Sustainable Living - We need this guy in Perth

[Jiblet]

This guys has some pretty good ideas and some damn good designs.
Someone on the Perth council hire this guy.

Does it deserve its own thread? maybe.

<object width="640" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ogXT_CI7KRU&rel=0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ogXT_CI7KRU&rel=0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></embed></object>

[tinto]

Very interesting.
"hedonistic sustainability" is a good phrase.

[Halle Terry]

Good to see people taking an interest in this type of stuff - If anyone is interested in these subjects search up Landscape Urbanism and Ecological Urbanism.

Some good ideas but implementing them into Perth would be fucking hard, everyone in Perth is a firm believer that we're all entitled to a single story detached house with a backyard (sprawl) so pushing ideas like this is dangerous and difficult. Look at how the Perth arena and waterfront development were received. Everyone bagged out the arena for being ugly and no one was that chuffed over the waterfront (one comment that stuck with me is "OH THINK OF THE TRAFFIC DURING PEAK HOUR" Yes pingpingpingping you are on here and I still can't believe how retarded that comment was) Melbourne is very green and on the way to being far more sustainable, ironically everyone likes Melbourne over Perth.

The Scandinavians are very open to these ideas and hence they're some of the leaders in new ideas in Urban Design, Architecture and Landscape Architecture. We'd have far less problems in the world if we all thought like them.

[tinto]

We'd have far less problems in the world if we all thought like them.
I suppose the two projects you mentioned weren't sold to the public as sustainable or innovative without compromise to our current lifestyle, which seems to be a strong theme in the video and not one we regularly see done well. The public reaction would be the same anywhere if the message put out isn't structured to clearly explain why a particular new idea will work OR the audience isn't conditioned to trust town planners/designers/architects.

It is our nature to resist change unless we're shown how things can work better.

[Halle Terry]

I wasn't necessarily meaning they were innovative or sustainable, but just the fact they were new additions to the city meant they were met with a lot of flak, I mean I'm running off a hunch but I'd be doubtful you would be able to push anything radical or out there in Perth.

[tinto]

Sure you could.
Those selling an idea / concept here just need to know their audience better.
They won't please everyone but should spend the time getting to know what pushes their audience's buttons. They'll then see lower resistance and greater public support for an idea... whatever it is.

I'm not endorsing design-by-committee, but when an idea is being sold to the public too often it is an ego driven masterpiece (from a politician, architect) and the public's immediate concerns aren't respected - however petty the originator of the idea may think they are.

Eg if a knee jerk concern is raised about traffic, demonstrate how it has been dealt with to ease the concern before it grows into something bigger. Otherwise it is being set up to fail.

[Mad_Aussie]

Started listening to this in a background tab, couldn't work out why Arnold Schwartzenegger was going on about sustainability

[Halle Terry]

Sure you could.
Those selling an idea / concept here just need to know their audience better.
They won't please everyone but should spend the time getting to know what pushes their audience's buttons. They'll then see lower resistance and greater public support for an idea... whatever it is.

I'm not endorsing design-by-committee, but when an idea is being sold to the public too often it is an ego driven masterpiece (from a politician, architect) and the public's immediate concerns aren't respected - however petty the originator of the idea may think they are.

Eg if a knee jerk concern is raised about traffic, demonstrate how it has been dealt with to ease the concern before it grows into something bigger. Otherwise it is being set up to fail.

All very fair points.

I'm just skeptical, which is ironically the same thing I'm bitching about haha. Don't get me wrong though, I'd fucking LOVE to see this kind of stuff in Perth.

[dagonite]

To all those interested, look up a dude called Josh Byrne. He lives in Perth and a big figure in practical ecology, and a lecturer at one of the local universities.
http://www.joshbyrne.com.au/
He's had bits on Gardening Australia and his own show at one point. He looks (and sounds) a bit weird but he's got the right idea.
He does up houses to be as sustainable as possible He's had 'open days' where people come and see what he's done to his house and see how they can implement ideas in their own house or garden.

[Halle Terry]

Adding to above, Boomtown:2050 is a book written by my professor Richard Wellar, very, very smart bloke and had lecturered at Harvard, Yale, Princeton etc etc - basically it outlines the scenarios for Perth going towards 2050.

[Mad_Aussie]

scenarios for Perth going towards 2050.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SFbLM2fHqao/ThrPoVycEKI/AAAAAAAAAeM/CEsB9gIFiRI/s1600/sahara-desert-6.jpg

[regi]

Terry what degree you doing with Weller?

[-Luke-]

To all those interested, look up a dude called Josh Byrne.

While I find it difficult too trust a man with such a large gap in his front teeth, He does have some very good ideas and concepts

[Halle Terry]

Terry what degree you doing with Weller?

Masters in Urban Design by coursework @ UWA, I've got a year left which is my thesis, will be heading over to the US to finish it there :D

[Fukushima]

Terry you homosexual

Just suppose you had a job in mosman park. You could walk to work from cottesloe no worries.

Now imagine you lived in carlisle and needed to get to work via riverside drive like thousands of other people do every day. You'd be a bit mad if they closed riverside drive without any plan for the traffic.

So fuck you. Not everyone can afford to live where they work.

[V70R]

Started listening to this in a background tab, couldn't work out why Arnold Schwartzenegger was going on about sustainability
Yessss!
Was going to say the same

[Buckets]

Not everyone can afford to live where they work.

QFT. Even the drive from Mt Lawley in to the city (on the odd occasion I spend time in the office there) is a nightmare and only gets worse every time they try to make it better.. And before anyone says take the bus / train... NO !

Now I realize that Perth being as big as it is doesn't help, we all myself included like owning massive houses on big lots which causes sprawl. But sprawl has spawned several decent semi cities or whatever they are called. Such as Joondalup & Mandurah which is a good thing as it reduces the people coming in to the main city significantly.

On another note Perth has much more pressing infrastructure issues to deal with other than making the waterfront "pretty" or a stupid stadium. We have an airport that's shit, our public transport is shit, our regional areas (for those people who bother leave to confines of the metro area) have substandard essential services and major infrastructure projects needed to support the current resources boom aren't getting done leaving us with potential severe capacity constraints.

Everyone loves a flash stadium or Southbank (Melb) spec development on the Perth foreshore and the current sinking of the rail line in Perth is great but it's not important and the things that are important especially in regional WA are getting neglected for these kind of projects.

[Slip_]

Been getting involved in a City of South Perth Community Garden project since late last year, Josh Byrne came down to the initial meeting and did a little presentation.

It's a small project, but pretty fucking cool. Always been into Permaculture n'shit, AUS has a massive oppertunity to embrace this all, really interesting stuff.

[ossie_21]

Buckets is on the money with that post. In a way it's lucky that places like Joondalup & Mandurah were developed so much. I along with others don't need to go into the city, I can't remember the last time I needed to. But for people trying to get into property ownership, they are having to settle for something 40kms out of the city, which is fine if you don't work there but you can imagine the amount of people in Perth that do work or travel there for work

But all about this new stadium is bs considering the poor quality road system, stupidly designed freeways (3 lanes minimum needed), shit public transport, overcrowded trains & car parks along the lines where people do their best to do the "right" thing. I just wonder how long it will take for people to actually try and make these changes

[yeahlow34]

On another note Perth has much more pressing infrastructure issues to deal with other than making the waterfront "pretty" or a stupid stadium. We have an airport that's shit, our public transport is shit.

100% disagree with you. I think that's rubbish.

In fact, you make the statement that you don't use public transport. So where you get that view from is beyond me. Our public transport system happens to be excellent, not to mention recent advances with the Perth to Mandurah line. There is improvements that can be made, but show me ONE public transport system in the world that is perfect, and I will suck your dick.

The airport is currently being redeveloped, but I would question why, in its current state, it's shit? It actually serves it's purpose EXTREMELY well. And I would challenge you to look at it's status per capita, with regards to other airports around Australia and the World.

Sick of people using the "that's shit" attitude.

WRT regional areas, I do agree.

Oh, by the way you must be forgetting the billions of dollars getting poured into hospitals, urban infrastructure and essential services? Probably, because that doesn't suit your argument.

[V70R]

QFT. Even the drive from Mt Lawley in to the city (on the odd occasion I spend time in the office there) is a nightmare and only gets worse every time they try to make it better.. And before anyone says take the bus / train... NO !

Now I realize that Perth being as big as it is doesn't help, we all myself included like owning massive houses on big lots which causes sprawl. But sprawl has spawned several decent semi cities or whatever they are called. Such as Joondalup & Mandurah which is a good thing as it reduces the people coming in to the main city significantly.

On another note Perth has much more pressing infrastructure issues to deal with other than making the waterfront "pretty" or a stupid stadium. We have an airport that's shit, our public transport is shit, our regional areas (for those people who bother leave to confines of the metro area) have substandard essential services and major infrastructure projects needed to support the current resources boom aren't getting done leaving us with potential severe capacity constraints.

Everyone loves a flash stadium or Southbank (Melb) spec development on the Perth foreshore and the current sinking of the rail line in Perth is great but it's not important and the things that are important especially in regional WA are getting neglected for these kind of projects.

I have had several chats to John Day (my boss) - Planning Minister over the years, and raised several issues in relation to where Perth needs improvement, change and discussed examples of what other cities do. I also found it rather amusing and totally coincidental that after a Christmas party in 2009?, after several beers, I discussed with him the need and scope for a gondola style lift from the Barrack St Jetty to Kings Park and a few days later the concept was on the cover of the West Australian. If anyone has been to Barcelona, you know what I'm on about. A second concept was to sink the FWY south (including train line) from the Narrows to Mt Henry - again like the Gran Via De Les Corts Catalanes, Barcelona. Although I understand the massive cost and engineering of such a plan would make it infeasible, its the ideas that need considering.

[Buckets]

In fact, you make the statement that you don't use public transport. So where you get that view from is beyond me.

The reason I don't use public transport is because I tried it. I lived Butler for a while and used it to try and keep km's off my car I do still use it every now and then but I find it doesn't work for me and is no where near as efficient or reliable as what I grew up with (In all fairness Wellington is a small, low population city and it's system wasn't perfect but it was decent). While the new rail lines going to the southern suburbs are great they were long overdue, the areas to the north east of Perth (Ellenbrook) could do with a line if not now then soon. The bus system is okay at best and Perth's Taxi service is renowned as below average.

As for a perfect system... There is no such thing. Although the Swiss & Japanese system would be pretty close.


The airport is currently being redeveloped, but I would question why, in its current state, it's shit? It actually serves it's purpose EXTREMELY well. And I would challenge you to look at it's status per capita, with regards to other airports around Australia and the World.

http://www.cnngo.com/explorations/life/10-most-hated-airports-324645

http://www.airlinequality.com/Airports/Airport_forum/per.htm

I'm there all the fucking time so I know it's crap. Going back to the public transport point the lack of a rail link or effective public transport system from the airport means you have to drive there which causes traffic problems including issues on the arterial roads. The improvements to the domestic terminal are again well overdue. The FIFO surge there in the mornings is a huge problem for the airport and I know they are trying to solve it but it's not like they couldn't see it coming and at least have something in motion rather then get caught on the hop and roll out a 1/2 measure like they have. They should have been given the funding to do it properly. I'd gladly trade the waterfront development for this.



Oh, by the way you must be forgetting the billions of dollars getting poured into hospitals, urban infrastructure and essential services? Probably, because that doesn't suit your argument.
Nope not forgetting it at all. Karratha for instance is going to receive over a billion dollars to try and fix the joint... but... This is all a bit late. It seems that after the companies built the Pilbara towns in the 60's & 70's not much else got done. This is part the governments problem and part the resource companies problem. BHP for instance is starting to tip $ back in to Newman after years of not giving a fuck because the Government certainly wasn't. A trip to Newman hospital is a step back in time. But move away from the big mining communities to smaller towns in the wheatbelt or midwest or god forbid Aboriginal communities (separate issue but relevant). They need much more help and support then they are getting but there's no votes out bush so there's not much cash (compared to the need).

On the infrastructure, essential service front, yep stuff happening now but it was needed ages ago, people knew it was needed ages ago but it never got done. This is not just a state issue it's federal, from what I can gather WA was the poor cousin for a while and still to this day doesn't get a fair cut as a result things that need to happen don't.

In all fairness the "it's fucked attitude" isn't the right one to try and make the point I was trying to. Pollies build bell towers, stadiums and flash foreshore developments because it wins votes not because it's important and while it would be nice to have these things they are a want not a need.

[regi]

....a gondola style lift from the Barrack St Jetty to Kings Park...

that has been a pipe dream since the early 90's IIRC

not that its a bad idea though!

[V70R]

Well currently there is no linkage between the two tourist hotspots.
Barrack street Jetty is a node to South Perth (wow) and Rotto.
Kings Park is .. Kings Park.

If you were a foreigner and wanted to get from one to another, you have to wait 1 hour for a damn taxi, only to have some Somalian refugee take you on a tour through Belmont because he hasn't a fucking clue where to go.

[Jiblet]

Technically these types of developments don't need to be in central Perth.

It would be a good way to spread tourism away from the city - say link up a bunch of interesting/futuristic architecture and have a "tour" using public transport so you can take as long was you want. It could go from Perth to another satellite city (Joondalup, Mandurah etc). At the end you could also have a similar building to the one in Bjark's presentation where there are a combination of shops, restaurants and hotels (instead of residency).

Obviously lots of $$ but if it was interesting enough the tourism would pay for it.

[Mad_Aussie]

Technically these types of developments don't need to be in central Perth.

They do...

No politician will ever be prepared to invest in infrastructure beyond their term in office. As a result, no new substantially improved roads/trains/etc will happen. As a result, these fat pingpingpingpings won't want to spend four hours in traffic being driven to the developments...

And so, they can only ever happen in the CBD.

[Passage GT]

If you were a foreigner and wanted to get from one to another, you have to wait 1 hour for a damn taxi, only to have some Somalian refugee take you on a tour through Belmont because he hasn't a fucking clue where to go.
LOL!
it's funny cause it's true.

[Lump]

that has been a pipe dream since the early 90's IIRC

not that its a bad idea though!
i'm pretty sure its still a part of the foreshore development, it was certainly shown in the 3d models that were released.

closing riverside drv & then expecting people to divert thru the tunnel is retarded, even with its expansion to 3 lanes each way.

they should be bypassing the riverside drv traffic around the development

[tinto]

Barrack st - kings park?
If you were a tourist you would probably walk given you can see your destination.

[Halle Terry]

Terry you homosexual

Just suppose you had a job in mosman park. You could walk to work from cottesloe no worries.

Now imagine you lived in carlisle and needed to get to work via riverside drive like thousands of other people do every day. You'd be a bit mad if they closed riverside drive without any plan for the traffic.

So fuck you. Not everyone can afford to live where they work.

So a new canal literally linking the Perth city to the Swan river including retail, living spaces, public open spaces and office areas, hundreds of new jobs and multitudes of new businesses, new venues in which to socialize and spend your time at is not worth the extra 5 minutes of traffic? Fuck you Shannon you selfish asshole.

And before you said 'oh but they could of done this' this project has been in the works for literally years, I'm sure it's come multitudes of times and they've made a judgement call that it was better to remove the road.


QFT. Even the drive from Mt Lawley in to the city (on the odd occasion I spend time in the office there) is a nightmare and only gets worse every time they try to make it better.. And before anyone says take the bus / train... NO !

Now I realize that Perth being as big as it is doesn't help, we all myself included like owning massive houses on big lots which causes sprawl. But sprawl has spawned several decent semi cities or whatever they are called. Such as Joondalup & Mandurah which is a good thing as it reduces the people coming in to the main city significantly.

On another note Perth has much more pressing infrastructure issues to deal with other than making the waterfront "pretty" or a stupid stadium. We have an airport that's shit, our public transport is shit, our regional areas (for those people who bother leave to confines of the metro area) have substandard essential services and major infrastructure projects needed to support the current resources boom aren't getting done leaving us with potential severe capacity constraints.

Everyone loves a flash stadium or Southbank (Melb) spec development on the Perth foreshore and the current sinking of the rail line in Perth is great but it's not important and the things that are important especially in regional WA are getting neglected for these kind of projects.

Well what do you want them to do then? Just demolish the buildings along Beaufort st to widen it so your commute is a bit quicker? If you can improve the traffic flow through an old suburb where infrastructure is limited, community is established and still preserve it then you deserve a medal for performing an impossible feat. The traffic through that area will ALWAYS be bad because it's now been developed and redeveloping it will destroy many aspects that make it desirable.

The very fact you stated you and many other people desire to own a big block of land and a detached house is THE VERY REASON WE HAVE CONGESTION. Sprawl isolates people and encourages and automobile dependency, if no one wanted big detached houses we'd have higher densities, shorter commutes and more people to justify infrastructure like trams and buses. Look at every city that has higher densities, they make a trade off of having higher densities for the sake of convenience.

You can't have an impossible city whereby everything is close and within reach, commutes are short and there's no congestion and still retain a large detached house.


Buckets is on the money with that post. In a way it's lucky that places like Joondalup & Mandurah were developed so much. I along with others don't need to go into the city, I can't remember the last time I needed to. But for people trying to get into property ownership, they are having to settle for something 40kms out of the city, which is fine if you don't work there but you can imagine the amount of people in Perth that do work or travel there for work

But all about this new stadium is bs considering the poor quality road system, stupidly designed freeways (3 lanes minimum needed), shit public transport, overcrowded trains & car parks along the lines where people do their best to do the "right" thing. I just wonder how long it will take for people to actually try and make these changes

We're not lucky that's just deliberate planning, Midland, Joondalup and Rockhingham were created as fringe cities which enable people to work elsewhere besides the city.

Anyone who harps on about Perth's public transport system being shit is on drugs. I took the public transport to work and then uni every single day for 6 months last year and never once did it not run nor could I not get to my destination, if it's overcrowded jump on the train 20 minutes earlier and your problems are gone.

Typical Perth attitude, bitch about what's wrong and not put serious consideration into the fact that our city has been shaped by literally thousands and thousands of qualified intelligent people in an attempt to create a cohesive city that appeases as many people as possible and functions as best as possible.

[Lump]

Sextra 5 minutes of traffic? Fuck you Shannon you selfish asshole..
5 mins extra lol, its going to be a shitload more than that for a lot of people, including the ones that use the tunnel & never go on riverside drv now.

closing riverside drv is not going to effect me much at all, i very rarely use it now.

So im not taking a selfish attitude here - its just a dumb idea plain & simple.

[V70R]

Barrack st - kings park?
If you were a tourist you would probably walk given you can see your destination.

Sure many have tried, got to the fwy and said 'O shit now what?'

Remember we live here and know ways around. Tourists don't and most dont even read signs 6 inches infront of their face.
Don't ask me how I know.

[Buckets]

Well what do you want them to do then? Just demolish the buildings along Beaufort st to widen it so your commute is a bit quicker?

Nope just no stupid speed bumps, random "active speed zones", bus lanes or people parking up on main traffic routes during peak hour when there's a heaps of side streets to park down.


Anyone who harps on about Perth's public transport system being shit is on drugs. I took the public transport to work and then uni every single day for 6 months last year and never once did it not run nor could I not get to my destination, if it's overcrowded jump on the train 20 minutes earlier and your problems are gone.
From a previous post I'm gathering you live in Cott & go to UWA, I don't know where you work but I'm assuming given you own two of three you would have set up your business locally,Cott's pretty well serviced (as is Mt Lawley but by the time the buses going in to the city get there they are full) Let's pretend you live in Alkimos and work in Welshpool, or lets say you need to get to Perth airport at 4am, or you need to get from your office in the CBD to a supplier off the major public transport routes (or your pissed out of your brain and don't have the $ left or don't feel like lining up for ages for a taxi on Saturday morning) public transport starts to fail.

The point I'm actually making here is people aren't always against the horrid thing they are building in the city (can't wait to see how well that ages) or the waterfront development because it's new or different, they don't like it because it's unnecessary and not really important. Personally I love what Melbourne did with Southbank so much so I had an bought an apartment there once upon a time but WA has other priorities. Perth's okay how it is really, it has it's faults but so what it's still a great place to live. Regional WA on the other hand needs all the money it's getting and all the money that's going on these projects just to bring up to a 21st century standard. This is where the funds & effort should go,hell if it happened and was done right maybe someone like you could even convince people to leave Perth and move bush because it's a decent place with the same standard of living. But as I said earlier no votes in the bush so aside from the National Parties regional fund there's sod all money to fix the problems because it's all going on a vote buying performing art's center or shit "community public artwork" for the local kids to graffiti. This drives people in the bush to pack it in, buy a big block of land on the edge of suburbia and move to the city...

[Halle Terry]

5 mins extra lol, its going to be a shitload more than that for a lot of people, including the ones that use the tunnel & never go on riverside drv now.

closing riverside drv is not going to effect me much at all, i very rarely use it now.

So im not taking a selfish attitude here - its just a dumb idea plain & simple.

So what's your solution then? I mean judging by what you've said you're clearly in a position that's assessed the project and design for many, many months and decided that despite trying to cover as many bases as possible, the idea is not a good one.


Nope just no stupid speed bumps, random "active speed zones", bus lanes or people parking up on main traffic routes during peak hour when there's a heaps of side streets to park down.


From a previous post I'm gathering you live in Cott & go to UWA, I don't know where you work but I'm assuming given you own two of three you would have set up your business locally,Cott's pretty well serviced (as is Mt Lawley but by the time the buses going in to the city get there they are full) Let's pretend you live in Alkimos and work in Welshpool, or lets say you need to get to Perth airport at 4am, or you need to get from your office in the CBD to a supplier off the major public transport routes (or your pissed out of your brain and don't have the $ left or don't feel like lining up for ages for a taxi on Saturday morning) public transport starts to fail.

The point I'm actually making here is people aren't always against the horrid thing they are building in the city (can't wait to see how well that ages) or the waterfront development because it's new or different, they don't like it because it's unnecessary and not really important. Personally I love what Melbourne did with Southbank so much so I had an bought an apartment there once upon a time but WA has other priorities. Perth's okay how it is really, it has it's faults but so what it's still a great place to live. Regional WA on the other hand needs all the money it's getting and all the money that's going on these projects just to bring up to a 21st century standard. This is where the funds & effort should go,hell if it happened and was done right maybe someone like you could even convince people to leave Perth and move bush because it's a decent place with the same standard of living. But as I said earlier no votes in the bush so aside from the National Parties regional fund there's sod all money to fix the problems because it's all going on a vote buying performing art's center or shit "community public artwork" for the local kids to graffiti. This drives people in the bush to pack it in, buy a big block of land on the edge of suburbia and move to the city...

What are we going to do, redesign the whole city so it caters to the few people that live in on one side of the city and work on the other and thus have a shitty commute?

I do indeed, I caught a bus + train to work (East Perth), or walked + train, then train + bus back to uni + bus back home. Sometimes I'd bus to the gym and bus back to Perth then bus to uni.

I don't understand why getting to Perth airport is a problem at 4am - really how much traffic is there going to be? Would there really be enough commuters on some rail link to justify having it running all night?

Pissed out of your brain and don't want to pay for the taxi? Best fire up a multi-million dollar rail network and bus network so you don't have to pay as much, better add some security guards on every bus and train too to ensure your safety, better pay them and the drivers well too because working at 4am sure does suck. Seriously think about how much money it would take to operate a massive transportation network all over the city to cater to people who don't want to pay for a taxi and only have them operating at some stupidly low efficiency.

I fully support what you have to say about regional WA, in fact many of these sustainable developments would kick ass out in smaller scale communities because they're easier to implement. As far as 'community centers' and shit go I can't really see how that problem can be easily fixed by any party - I mean living bush has its tradeoffs too and that's going to be one.

I also agree with the speed measures in Mt Lawley, they're totally uncesscary and of no use, so if I misunderstood what you said I apologize.

The point I'm trying to make overall is that everyone expects some magical solution whereby every base is somehow covered and no one loses out at all, if you want Perth to become interesting and you want to see vibrant interesting developments there will be a trade off. Everyone here just throws their opinion around wildly and doesn't stop and think that the best people for this job were employed and literally slaved over trying to find the best way to please every party involved. Think about every time someone has criticized your job and had literally no idea of the scope or problems faced when trying to come up with a solution.

[Lump]

So what's your solution then? I mean judging by what you've said you're clearly in a position that's assessed the project and design for many, many months and decided that despite trying to cover as many bases as possible, the idea is not a good one.
.
divert riverside drive around the development by 1/2 sinking it and covering over for pedestrian access - or fully sinking it just where it could go around the perimeter of the project.

they did it for the train line in the area so why not for the cars..

its a much better idea than just turning a blind eye to a major arterial road thru the city & glossing over the huge negative impacts of closing it will have.

[Halle Terry]

divert riverside drive around the development by 1/2 sinking it and covering over for pedestrian access - or fully sinking it just where it could go around the perimeter of the project.

they did it for the train line in the area so why not for the cars..

its a much better idea than just turning a blind eye to a major arterial road thru the city & glossing over the huge negative impacts of closing it will have.

Ever considered that it might not adhere to the budget or might not be possible? I SERIOUSLY doubt it was something they 'glossed' over and just were like 'yeah lol fuck it we'll just ignore that shit'

[Lump]

budget lol, so we get a half assed job instead, well done.

you asked for a solution, so why wouldnt it be possible?

[Ash-u-lee]

Function over form.

We need a city that works, not a city that is pretty.

Many of the ideas being thrown around are to benefit inner city dwellers.

[tinto]

Function over form.

We need a city that works, not a city that is pretty.


Did you watch any of the video or is that relating to the comments above?
With some effort the two of them can co exist.

[Halle Terry]

budget lol, so we get a half assed job instead, well done.

you asked for a solution, so why wouldnt it be possible?

What part about is half assed? Since when are things not built to a budget?

I asked for a solution from YOU because clearly you're some sort of genius that has it all figured out.

Seriously if you're going to argue with me at least sit down and bring some REALISTIC and INFORMED opinions to the table rather then ignorant banter.


Function over form.

We need a city that works, not a city that is pretty.

Many of the ideas being thrown around are to benefit inner city dwellers.

Yes because modernism has worked so well in the past.

[yeahlow34]

Literally astounded at how short-sighted some people are.

Terry, I think I love you.

[Lump]

What part about is half assed? Since when are things not built to a budget?

I asked for a solution from YOU because clearly you're some sort of genius that has it all figured out.

Seriously if you're going to argue with me at least sit down and bring some REALISTIC and INFORMED opinions to the table rather then ignorant banter.
.
the bit thats half assed is closing riverside drive without a viable solution - isnt that obvious..

i didnt say things werent built to budget, I meant change to budget to include a viable transport corridor thru this development.

tell me how this development is going to improve public transport with all the busses that are going to have a main feed road into and out of the esplanade busport cut off because they cant easily go east/west along riverside drv.

and you still didnt tell me why my idea was not possible, so drop the personal attack bs and have a reasonable discussion about this if you can

[yeahlow34]

and you still didnt tell me why my idea was not possible

Anything is possible, at a cost. Looking at SERIOUS $$$ to sink a road in that vicinity, as you encounter water at a very shallow depth. Look at the budget for the train line being sunk.

Also, there will be an alternative to Riverside Drive. but as per usual, you change anything in Perth and people fucking whinge and whinge and whinge. When it's complete however, they claim they were supporting it 'from the beggining'.

No wonder we're becoming a city of fat pingpingpingpings. Any excuse to drive instead of use public tranport/walk.

[Halle Terry]

the bit thats half assed is closing riverside drive without a viable solution - isnt that obvious..

i didnt say things werent built to budget, I meant change to budget to include a viable transport corridor thru this development.

tell me how this development is going to improve public transport with all the busses that are going to have a main feed road into and out of the esplanade busport cut off because they cant easily go east/west along riverside drv.

and you still didnt tell me why my idea was not possible, so drop the personal attack bs and have a reasonable discussion about this if you can

I haven't told you why it's not possible because I don't know, I wasn't on the design committee and I haven't had first hand knowledge dealing with this - but what I do know is that many very qualified people worked on this project and I have enough faith in them to know that they would of accessed every possible solution to work around this, so if here it is:

"Perth Waterfront will result in a number of changes to Perth’s existing transport network, with new infrastructure ensuring the locality is one of the most publicly accessible parts of the metropolitan area connected to bus, train, CAT, ferry, cycle and pedestrian networks.

The removal of Riverside Drive will enable moving away from higher volume, higher speed roads to lower speed shared-use city centre roads that are safer for cyclists and pedestrians. Changes to the road network will be made to improve the connectivity of peripheral roads, particularly the two-way conversion of Riverside Drive between William Street and the Point Lewis Rotary.

The Public Transport Authority, Main Roads WA and the Department of Transport have been involved in the planning for the development over several years and will continue to be closely involved as the project is implemented.

Extensive traffic modelling has been completed and transport agencies are working together with the City of Perth to prepare an integrated CBD transport plan that will meet community needs to 2031. The plan is due for completion in the second half of 2012."

"How will the Waterfront project affect motorists wishing to travel to and from the eastern and the western Suburbs?
The Graham Farmer Freeway was constructed with the intention of catering for this movement and to eventually provide three lanes of traffic each-way rather than two. This will provide more capacity for East-West transit across the city. Traffic may also still use Riverside Drive, Mounts Bay Road, The Esplanade to make these east-west movements."

http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/Projects/Perth-Waterfront/About-the-Project/Transport/

[Lump]

Anything is possible, at a cost. Looking at SERIOUS $$$ to sink a road in that vicinity, as you encounter water at a very shallow depth. Look at the budget for the train line being sunk.

Also, there will be an alternative to Riverside Drive. but as per usual, you change anything in Perth and people fucking whinge and whinge and whinge. When it's complete however, they claim they were supporting it 'from the beggining'.

No wonder we're becoming a city of fat pingpingpingpings. Any excuse to drive instead of use public tranport/walk.

yes, i realise its expensive & i allready pointed out that was done for the train line nearby, but at least this could be done open cut and not tunnel bored.
what is the alternative to RV, i heard it was a 3rd lane each way thru the northbridge tunnel?


i use public transport 5 days a week to get to the city & even on weekends, but not everyone lives 5km out like i do

[Lump]

I haven't told you why it's not possible because I don't know, I wasn't on the design committee and I haven't had first hand knowledge dealing with this - but what I do know is that many very qualified people worked on this project and I have enough faith in them to know that they would of accessed every possible solution to work around this, so if here it is:

"Perth Waterfront will result in a number of changes to Perth’s existing transport network, with new infrastructure ensuring the locality is one of the most publicly accessible parts of the metropolitan area connected to bus, train, CAT, ferry, cycle and pedestrian networks.

The removal of Riverside Drive will enable moving away from higher volume, higher speed roads to lower speed shared-use city centre roads that are safer for cyclists and pedestrians. Changes to the road network will be made to improve the connectivity of peripheral roads, particularly the two-way conversion of Riverside Drive between William Street and the Point Lewis Rotary.

The Public Transport Authority, Main Roads WA and the Department of Transport have been involved in the planning for the development over several years and will continue to be closely involved as the project is implemented.

Extensive traffic modelling has been completed and transport agencies are working together with the City of Perth to prepare an integrated CBD transport plan that will meet community needs to 2031. The plan is due for completion in the second half of 2012."

"How will the Waterfront project affect motorists wishing to travel to and from the eastern and the western Suburbs?
The Graham Farmer Freeway was constructed with the intention of catering for this movement and to eventually provide three lanes of traffic each-way rather than two. This will provide more capacity for East-West transit across the city. Traffic may also still use Riverside Drive, Mounts Bay Road, The Esplanade to make these east-west movements."

http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/Projects/Perth-Waterfront/About-the-Project/Transport/
that doesnt really tell me much at all, its all very general.

especially this bit- "The removal of Riverside Drive will enable moving away from higher volume, higher speed roads to lower speed shared-use city centre roads"

i dont use the tunnel, but from what i hear it should have been 3 lanes with the peak hours traffic we have allready years ago

[Halle Terry]

Here's a more comprehensive document, I really can't be fucked reading through it right now though:

http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/Documents/Perth-Waterfront/Transport-Information-Sheet.pdf