This is an archive. The forum is not taking new registrations or allowing new discussion, despite what the buttons might suggest.
Melbourne: Council backs transport tunnels
The tunnel solution may seem evident to most people living in important cities (by their density, business, industrial development, access to services etc.). From Santiago, to Stockholm, Lisbon and Vancouver, to Ankara and Barcelona, the citizens of these cities enjoy a first class, or at least a regular transport service, which in most cases (as for the cities cited above), include an underground (Metro).
Underground transport improves efficiency, which in turns promotes the concept of public transport. An efficient public transport needs investment. It does not rely on 'coercing' or 'educating' people into using public transportpeople opt for public transport when this is a real option. Underground tunnelsassuming that these included good public transport serviceassist cities in becoming pedestrian friendly, as the traffic above is reduced and the speed slower.
The following article discusses this possibility. It aims to address congestion, and opens up more holistic considerations regarding the upgrading of the rail system, connectivity, and the notion of a pedestrian friendly city.
I find it concerning, that lobby and financiers may welcome the potential for business interest by the implementation of a road toll, above the interest of the public. In a rich country like Australia, with constant budget surpluseswhy is it that what have such an underdeveloped notion of what public transport should be?
The following article is one of the first (I have seen), discussing this possibility.
Underground transport improves efficiency, which in turns promotes the concept of public transport. An efficient public transport needs investment. It does not rely on 'coercing' or 'educating' people into using public transportpeople opt for public transport when this is a real option. Underground tunnelsassuming that these included good public transport serviceassist cities in becoming pedestrian friendly, as the traffic above is reduced and the speed slower.
The following article discusses this possibility. It aims to address congestion, and opens up more holistic considerations regarding the upgrading of the rail system, connectivity, and the notion of a pedestrian friendly city.
I find it concerning, that lobby and financiers may welcome the potential for business interest by the implementation of a road toll, above the interest of the public. In a rich country like Australia, with constant budget surpluseswhy is it that what have such an underdeveloped notion of what public transport should be?
The following article is one of the first (I have seen), discussing this possibility.
Find this article: The AgeCouncil backs people-friendly transport tunnels
Royce Millar
June 15, 2007
THE traffic tangle that is Princes Street and Alexandra Parade in Melbourne's inner north would be transformed into a pedestrian-friendly boulevard under a Melbourne City Council scheme for a major underground traffic tunnel.
In its submission to the Sir Rod Eddington-led inquiry into a new transport link between Melbourne's east and west, the council has supported a tunnel, while stressing that such a project should include rail between Parkville and Doncaster
The council has also called for an ambitious new north-south underground rail line between Parkville and South Yarra, and a light rail line between Docklands and Footscray.
Council planning committee chairwoman Catherine Ng said that with the Port of Melbourne growing and EastLink to open soon, traffic would pour into the northern suburbs in ever greater numbers.
"The road network in the area simply does not have the capacity to meet our future freight needs without major incursion into Royal Park, Melbourne Cemetery or the University of Melbourne," she said. "Under these circumstances, a road freight tunnel is an attractive option for the future it would give the streets above back to the people."
But the city council's view is not necessarily shared by "the people". In its submission to the inquiry, the Collingwood and Abbotsford Residents' Association has called for the State Government to act on an earlier government study that found a new east-west road link was not necessary.
"We are disappointed that this proposition is being raised again. It has very significant implications for residential amenity in these two suburbs, but also broader implications for the sustainability and liveability of our city," says the submission.
Lord Mayor John So said transport projects, including the tunnels, were vital for Melbourne's future liveability, and would "solve our current problems and give Melbourne room to grow without choking on its own traffic. Our suggestions are driven by the realities of peak oil, climate change, road congestion and Melbourne's continued growth projected at 3 per cent out to 2020."
The council's submission is in line with its 2006 Transport Strategy Moving People and Freight policy, and follows its on-again, off-again support for the east-west road tunnel idea.
Debate about a road tunnel, which would almost certainly be a multibillion-dollar toll road, is building as the Eddington inquiry progresses and transport groups, politicians and infrastructure companies weigh in.
The council's submission, which does not take a position on tolls, will be welcomed by the road lobby and financiers such as Macquarie Bank and ABN Amro, keen for a major new toll road in Melbourne. But it will anger others, including local Labor MPs such as the federal frontbencher Lindsay Tanner and state member for Coburg, Carlo Carli.
Howdy, Stranger!