RAIL - Back On Track Forum

^

Plenty of room for improvement! 

Important to recognize that our current urban form and trip profile is not a "constant" that needs to be factored in! It is purely the result of the poor city and transport planning in SEQ over last 50 years.

The trips of tomorrow in a multi-mil city are vastly different from those today! Being multi-modal is about changing our trips just as much as change the mode!

QuoteImportant to recognize that our current urban form and trip profile is not a "constant" that needs to be factored in! It is purely the result of the poor city and transport planning in SEQ over last 50 years.

The trips of tomorrow in a multi-mil city are vastly different from those today! Being multi-modal is about changing our trips just as much as change the mode!

I think pursuing a TOD-only/TAD-only approach is not going to be enough to get to this objective.

The areas that are non-TOD need to be rezoned to allow single family homes (SFH) to allow duplexes by default. I believe the NZ Government has done exactly this, abolishing SFH zoning for the whole country.

New Zealand has adopted a radical rezoning plan to cut house prices – could it work in Australia?

QuoteCouncils won't be able to block townhouses or apartments under a sweeping reform aimed at improving affordability – but will it work? And could the idea cross the Tasman?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/15/new-zealand-has-adopted-a-radical-rezoning-plan-to-cut-house-prices-could-it-work-in-australia

Who said anything about a TOD?  The City of Vancouver has leading practice City Plan which allows a mix of housing, walkable suburbs, safe cycling and transit oriented neighbourhoods.  It is this approach to City Planning that will change our travels/trip habits.

Vancouver is also expensive to live in. If you want to enjoy these amenities you'll have to pay much higher rent or buy a more expensive place.

Brisbane is infrastructure rich but service poor. The "more infrastructure will fix it" is the narrative that needs to shift. It's a quality of supply issue and lack of utilisation, which the binary comparison clearly shows.

Lots could be achieved by doing more supply along the lines of the plans or maps that yourself and myself have put forward.

We do need to look at cable cars/gondolas though.

Gold Coast is taking the lead with Mt Tamborine. Although they need to look at Mount Cootha and Mount Glorious as well. But they should look at the larger version that cater for bikes as well as passengers.

Vancouver also has LRT and trolley buses which would be nice.

The easiest thing would be to prioritise segregated bikeways. Yet, no announcements or lead on that issue either.

It will take them at 7 years or more to build just 100 KMs of new segregated bikeway, despite what is suggested by the Vancouver transit agency.

Im not sure what boundaries of Vancouver have been used, but Vancouver is about 40km wide (UBC to Coquitlam) and 27km north to south (Bottom of Richmond/Surrey, to North Vancouver)

Brisbanes 'blob' is more or less 60x60 km (Ipswich to Redlands / Beenleigh to Redcliffe)

So I think by definition there's always going to be more infrastructure in Brisbane purely because there is more distance to cover to get people into a reasonable catchment.

QuoteWe do need to look at cable cars/gondolas though.

Gold Coast is taking the lead with Mt Tamborine. Although they need to look at Mount Cootha and Mount Glorious as well. But they should look at the larger version that cater for bikes as well as passengers.

I think those are more for tourism purposes.

But it's not really the main game.  (Which is getting people to use PT/ Active travel for more day to day activities, rather than a smaller cohort going to Mt Glorious a few weekends per year.

If Vancouver has 300m public transport trips than Brisbane, building a cable car up to Mt Cootha/Mt Glorius isn't going to make us catch up.

Think about which destination in this pair has more trips generated per day for example:

-Mt Cootha
-Westfield Chermside

That should be a clue as to where improvements would have the highest impact.

That is not to say a cable car is a bad idea for a certain area.
It's more that it's not really Translink or RBoTs job to be investigating or advocating for a cable car, since it is not a significant part of the transport task.

Quote from: Gazza on March 01, 2023, 11:59:17 AMIm not sure what boundaries of Vancouver have been used, but Vancouver is about 40km wide (UBC to Coquitlam) and 27km north to south (Bottom of Richmond/Surrey, to North Vancouver)

Brisbanes 'blob' is more or less 60x60 km (Ipswich to Redlands / Beenleigh to Redcliffe)

So I think by definition there's always going to be more infrastructure in Brisbane purely because there is more distance to cover to get people into a reasonable catchment.

Yeah this confused me. I'm not sure if the "Metro Vancouver" area they're talking about includes Surrey/Langley etc., Because like Ipswich and Logan, these areas are generally considered part of the "greater Vancouver area"

Well, if the areas are different then you can compare by infrastructure density or per standardised population (e.g. stations/100,000 persons).

What about stations per sq km?

Lord Mayor must have been well and truly asleep during the 4 days in Vancouver if he thinks this is answer

Brisbane City Council to allow CBD height apartment buildings in South Brisbane increasing to 270m

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-02/qld-brisbane-sustainable-growth-plan-south-brisbane-skyscrapers/102043060

QuoteBuildings in South Brisbane will be allowed to reach as high as those the city's CBD in a major departure from previous planning limits.

Brisbane City Council (BCC) said buildings in the Kurilpa precinct, near South Bank, will now reach 274 meters in some instances, slightly higher than the highest building in the city, the Brisbane Skytower.

The previous limit for buildings in the precinct, which stretches behind South Bank and along the river near West End, was between 15 and 30 storeys.

The change comes as part of the council's Brisbane Sustainable Growth Strategy, adding a supposed 10,000 dwellings to the housing market.

Brisbane Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner told ABC Radio Brisbane that the new heights in South Brisbane would limit city sprawl and provide housing for young people.

"Density in the right areas can be the most sustainable form of growth," he said.

"We can create a precinct which I think could be our most sustainable community.

"It's got the train line, it's got the Metro coming, it's got the city glider, it's got multiple bridges. It's got great facilities, it is literally within walking distance of the CBD."

He said not every new build would be approved to reach the maximum height.

"Not every building goes to that height limit, even in the CBD. So there's always going to be a mix of different opportunities," he said.

He said industrial sites in the area would be "transitioned out".

The stretch along the river is currently home to a milk factory and a concrete plant.

"The milk factory in that prime location, I don't see it being there for the long term.

"I see that being a much better opportunity for parkland or new residential communities.

"When you see the writing on the wall that this area will transition. I think everyone will see, including the owners of the site, that this is not the best place for a milk factory, and that there are other more suitable and modern facilities that they can go to."

Precinct must be 'socially sustainable'
Mr Schrinner said changing the city plan would not happen overnight.

"It's going to happen in two stages. The first stage we're proposing is a temporary local planning instrument, which will effectively enable this to happen," he said.

"Temporary local planning instruments can last for one or two years.

"During that one or two years we'll go through the process of formally changing the Brisbane City Plan."

Mark Limb, an urban planner from QUT, said adding 10,000 new dwellings would be a big change for the area.

"I think that's going to be almost a tripling of that potential density through that area. So with that basically becomes a tripling of the demand on various services for the council," he said.

"So for road park, sewer, water, community services — all those sorts of things."

Dr Limb said the high level of public transport to the city from Kurilpa will be a good starting point, but the precinct must be "socially sustainable" as well as environmentally.

"I noticed that the mayor made comments about young people being able to live in this area and that's all well and good, but just rezoning is no guarantee of having affordable housing," he said.

"You could have 270 meters of really expensive luxury dwellings, which young people could never afford.

"Hopefully, they would be socially sustainable in that respect as well by trying to make sure there is some provision for affordable housing so that a diversity of people and workers can actually live in this in this area."

Want more local stories?
We've got an ABC News homepage for you. Adjust your settings for the right mix of local and national news.

An aerial view of ocean meeting the sandy beach and rocks of Fitzroy Island.
Read more

Mr Schrinner said the council was "certainly open" to ensuring affordable housing in the precinct, but the state government needed to make legislative change to keep it affordable.

"It is possible in theory to provide incentives for affordable housing, but there's no legislative mechanism available to us at the moment to ensure that it stays affordable," he said.

"So someone could pocket the incentive and then sell it on the private market."

He added that building more apartments to the market steadies and moderates price increases.

The thing is that even Vancouver isn't that great at urban form.  Lots of 40 storey towers sticking up out of nowhere and 2 storey builds around them.

The kind of density being raised here is not greatly different from the downtown parts of Vancouver - just that most Skytrain stops have better integration with buses and development has followed the network so it is concentrated in more useful places.  This is also a consequence of Vancouver's street grid, which can't be replicated in Brisbane.

Vancouver isn't universally great though.  A lot of the Millenium line stations in particular are in pretty useless spots next to low density housing, industrial hardstand type uses or highways, and some have open air at-grade park'n'rides that would make any QR station blush.  The Delta and Surrey are horrible and mostly comparable to places like Park Ridge.  When I was there I roamed as far out as Langley and that feels like a bigger version of Capalaba with more concrete and a casino.