Тёмный

Choosing Victoria’s future: 5 urban development scenarios 

Infrastructure Victoria
Подписаться 311
Просмотров 4,9 тыс.
50% 1

Infrastructure Victoria modelled 5 different, possible urban development futures for Victoria’s capital city and our largest regional cities over 30 years. We wanted to explore the impact of different city shapes on where people choose to live and work, the jobs and services they can access, how much land is used for housing, travel patterns, the impact on our environment and other outcomes.
Our research finds each scenario has advantages and disadvantages. But overall, the results tell us that more compact cities perform better on many indicators including:
• More compact cities offer businesses better opportunities to hire great staff and connect with customers and markets. Victorians would be up to $43 billion better off by 2056 with more compact cities compared to growth being dispersed across the state.
• More compact cities also mean more land for agriculture and wildlife habitat. A sprawling, dispersed city consumes an extra 30,000 hectares of land compared to a compact city - equivalent to over 12,000 times the field size of the Melbourne Cricket Ground.
• People living in dispersed cities would spend up to 70% more time in congested traffic to get to jobs and services.
• Infrastructure in a dispersed city costs the government about $41 billion more by 2056, or $59,000 extra for every new home built, compared to a compact city.
• Over 25% more people would use public transport in a more compact city than in a dispersed city.
The future shape of Melbourne and our regional cities will have big impacts for our quality of life, the economy, and the environment as Victoria grows.
Find out more at www.infrastructurevictoria.com.au

Авто/Мото

Опубликовано:

 

6 авг 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 22   
@thatguyfromdownunder
@thatguyfromdownunder 9 месяцев назад
A mix of point 2 and 4 imo. Having everything centered in Melbourne as in point 1 tips the state's focus solely on inner Melbourne. Having multiple 'CBD' centres in both Metro and regional Victoria would benefit the whole state! Melbourne will always be the centre, but to see dense, tall urban development in places like Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo and maybe even LaTrobe would do wonders for the state. Areas dubbed as 'Activity centres' inside metro Melbourne should also go the way of Parramatta and Chatswood in Sydney. Ringwood, Box Hill, Clayton, Dandenong, Sunshine, Frankston, among others, should definitely go this way too!
@thatguyfromdownunder
@thatguyfromdownunder 8 месяцев назад
@@soulsphere9242 Preferably there would be areas of mixed zoning medium density to soften the transition from skyscrapers to suburban houses, so we don't end up with some of the jarring transitions seen in places like Toronto. Pedestrian friendly areas should also be a high priority.
@jamesknight4797
@jamesknight4797 7 месяцев назад
2 and 4 don't seem mutually exclusive to me. I think a mix of those would be best.
@arkinept
@arkinept 9 месяцев назад
Compact for sure. Dull endless sprawl is not a city.
@chevrolet-poitiers9507
@chevrolet-poitiers9507 9 месяцев назад
I’d say a smaller compact with suburban centres and regional cities like Geelong, Bendigo, Wodonga, Ballarat serving as tertiary hubs.
@boggeorge
@boggeorge 6 месяцев назад
Honestly, I can see a combination of these working, particularly 2 and 4. The centre city will always be dense and thats fine. Worst case option (imo where we are at the present day) is option 3. Endless sprawl with carpark deserts and long commutes.
@littlekiwiiifruit
@littlekiwiiifruit 3 месяца назад
The year, 2056; the Airport Rail Link has finally begun construction.
@CPTE5069
@CPTE5069 7 месяцев назад
2 and 4 please - a network of consolidated, medium density cities with good connections, providing education, work, and healthcare opportunities at hubs in Melbourne and Victoria.
@PilgrimIsHere
@PilgrimIsHere 7 месяцев назад
I think a mixture of 2 and 4 would be most ideal, We have massive suburban hubs with high rise buildings and the other cities especially Geelong Ballarat and Bendigo densify and get high rises
@CommissionerManu
@CommissionerManu 4 месяца назад
1, 2 and 4!
@sancheeez
@sancheeez 7 месяцев назад
these are not mutually exclusive. The worst option for environmental use would be the Dispersed city, but I think the worst option overall would be to choose to focus on only one option.
@colehendrigan1368
@colehendrigan1368 8 месяцев назад
It will be some of all of it. Compact City leaves the periphery to the really rich or the very poor. Consolidation and Regional make the most sense to make the most of existing infrastructure (roads, rails, schools, hospitals, parks libraries, swimming pools, tennis courts and ovals) already in place. The real question is which of these scenarios builds a State of worth and with lowered GHG, more walking and cycling, lower maintenance and which one needs the most new infrastructure paid for by.....____.
@HazptMedia
@HazptMedia 8 месяцев назад
Consolidated
@AyaansCornerYT
@AyaansCornerYT 9 месяцев назад
Number 2 would be the most ideal, majority of all the historical buildings in downtown to be replaced with Skyscrapers. Very transit oriented development would be ideal. If they do number one then downtown Melbourne would be way to crowded having more then 1 million people in downtown.
@robmeagher2443
@robmeagher2443 9 месяцев назад
That video should make sure no one in government actually needs to do anything for the foreseeable future
@tdb7992
@tdb7992 9 месяцев назад
Very funny :D
@danielvanasewgen6274
@danielvanasewgen6274 9 месяцев назад
1st for sure
@themosterstoster7587
@themosterstoster7587 6 месяцев назад
NUMBER 1 IS THE ONLY 1
@blackdeckbox
@blackdeckbox 9 месяцев назад
You cant go very far if everyone is stuck in one city. CBD cannot be the ONLY place everyone wants to go to.
@bobbuliniusbotulismus7129
@bobbuliniusbotulismus7129 5 месяцев назад
As insightful as Infrastructure Victoria's modelling and recommendations are, it sadly counts for nought when we have arrogant, unaccountable governments like the current one (starting with Daniel Andrews), who completely disregard and sideline advice of bodies like Infrastructure Victoria and just unilaterally draw up reckless schemes like SRL to win votes in key areas.
@carolinec2773
@carolinec2773 3 месяца назад
This clip is totally based on a fantasy given Victoria has a debt level that's equivalent to 3 States combined! What will the State Government be doing (by way of leading by example) and moving their offices out of the Melbourne City area to other parts of Victoria, e.g. Warrnambool, Sale, Terang, Mornington? People from the city can't move to these areas due to the lack of corporate work there. Where's the State Government incentive for businesses to move regional and create Regional Jobs? Oh, I forgot, Victoria is absolutely broke!
@alanpeachey4085
@alanpeachey4085 5 месяцев назад
Australia loves destroying its history. If buildings are not heritage listed, you don’t get to see them in the future, but Melbourne has been totally destroyed and was so unique before the aspects of let’s destroy our grandfathers inheritance. It was incredibly difficult to build the buildings in Victoria in the first place, they did a marvellous job your destruction for your grandchildren future is disgraceful in all aspects and there is no regards from me only condemnation
Далее
Planning the Future of Australian Cities
12:39
Просмотров 6 тыс.
Water infrastructure in a changing climate
1:02:58
How Garden City changed Melbourne forever
9:34
Просмотров 102 тыс.
Why Moscow Is Insanely Well Designed
9:44
Просмотров 1,5 млн
Pros and Cons of Moving to Australia (An Honest Review)
18:52
This City Gets to Start From Scratch
12:03
Просмотров 308 тыс.
Did pedestrian malls ruin U.S. downtowns?
9:57
Просмотров 513 тыс.
Why Singapore Is Insanely Well Designed
13:16
Просмотров 1,7 млн
Помыла и машину, и водителя
0:18
Погрузка лентой 🍉🚜🚛
0:10
Просмотров 1,5 млн