Perth Waterfront

[fixed]

Change happens, or even Stuff happens. With the Perth Waterfront we are seeing the city "embrace the river, but we are also seeing Perth systematically remove east-west transit routes across the city block.
St Georges Terrace is being remodelled to make it even more dangerous for cyclists to negotiate, even though The City of Perth are trying to make the City more friendly for people who ride bikes.
Due to the ped malls - Murray St and Hay St are not well suited for cross town riding.
Wellington St will remain a building site for a few more years and Roe St is going to be subject to major disruption also due to the Northbridge Link project.
Now Riverside Drive is being removed.


A bridge is being planned that will cope with pedestrian and cycle use, will we see the bridge succumb to CoP cycle hating like the Trafalgar Bridge in East Perth? The bridge itself looks unnecessarily convoluted until one realises it is in that form to enable stinkboats to access the jetty in the excavated basin. A separate direct cycle only bridge is need here for efficient safe cycle use, separating pedestrians and recreational cyclists from commuting cyclists.

There is no appreciation for the need for cyclists to have access to efficient and safe transit routes across this city, and there is nothing coming out Department of Planning, WAPC, CoP to indicate this is going to change.

[HappyHumber]

Arrgh.. dammit.. I couldn't find it for a minute.. but Dicky's Bell (end) Tower is still there.

[fixed]

Arrgh.. dammit.. I couldn't find it for a minute.. but Dicky's Bell (end) Tower is still there.

and the people who move into the inner city and complain about noise (pubs, concerts, people, traffic) they'll have the bell-tower shut down in three months of moving in

[HappyHumber]

That's progress

What's wrong with all the open park land that's in the area anyway? Greedy bloody developers with their tongues down the Councillors trousers.

[jet-ski]

Hm, good thing the Swan never floods....

Getting rid of Riverside Drive is more of a disadvantage to motorists I would have thought. They are really cutting down on the East-West roads, St Georges will be a non stop jam - fine by me, I will just filter.

[sagara0510]

what the heck have they done to riverside drive?

there goes the nice tailwind sprint to the bell tower on the weekend ride

[HappyHumber]

there goes the nice tailwind sprint to the bell tower on the weekend ride

Nah.. just get one of these:

[pickle]

what the heck have they done to riverside drive?

there goes the nice tailwind sprint to the bell tower on the weekend ride

We could set some ramps up so that if you get up enough speed, you could jump clear across the new inlet! How's that for a sprint finish

[sagara0510]

there goes the nice tailwind sprint to the bell tower on the weekend ride

Nah.. just get one of these:

lol i like

i'd have to change those wheels to carbon clinchers tho

[HappyHumber]

there goes the nice tailwind sprint to the bell tower on the weekend ride

We could set some ramps up so that if you get up enough speed, you could jump clear across the new inlet! How's that for a sprint finish

Yeah, with some pegs & shocks.. you could like get 3 feet of air! Sweet!!!



Alright, alright.. time for me to get back in my box. This was never my thread

[giwi2]

I suspect the works will not happen for another 24 monthes knowing how the wheels of Govt turn. A good example is how long EPRA has been taking with the Riverside (formerly called gateway) development at the western end of the causeway. That has been going on in the background fro 10 years now.

And to further strengthen that I reckon that the new Combined Redevelopent Authority currently proposed for kicking off early next year will get the gig of driving this one. Mainly cos redevelopment authorities have their own planning powers and therefore are supposed to be able to drive the redevelopment process faster than via Council and WAPC approvals process.

Watch and wait as it bogs down in the boggy sediments its supposed to be reclaiming

[rustguard]

what an eyesore compared to the uncluttered foreshore we have now, once it goes up will be impossible to take down. The corruption in our government astounds me

[RobertFrith]

What's wrong with all the open park land that's in the area anyway? Greedy bloody developers with their tongues down the Councillors trousers.

This is nothing more than the state government raising an ugly lump of quick cash. I love the way the artist's impression points out all the "features" meant to get the public excited and the way those features are dwarfed by the real reason this is happening - no less than 10 towers right on the river, the largest of which looks to be 40 storeys high. Needless to say the towers don't warrant a mention in version you and I see.

Barnett seems pretty excited about it, he's ponied up $270M quick as you like (ABC report here). He knows he's getting it all back though. Remember this is the guy that was happy to see wall to wall residential development along and to within 50 metres of Port and Leighton Beaches a decade ago.

We seriously need to get over our envy of Hong Kong and Darling Harbour. Perth's thing is open space, be prepared to fight for it you you wanna keep it.

[RollerBird]

So they're severing major roads and paths so they can unclaim premium land that they had previously claimed and waste it on a stinky fetid water drain in order to emulate every other city on the planet in the hope that it will somehow make Perth different and more attractive? *facepalm*

[Kalgrm]

Perth is already different to every other waterside city - it has great public park space on the river. (+1 to the facepalm)

As for not being cycle friendly across town - guess it's just time for us to make sure we claim the lane all the time. If every cyclist did this on every trip, they'd soon find a better way to accommodate us.

I wonder how the stink boats get through that bridge?

Cheers,
Graeme

[casual_cyclist]

That's progress

What's wrong with all the open park land that's in the area anyway? Greedy bloody developers with their tongues down the Councillors trousers.

Not that I am defending developers or the council but my understanding is that this is being driven by the state government, not developers and not the council.

@kalgrm you might get a better idea about boats from this image http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/day06big.jpg

[casual_cyclist]

This is nothing more than the state government raising an ugly lump of quick cash.

I think it is a lot more than that. It's not like they are trying to develop the entire waterfront from King's Park to East Perth.

[fixed]

This is nothing more than the state government raising an ugly lump of quick cash.

I think it is a lot more than that. It's not like they are trying to develop the entire waterfront from King's Park to East Perth.

Well actually they are going to change a large chunk of it in addition to the Waterfront (fetid unflushed stinkboat pond).

East Perth - Riverside http://www.epra.wa.gov.au/Projects/Riverside/
Point Fraser - commercial precinct (99year lease) bridge to Heirisson Island
http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/web/Council/ ... velopment/

[casual_cyclist]

Well, I think that it is a great project. I am a bit sick of people knocking new developments. Perth is growing fast and we already have urban sprawl from Two Rocks in the north to Port Bouvard in the south. If you didn't know, that is around 150km. The answer to Perth's increasing population is not more urban sprawl. People living in the outer suburbs are not going to realistically cycle commute to work in the City, so that isn't good for cyclists either. We need much smarter ways of accommodating our population and yet any time multi-story development is proposed Perth is going to become another Gold Coast or Hong Kong.

Maybe we should be a bit more envious of Hong Kong. They manage to accommodate a population of 7 million in 1,104 km². Perth on the other hand is struggling to squeeze a population of 1.6 million in 5,386 km². I am not saying we should turn Perth into Hong Kong. However, we could be smart and take some good ideas from there and use them in our own way here. The answer to Perth's increasing population is not more urban sprawl. It's past the time to be smarter than that.

[fixed]

The answer to Perth's increasing population is not more urban sprawl. It's past the time to be smarter than that.

Check Richard Weller and BoomTown 2050
how to replicate all the infrastructure we have now for 1.5m and double it by 2050 - roads, schools, water gas, power infrastructure, public transport etc etc.

The answer has to be radicalised increased urban density, not overcapitalised strata blocks, where we have 1/4 acre block being subdivided into three or four blocks they should be heading to consolidated superblocks with very high densities.

Achieving that is not going to happen under Directions 2031.

[crazycanuck]

Found this Perth blog today http://www.6000times.com/

+1 for Boomtown 2050

[RobertFrith]

The answer to Perth's increasing population is not more urban sprawl. It's past the time to be smarter than that.

It is time to be smarter about population density. The city foreshore plan will do nothing to address sprawl though. High and medium density housing around rail lines will. haven't noticed hundreds of millions being splashed about there though...
The foreshore plan owes nothing to responsible urban planning and everything to cashing up a government that fancies running another term.

[casual_cyclist]

The answer to Perth's increasing population is not more urban sprawl. It's past the time to be smarter than that.

It is time to be smarter about population density. The city foreshore plan will do nothing to address sprawl though. High and medium density housing around rail lines will. haven't noticed hundreds of millions being splashed about there though...
The foreshore plan owes nothing to responsible urban planning and everything to cashing up a government that fancies running another term.

Higher densities around train stations is a practical solution and essential for Perth's future. Case studies from around the world demonstrates that it really does work.

[rustguard]

but my understanding is that this is being driven by the state government, not developers and not the council

Haha Good onr mate, thats the funniest thing I have heard this week. roflmas.
Man you crack me up!

[rustguard]

It's not like they are trying to develop the entire waterfront from King's Park to East Perth.

Any one been riding along the river at north fremantle notice the massive development there, nothing wrong with the buildings but the location destroys the nature of the river front.