Including best road structure and best future if being able to support a big population. It just interests me because most aus citys are quite compacted and are only just getting to the outskirts of where over seas city's have been ages ago. I would think we as a country could learn from other country's mistakes, but it never seems to work that way.
Which Australian city has the best Infrastructure?
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Joined
·
9,177 Posts
My Pic.
#1=Melbourne - wide streets that are under used. Has great 'bones' on which to build a great city and fit more people in.
#2=Adelaide - same as Melbourne, has great planned network of streets on which to build but needs some transport improvements, especially rail.
#3=Canberra - lots of opportunities to build on a great city plan, could be Australia's answer to Paris if we plan correctly.
#4=Rockhampton - like Adelaide its got wide streets and was originally planned to be great but needs improvements to its rail network.
#5=Perth - few challenges would make this city support a few more million people if public transport is improved and density in the inner suburbs is encouraged.
jt
#1=Melbourne - wide streets that are under used. Has great 'bones' on which to build a great city and fit more people in.
#2=Adelaide - same as Melbourne, has great planned network of streets on which to build but needs some transport improvements, especially rail.
#3=Canberra - lots of opportunities to build on a great city plan, could be Australia's answer to Paris if we plan correctly.
#4=Rockhampton - like Adelaide its got wide streets and was originally planned to be great but needs improvements to its rail network.
#5=Perth - few challenges would make this city support a few more million people if public transport is improved and density in the inner suburbs is encouraged.
jt
hmmm, yeah when i look at perth, the roads seem so wide and they planned them well, and melbourne to me seem's ok. The fact that, in melb the hole city is square makes me think that roads would link easyer and the city isnt as confusing as say sydney. With SEQ new plan coming about, i would think qld will be right up there in no time at all. But when it comes to road structure in all citys (maybe not perth) they seem very narrow and cramped, and that IMO makes for a tight feeling city. It would be awesome if the roads here where more like new york where there are so many wide roads in the middle of a really busy area. I wonder how that came about? how did newyork make it's city like this?
I don't quite understand that. Do you mean Sydney-siders en mass, as one group are in denial? The planners which involves a varying number of groups?wowsim said:
I just wish the state government would stop talking and actually do something about Sydney's horrific infrastructural problems. At the end of the day, it still seems to cope....somehow & amazingly!
Melbourne seems to have the best by far. It's almost the model city and something for all Australia to be proud of. We have numerous visiting O.S. experts telling us how Melbourne fairs well in this department too. How many times do we need to hear it before it actually sinks in?
are you serious?? of course more lanes means better transport! (road anyway) as long as there are suitably multi-laned roads at the ends of freeways and tollways! there is such a thing as building adequate roads AND adequate PT. i'm sorry but under NO stretch of the imagination are the two laned tollways in Sydney remotely adequate nor would they be if supported by better PT. maybe they would be if Sydney had a population of 2million rather than over 4!
this is true, on the other hand they don't necessarily know the transport situation better than anyone else. And with DIPNR (Department of Infrastructure and Natural Resources) essentially a political entity not overly interested in transport and the "Ministry of Transport" divided between the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Roads, the latter of which is essentially a pipe to the RTA to the exculsion of the rest of the "Ministry", it becomes little more than a political and bureaucratic pile of molasses (or quicksand or whatever metaphor you want)sirhc8 said:
Go check out LA, and then tell me that more lanes means better transport (road anyway)- they have more lanes than any place in the world and they have suitably multi-laned roads the ends of freeways and tollways.wowsim said:
As for the 2 lane way (im guessing you mean the M2), it would be STUPID (im serious). You can make it 4 lanes, but they would have to merge into 2 lanes at Lane Cove- i should know im on the bus everyday. Thats the prob, if there was another alternative like a train station, i would say as much as 50% of the traffic would be cut. Therefore it would be adequate. The prob isn't the 2 lanes its the fact that there is ONLY 2 lanes (and one bus lane) and no other option.
You should note in Europe where most of the city lanes are barley 2 lanes, with cities the size of 11 mil (Paris that i have been to and have family there) which has the great metro and RER systems and the city is fine. Its the typical (and flawed view) that more lanes built means better transport. You should know that when most of the freeways in Syd were built they were considered huge. Ok so increase all roads, add 2 lanes to each, what next in 20 yrs, add more?? Thats the flawed view and LA is now suffering, whilst cities with the same pop (NYC) is still functional and thriving with their subway system.
Sydney doesn't need more roads, it needs an adequate train system. All cities in Oz are guilty of being too car centric, its only inevitable that the probs will be faced by all unless train systems are drastically improved.
Again, sirhc8 you are spot on! :applause:
Ok well i better not hijack this thread, i've stated what i wanted to say. Like i said Melboune has the best transport followed by Perth.
Joined
·
11,950 Posts
yeah, sirch8 is on the money, wowsim is off with the fairies down Geelong way!
The Eastern, The West Gate and Tullamarine (Bell to Flmeington) would be excessive if we had a decent PT system with a mode share of about 30% (as opposed to 9% now).
The Eastern, The West Gate and Tullamarine (Bell to Flmeington) would be excessive if we had a decent PT system with a mode share of about 30% (as opposed to 9% now).
I'm sorry, you are living a dream. You cannot compare Australian cities to European cities, ESPECIALLY not Sydney. You'll note im not saying that wide roads are the solution to transport everywhere. I am saying that Sydney's tollways are not built to accomodate the traffic they need too. Full stop. that cannot be argued with. the m2 is a parking lot in peak hour and is less than 10 years old. next the m7 will be constructed, and guess what? two lanes. it too will be at or past capacity upon completion.
And you'll notice that i DID say that more lanes require outflow roads with a suitable amount of lanes also. I'm, not advocating LA style highway cities, but i am saying Sydney's tollways arent adequate. Its all well and good to point to europe and paris and say look, look, look, big cities with narrow roads and good PT.Yes i totally agree Sydney's road system would be fine if it had really good PT to back it up. Sydney doesnt have really good PT to back it up. Sydney will never have PT good enough to relieve the current traffic woes as they are. You would have to raze Sydney to the ground and rebuild it with the train and RER system of paris for the current road system to be good enough.
Since that wont happen why not take trouble to think ahead say 5 years and build a road that will actually do some good for more than a few years before a new solution is needed?
And you'll notice that i DID say that more lanes require outflow roads with a suitable amount of lanes also. I'm, not advocating LA style highway cities, but i am saying Sydney's tollways arent adequate. Its all well and good to point to europe and paris and say look, look, look, big cities with narrow roads and good PT.Yes i totally agree Sydney's road system would be fine if it had really good PT to back it up. Sydney doesnt have really good PT to back it up. Sydney will never have PT good enough to relieve the current traffic woes as they are. You would have to raze Sydney to the ground and rebuild it with the train and RER system of paris for the current road system to be good enough.
Since that wont happen why not take trouble to think ahead say 5 years and build a road that will actually do some good for more than a few years before a new solution is needed?
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!