Projects & Discussions | Perth Waterfront | Urban Renewal

[RallyOz19]

Originally Posted by Sanj

Julian lives in country WA.

Of course he does!

[BartBart]

Originally Posted by izza

So the Riverside Drv argument is simply a case of Perth driver impationtness? You will have to drive a futher 400m to get to the freeway.
Also will Mounts Bay Rd be reconfigured to be 2 way to help the west bound traffic access the freeway? This would make sense and would be relativity easy to implement.

EDIT: Looking at the masterpaln it seems to show Mounts Bay Rd being two lanes

Looking at the plan, I think cars heading west might be able to use the road next to the northern side of the inlet, if they are heading towards the fwy. I suspect that it will be low speed though. Heading in the opposite direction I think cars won't be able to right turn onto that road, so they will have to go via The Esplanade.

http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/Documents/P...Masterplan.pdf

[RallyOz19]

Originally Posted by docker

i was driving through the city today and got thinking about this whole gatekeeper bashing.

but besides from the obvious reason (of making the city looking bigger and cooler) what is the benefit of having a tall tower as proposed over a low rise building that could have the same floor space? shorter buildings waste less floor space with elevators and stairwells (which is why they are exempt from plot ratio's). they are better to prevent wind tunnelling, and companies are prefering larger floor-spaces.

and shouldn't we be more concerned about the street level activity and the happiness of the workers in the waterfront than the height of the buildings, which most of europe probably suggests low rise is good?

The project isn't viable with low-rise because it would take roughly the same amount of groundwork for less pay-off, so any waterfront project must be highrise. As for having the same floorspace, that's not possible with the kind of floorspace being proposed. The floorplates of the "example" buildings in the concept plan are actually quite large, although the renders make them appear slender. VERY large floorplates (like in a groundscraper) are more likely to kill activity because there isn't any street access to the middle.

The street level activity will be determined by the quality of the podiums, which are quite substantial in the concept plan. A good podium can make the pedestrian forget there is even a taller building above, although there aren't any examples of this in Perth yet.

[PD]

Originally Posted by docker

i was driving through the city today and got thinking about this whole gatekeeper bashing.

but besides from the obvious reason (of making the city looking bigger and cooler) what is the benefit of having a tall tower as proposed over a low rise building that could have the same floor space? shorter buildings waste less floor space with elevators and stairwells (which is why they are exempt from plot ratio's). they are better to prevent wind tunnelling, and companies are prefering larger floor-spaces.

and shouldn't we be more concerned about the street level activity and the happiness of the workers in the waterfront than the height of the buildings, which most of europe probably suggests low rise is good?

NIIIIIIIIMMMBBBBYYYYY!!!!

[desperaterobots]

BE MORE LIKE EUROPE is an awesome idea, except low rise residential in Europe would be significantly denser than anything new that would be built in Perth. In central Paris you'd be happy with a combined bathroom/shower closet, a loft bed and a kitchennette built into a cabinet from the 1890s. In Perth after all the legislated minimum space requirements and costs to build the thing, from the very beginning the asking price on the propery is going to be such that buyers will expect more space than would be viable for a 'low-rise' waterfront, if you also want to be as inclusive as possible, to have vibrancy and avoid the ghost town stuff.

Docklands is pretty gross though, I wonder how similar this project will wind up being.

[samboy]

docklands is a dream compared to how this will turn out. Don't expect miracles.

[jackso]

Docklands is not well connected to the city. I think this will be quite different.

[BartBart]

I am personally expecting middle-of-the-road results. Ok - but fairly disappointing architecturally, etc. The "better than grass" or "it is the best we can expect in Perth" sort of result. And that is assuming that the Grasskeepers don't get their way in watering it down.

[PD]

I am an optimist with this one.
Expecting great things but a slow time line.

[fast_fokker]

So has Future Perth formally rebutted some of these wacky arguments put forward by the grasskeepers (love the pun), say in the press?

[BartBart]

On the radio I think and the occasional comment in the newspaper. Probably due a full Opinion article considering how much anti-ones they have had in the West.

[ryan79]

Originally Posted by fast_fokker

Evidance??? They don't need it... They have clearly taken a leaf from the Tony Abbot book of public utterances, just throw as much unsubstantiated shit around and some will eventually stick...

Not sure why you guys are getting your shorts in such a bunch over this group if they are as irrelevant and as mistaken as you seem to be indicating.

Unfortunately no one is irrelevant if they continually get into the mainstream media.

[ozaway]

Originally Posted by ryan79

If there was anything worth looking for it would have/should have been done by now. Just another time wasting strategy.

Complete Dick!
How would you know if you don't look? here am I thinking it was WA pollies. No - it's the people who vote for pollies that think we have no history worth examining.
Worse than clueless.

[ozaway]

Originally Posted by wexford

I don't recall anyone screaming for a chance to dig around when the belltower was constructed, and that's in a far more potentially interesting archaeological location.

I was looking around for some photos and came across this site which is both interesting and amusing: http://www.lifeonperth.com/swan-river-reclamation.htm

Brilliant. Don't often come across someone so proud of their ignorance!
If they'd had an archaeological survey done of the ground beneath the proposed belltower - they would have been examining the river bottom. Not a lot of late Georgian colonial activity went on there.
As the Irish say: thicker than shit in a bottle.

[Sanj]

Originally Posted by ozaway

Complete Dick!

Worse than clueless.

Originally Posted by ozaway

Brilliant. Don't often come across someone so proud of their ignorance!

As the Irish say: thicker than shit in a bottle.

keep going!

[..adam]

I agree with ozaway about the archaeology thing. It's not like they could just go and start digging up the esplanade at any other time (not that I'd care if they did, but some people get upset about these things).

[PD]

Originally Posted by ..adam

I agree with ozaway about the archaeology thing. It's not like they could just go and start digging up the esplanade at any other time (not that I'd care if they did, but some people get upset about these things).

I it really was a historical extravaganza I dont see why the wouldnt have already attempted to excavate a portion of it.
It is only grass and would not have caused much of a fuss if they had done it before.
In fact it would have created a point of interest along the esplanade if anything, a team working to find lost history.

[ryan79]

Originally Posted by ozaway

Complete Dick!
How would you know if you don't look? here am I thinking it was WA pollies. No - it's the people who vote for pollies that think we have no history worth examining.
Worse than clueless.

My point, you complete cunt, is why hasn't there been a push to "look" at this site if it is believed it may contain historical artefacts until now?

Waterfront plans have been put forward many times with no one talking about an archeological survey before. Why now? Why wait until a design has finally been approved and about to get underway, including awarding contracts and projecting timelines, to now want to have a dig around?

Too much of a clue I believe is the problem.

[samboy]

No need to look for anything. I can supply a few syringes, some broken glass and preserved dog shit. They can thank me later for saving them all that trouble.

[ryan79]

Originally Posted by ..adam

I agree with ozaway about the archaeology thing. It's not like they could just go and start digging up the esplanade at any other time (not that I'd care if they did, but some people get upset about these things).

I'm not sure why not. If there really was the possibility of historical items to be recovered then it should have been done by now.