advocacy Infrastructures (network) Modal share increase
Culture Modal share Share programmes
Facilities Social acceptance Traffic calming
Gender split Urban planning
Infrastructures (path) Perception of safety (crossings)
Perception of safety (path)
Copenhagen index for evaluating low-powered transports in Alice Springs.

10. Alternative initiatives
Infrastructure New Tech Regulations/Planning
Extended infrastructures Smart tech equipment Bike sharing
Improved roundabouts Low-powered device Incentives
Parking facilities Fast recharge stations Education programs
Green wave Smart applications Integrated planning
High quality public
amenities
Safety innovations Paid parking
Perception of safety (path) Speed reductions

11. Estimating costs
Infrastructure New Tech Regulations/Planning
Extended integrated
infrastructures
Smart tech equipment Bike sharing
Improved roundabouts Low-powered device Incentives
Parking facilities Fast recharge stations Education programs/
community events
Green wave Smart applications Integrated planning
High quality public
amenities
Safety innovations Paid parking
Perception of safety
(path)
Speed reductions
Over 2,000/person/year 1-2,000/person/year
0-1,000/person/year

12. Estimating impacts
Infrastructure New Tech Regulations/Planning
Extended integrated
infrastructures
Smart tech equipment Bike sharing
Improved roundabouts Low-powered device Incentives
Parking facilities Fast recharge stations Education programs/
community events
Green wave Smart applications Integrated planning
High quality public
amenities
Safety innovations Paid parking
Perception of safety
(path)
Speed reductions
6-8% increase 4-6% increase
2-4% increase 0-2% increase
Legend
(maximum increase of 150%
or 15% of active transport)

13. Assumptions
Cost and
benefit
indicators
Details
Infrastructure The cost of 1 kilometre of stand-alone cycling track is between AUD150,000 and
AUD300,000 per km
Retrofitting or adapting road or large footpath for the use of bicycle would be around half.
Green wave and roundabout equipment are between AUD100,000 and AUD500,000.
Increase in parking revenue is balanced by financial incentives for active transport.
Time Average additional time costs of 30 minutes per day are factored in (AUD20 per hour). It
corresponds to AUD2,000 to AUD3,000 per year. This is reduced to 15% in the smart
network scenario and 50% in the best case scenario.
Equipment Savings of AUD2,000 in not using a motorised vehicle.
Health,
productivity,
social and
recreational,
environmental
and land value
AUD100-200 per year per person half shared with all inhabitants.
AUD100-200 per year per person, shared with all inhabitants.
AUD100-200 per year per person, shared with all inhabitants.
AUD25 (AUD3 per tonne of CO2) per year per person half shared with all inhabitants.
AUD100-200 per year per person half shared with all inhabitants.

14. Scenarios
Scenario 1
Better network
Scenario 2
Enhanced smart network
Scenario 3
Cutting edge smart network
Infrastructure 60km of cycling and
walking tracks. The
major roundabout
crossings are
improved. Smart
technologies are slowly
introduced. Some
additional education
programs and events
are organised.
60km of retrofitted cycling and
walking tracks and 7km of new
tracks. Key nodes are equipped
with green wave technology and
safe roundabouts. Smart
technologies are available and
motorised transport experience
an average speed reduction of
10km/h.
60km of retrofitted cycling and walking tracks and
20-30km of new tracks. All the network is equipped
with state of the art standards. Smart technologies
are the norm and motorised transport experience an
average speed reduction of 20km/h. Free bike
sharing and demand responsive small scale
automated public transport is financed by paid
parking. The city centre is pedestrian only. The state
funds new e-bikes purchase and workers can claim
a tax reduction for active transport through a
specific app.
2030 Impact Cycling and walking
increase by 50% to
reach 8-12% of the
travel to work modal
share (1,200 new daily
users). Average speed
is around 15km/hr.
Cycling and walking increase by
100% to reach 10%-15% of the
transport modal share of travel
to work (3,600 users, 2,400
new users). Car traffic drops by
10% to drop to 74% of the
modal share. Average speed is
around 17km/hr.
Cycling and walking increases by over 150% to
reach 12-18% of the transport modal share (4,800
users). Car traffic drops by 15% to drop to 69% of
the modal share (3,200 less users). Average speed
is around 20km/hr.

15. Benefit Cost Analyses
Scenario 1 better network Scenario 2 enhanced smart
network
Scenario 3 smart cutting edge
network
Costs Infrastructure costs AUD10 million
over 10 years.
Time costs for non-motorised
transport users is AUD3,000 per
year (AUD48 million over 10 years).
Total costs: AUD48 million
Infrastructure costs AUD20 million
over 10 years.
Time costs for non-motorised
transport users is AUD60 million
over 10 years).
Total costs: AUD80 million
Infrastructure costs $25 million over
10 years.
Time costs for non-motorised
transport users is AUD48 million
over 10 years).
Total costs: AUD73 million
Benefits Savings on motorised transport
AUD48 million over 10 years.
Savings for health services,
productivity, social and recreational
activities, land value and
environmental benefits are around
AUD30 million over 10 years.
Total benefits: AUD78 million
Savings on motorised transport
AUD80 million over 10 years.
Savings for health services,
productivity, social and recreational
activities, land value and
environmental benefits are around
AUD50 million over 10 years.
Total benefits: AUD130 million
Savings on motorised transport
AUD115 million over 10 years.
Savings for health services,
productivity, social and recreational
activities, land value and
environmental benefits are around
AUD80 million over 10 years.
Total benefits: AUD195 million
Ratio 1.34 1.62 2.6

16. Timeline and perspectives

17. Implications and conclusions
• Active transport policy can effectively deliver high quality of
living in large remote Australian communities.
• Initial investments required are low.
• Detailed analyses of individual active transport initiatives
would allow to optimise active transport strategies.

18. Acknowledgements
• This research is conducted by Flinders University, Ninti One and the
Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation.
Contact:
Bruno Spandonide
Researcher
Ninti One
Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation
Flinders University
Email: bruno.spandonide@nintione.com.au
For further information Transport Futures Reports:
http://www.crc-rep.com.au/resource/CW026_PreferredTransportFuturesRemoteAustralia.pdf
Spandonide B. 2015. Preferred transport futures in remote Australia. CRC-REP Working Paper CW026. Ninti One
Limited, Alice Springs.
http://www.crc-rep.com.au/resource/CW017_TransportCostsInRemoteCommunities.pdf
Spandonide B. 2014. Transport systems in remote Australia: Transport costs in remote communities. CRC-REP Working
Paper CW0017. Ninti One Limited. Alice Springs.