Four years after the project&#39;s inception, Victorian Environment Minister Lily D&#39;Ambrosio has endorsed an inquiry&#39;s recommendation and found the environmental effects statement for Melbourne&#39;s Suburban Rail Loop project is acceptable.

What does this mean?&nbsp; Effectively, the Suburban Rail Loop has leaped over a major planning hurdle.

It mightn&#39;t be much of a surprise given that early works are already underway, however it is a major milestone for the project.

<a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/victorian-government-unveils-suburban-rail-loop-election-proposal">At the time it was revealed to the public in 2018</a> in the lead up to the&nbsp;Victorian state election of that same year, the project was spruiked as a rail line that would link all except for one of Melbourne&#39;s radial railway lines, taking cars off the road and enabling more intensive development in Melbourne&#39;s middle ring of suburbs.

&nbsp;

Alastair Taylor

Melbourne's Suburban Rail Loop EES gets the green light

<html><body>
The<a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/how-will-the-coronavirus-impact-australias-property-market"> COVID19 pandemic</a> has changed a lot.

Politicians are listening to experts - in the health sector, at least - and a great number of people are working from home, participating in a giant experiment that will have consequences in the residential, commercial and equally important transport spaces.

Any job that doesn't require a specific workplace (such as a retail premise, construction site or a laboratory for instance) or is not a job in the frontline/emergency and health services sector has been conducted in the employee's home.

Employers big and small are getting real-time data on the effect of working from home on their employee's productivity and vast numbers of employees are working from home for the first time, gauging whether it suits them or not.

Anecdotes started trickling through various media in April and have since turned into a steady stream of organisations - and employees - calling for a permanent change to how we work and where we work after the immediate danger of the pandemic has passed.

From jobs such as <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/telecommunications/optus-staff-to-work-from-home-permanently-20200417-p54kro">traditionally office-based contact centres</a> at one end of the spectrum to <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/professional-services/grant-thornton-kearney-reimagine-the-post-pandemic-office-20200601-p54yc8">lawyers and consultants</a> at the other end, it seems pretty clear through reporting that change is coming.

<h2>Flexibility is always welcome...</h2>

...yet not everyone will want to continue to work from home after COVID19.  To use my own anecdote that might be shared with other members of the community, prior to the pandemic, I was lucky enough to experience 100% work from office, 100% work from home.  I've also worked under a regime where - with varying layers of flexibility - I'd be split between two places during the week.  For instance 2 days a week at home, 3 days a week in an office - over a period of 15 years.

I've always favoured flexibility to isolate myself when I need to devise solutions (when I was business analyst) or use the creative side of my brain (when writing articles) because distractions - in the form of other human beings or incessant digital communication requests - don't help with my own productivity. 

Yet I could never see myself enjoying a permanent work from home experience in a medium or large-scale organisation because the casual interactions which tend to err on the side of distraction when you are accomplishing tasks that require focus - as mentioned previously - can also be beneficial in certain contexts like when you need to brainstorm ideas or decide upon weekly/monthly goal setting. 

I could also not see myself remaining interested enough in an organisation if I was forced to interact with colleagues 100% of the time over impersonal digital communications platforms.

<h2>Orthodoxy, be damned</h2>

Getting employees to their place of employment is one of the major tasks of our transport network - this is everything from those who walk or cycle to work, catch public transport or drive to their place of employment.

And in a post-COVID19 world, if the steady stream of anecdotes published throughout the media do come to fruition - that a greater number of people will be working from home, either permanently of with varying levels of flexibility - then we have an opportunity to permanently change the way we think of peak hour and the lived experience of it.

For every person who works from home, either permanently or on a flexibility arrangement, that's one less trip the transport network needs to manage.   

Yet if the bulk of people who shift to working from home do it on a set timetable, like Mondays and Fridays, the peaks would become more intense on the other working days in the week. 

The ideal scenario would be that employers rotate rosters of people who work on a flexible arrangement so that we get across the board reduction in people traveling in peak on every weekday - journeys will be more pleasant with the same level of peak services.

There's also an argument to be made the concept of a weekend or Saturday/Sunday timetable needs to be ditched or dramatically altered.  If we get the working week right - through the reduction in trips by car and public transport - squeezing more out of what we already have - then we can't have everyone take to their cars on weekends, clogging the transport network up again.

<h2>Is it time to re-think long-distance inter-city commuting?</h2>

Taking the logic of continuing to work 1 or 2 days a week in a Melbourne office or any other state capital and the remaining 3 to 4 days an employee would work from home, it follows that the employee wouldn't necessarily need to live within metropolitan Melbourne.

Since the Regional Fast Rail projects of the 2000-2010 decade came online, patronage on Vline services has grown markedly.  Excluding the astronomical growth on the Geelong long that can be attributed to outer suburban patronage growth in places like Tarneit, more people are traveling from the regional cities and towns that surround Melbourne.

Where once I would have seen the logic in planning orthodoxy that resisted inter-city commuting, and facility far more of it, when it occurs less frequently, but with more people, the argument that the regional cities will become dormitory towns for the big smoke becomes a lot harder to justify.

For the regional towns and cities, it's an opportunity to create shared workplaces which in turn will create agglomeration benefits in those towns and cities much like central Melbourne (or any other state capital) sees with all the ancillary businesses that serve office workers.  It, naturally, also benefits them from growing their respective populations which in turn would create more local jobs there as well.

For businesses with centralised offices whether it's in the CBD or a suburban node they can diversify the space they own or lease. 

Sure, you can be a cynic and point out the bean-counters in organisations will likely push for a reduction in office space if a large number of a business' employees start working remotely to save on outlays, but there'd also be an argument those workplaces could evolve and adapt to tasks they'll need to facilitate when the remote employees are on. their weekly jaunt in the office.

For capital cities, it means the pressure on housing sectors mightn't be as great with regional cities shouldering a much higher portion of the population burden.

For Victoria and to an extent New South Wales but not realistically any other state, this would mean the transport focus should shift to increasing capacity for regional services (which is a focus in Victoria and belatedly now in NSW) and connecting nodes in metropolitan areas so journeys can be facilitated by public transport rather than existing road networks.

That's one logic path - there may be others, however everyone should prepare for orthodoxy to be challenged in a post-COVID19 world.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Refurbished_Vline_Vlocity_Interior.jpg">wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

What should happen after The Great Work From Home Experiment concludes?

<html><body>
A major planning milestone was achieved last night when the City of Melbourne's Future Melbourne Committee unanimously backed the planning application for the Southbank by Beulah development - a proposal that if built would be Melbourne and Australia's next tallest building.

The UNS + Cox design was a result of one of Melbourne's most prominent design competitions to date and has been covered extensively here on Urban.com.au. The planning application was lodged back in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/beulah-international-submits-planning-application-for-southbank-by-beulah">August 2019</a>.

While the ultimate aye or nay is signed off by the Victorian Planning Minister - as the responsible authority for planning application of this scale, the City of Melbourne is a referral authority, and their endorsement will go a long way in helping the Minister make his decision.

There are some other planning hurdles to work through. Notably, aviation authorities are yet to sign off on the proposal as the East Tower's height - 365.1 metres - breaches the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/aviation-impact-on-building-development-in-the-melbourne-cbd">PANS-OPS</a> controls for Southbank.

The FMC meeting noted that should aviation authorities reject the proposal as it stands, it is expected the east tower's height will likely be reduced by 11 metres in order to comply with aviation regulations government Essendon airport as they stand.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/sbb2_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Southbank by Beulah. Image: UNS/Cox, Beulah"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="497" src="/s3/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/sbb2_0.jpg?itok=GzPqY2vQ" title="Southbank by Beulah. Image: UNS/Cox, Beulah" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Southbank by Beulah. Image: UNS/Cox, Beulah</figcaption></figure>341 one-bedroom apartments, 263 two-bedroom apartments, 146 three-bedroom apartments, 24 four-bedroom apartments and 15 penthouses will see the total apartments to 789 in the East tower. In terms of hotel rooms, there will be 202 and a further 120 hotel residences in the west tower, sending the total number of residential and hotel units over the 1000 mark.

The development will include just over 27,000 square metres of net leasable floor space for office uses. It will consist of over 32,000 square metres of gross lettable area for retail uses that includes food and drink premises and a supermarket.

A childcare centre will be present in the development which will take up 1,200 square metres of the net leasable area - enough space for 100 children. An exhibition centre (1438 square metres) and conservatory (1,758 square metres) are also included in the planning application.

The east tower, subject to aviation and Ministerial approval, will be 365.1 metres high over 102 levels.  The west tower will measure 250 metres across 59 levels.

For perspective, the west tower will be approximately the same height as the 80s-built Rialto Tower at 525 Collins Street. The east tower - subject to aviation approval - will be approximately 48 metres taller than Australia 108, the tower that is in the final stages of construction and the current tallest building in Melbourne.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/sbb3.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Southbank by Beulah. Image: UNS/Cox, Beulah"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="425" src="/s3/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/sbb3.jpg?itok=FWwrfD3P" title="Southbank by Beulah. Image: UNS/Cox, Beulah" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Southbank by Beulah. Image: UNS/Cox, Beulah</figcaption></figure>Councillor Rohan Leppert endorsed the application,

<blockquote>
"I think the thought that has gone into the ground plane and the multistory activation - with the public access not just to the ground floor but further up the fragmented podium, if you like - of the building is brilliantly well thought through."
</blockquote>

Lord Mayor Sally Cap highlighted the accessibility and pedestrian thoroughfare benefits of the proposal - especially as it will create a thoroughfare for pedestrians from City Road, through the site and Freshwater Place and the river.

<blockquote>
"I think that those sorts of ways of providing accessibility through what could otherwise be viewed as fortresses in the sky, are really important and they do add considerably [...] to the sense of vibrancy and human activity."
</blockquote>

The Lord Mayor also noted council officers recommended several conditions and that they are aimed at improving the outcomes for Southbank and the city while retaining the vision for the project.

To view the Committee's deliberations, you can check out <a href="https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/about-council/committees-meetings/meeting-archive/pages/Future-Melbourne-Committee-3-March-2020.aspx">this video</a> on the City of Melbourne's website, the Southbank by Beulah discussion starts at 32 minutes and 36 seconds into the video.
</body></html>

City of Melbourne unanimously endorses Southbank by Beulah planning application

<html><body>
The Victorian Premier, Daniel Andrews, and Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Jacinta Allan, today inspected tunnel boring machines at the site of the future Anzac station on St. Kilda Road. The future station site is where the third and fourth TBMs will soon begin their run toward the rapidly evolving eastern portal in South Yarra.

Named Millie and Alice after Victoria's First female MP (Millie Peacock) and a First World War hero (Alice Appleford), the TBMs will be lowered into the station box underneath St. Kilda Road. When construction is complete on the TBMs, and the final excavations for Anzac station occur, the TBMs will start their first run toward the eastern portal in South Yarra.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/6zerizf.png" rel="gallery-all" title="The eastern portal for the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project is now visible in South Yarra. Image: RPV"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="326" src="/s3/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/6zerizf.png?itok=Ldi9EIkK" title="The eastern portal for the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project is now visible in South Yarra. Image: RPV" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The eastern portal for the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project is now visible in South Yarra. Image: RPV</figcaption></figure>Once both TBMs reach South Yarra at the extraction point (bottom left in the picture above) the TBMs will be deconstructed, trucked back to Anzac station, reconstructed in the station pit and then sent on their final journey toward Town Hall (Flinders Street) station.

The media event today marked five years since works began on the project which started with an early works package kicking off in 2016.

<blockquote>
Five years ago work started on the biggest public transport project ib Victoria's history - today, we're getting it done with the final tunnel boring machines being assembled
<cite>Premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews</cite>
</blockquote>

Meanwhile, the first two TBMs which began their journey last year are nearing the end of their first run from Arden Station to the western portal adjacent to South Kensington station. 

According to the latest estimate at the time of writing, TBM Joan has dug for over 1km and installed 633 rings inside the tunnel.  TBM Meg, which is roughly 300m behind Joan, has tunnelled 764 metres and thus far installed 444 rings to line the tunnel.

The Metro Tunnel's Facebook page posted the image below that depicts the completed tunnel that TBM Joan has created.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/metro_joan1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Completed tunnel after TBM Joan has gone through. Image: Metro Tunnel/facebook"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="385" src="/s3/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/metro_joan1.jpg?itok=2TBGjhlH" title="Completed tunnel after TBM Joan has gone through. Image: Metro Tunnel/facebook" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Completed tunnel after TBM Joan has gone through. Image: Metro Tunnel/Facebook</figcaption></figure>The Metro Tunnel project will connect the Pakenham/Cranbourne lines in Melbourne's south-east with the Sunbury line in Melbourne's west, creating a high-frequency cross-town service on larger trains that currently operate services on Melbourne's network.

A big chunk of the Level Crossing Removal Project in the south-east can also be associated with the significant upgrades and new tunnel construction that has been ongoing for 4-5 years.

The overhead power system that gives trains traction power has been upgraded, and a new signalling system that takes one or two-generational leaps over and above what currently keeps trains safely running will also be installed.

While initially promised for a 2019 roll-out, the new HCMTs - High Capacity Metro Trains - have been doing introduction tests firstly between Berwick and Pakenham late last year and the trains have also been sighted doing tests on the Werribee line after dark.

The Sunbury line, after the Metro Tunnel is completed, will provide a one-seat journey to major employment centres and future transport interchanges in Clayton and the wider Monash NEIC. 

Conversely, the south-east of Melbourne will have a one-seat journey to Footscray and Sunshine - which is also an NEIC - and assuming the upcoming Melbourne Airport Rail Link uses the Metro Tunnel, south-east Melburnians will likely have a one-seat journey to Melbourne Airport.
</body></html>

More TBMs about to get underway on Melbourne Metro project

<html><body>
The Suburban Rail Loop corridor now appears on maps in Melbourne's long-term strategic planning document suite Plan Melbourne after amendments to all related planning schemes were gazetted by the Victorian Minister for Planning.

Amendment VC168 as it is known "is required to facilitate the delivery of the Suburban Rail Loop (SRL) by the Victorian Government" according to the analytical report <a href="https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/schemes-and-amendments/browse-amendments?query=vc168&amp;search_mode=id#Amendments--VC168">published</a> on the 11th of February.

<blockquote>
The amendment will allow the SRL to be considered in strategic reviews and planning scheme amendments. This is needed to enable coordinated decision-making regarding land uses and developments that could affect the delivery of the SRL and for identified SRL priority precincts.

The Plan Melbourne 2017-2050: Addendum 2019 (the Addendum) was prepared to update growth projections for Melbourne and identify proposed major infrastructure projects including the SRL. The Victorian Government announced the SRL in 2018 to respond to Melbourne's rapid population growth and public transport network pressures.

Melbourne’s public transport network needs to develop to support the distribution of population and employment in line with Plan Melbourne 2017-2050 and the Addendum.

The SRL includes a new orbital rail line connecting major railway lines from the Frankston line to the Werribee line, with a connection to Melbourne Airport. The SRL project includes several new stations and integrated precinct development around these stations.
<cite>Amendment VC168 - Explanatory report, page 1</cite>
</blockquote>

The addendum document includes a few paragraphs on 20-minute neighbourhoods that seeks to tie the principle to various active initiatives. 

The SRL and level crossing removal program currently underway feature prominently and will "ensure that surround communities benefit from the coordinated planning of state and local infrastructure" according to the addendum.

By crystalising the link between Principle 5 - 20-minute neighbourhoods in Plan Melbourne and significant infrastructure investment, the state government has set a high bar in which to measure itself and its future infrastructure initiatives.  Not to mention all future governments should the link remain in place will be in the same boat.

<blockquote>
Embedding the 20-minute neighbourhods 'hallmarks' into major infrastructure projects will ensure that there is a coordinated outcomes framework to deliver more inclusive, vibrant and health neighbourhoods as part of all major infrastructure investments.
<cite>20 minute neighbourhoods, Plan Melbourne 2017 - 2050 Addendum, 2019, page 9</cite>
</blockquote>

Priority precincts, a portfolio contained within the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, will now be referenced in Plan Melbourne as well.

At the initial creation of the portfolio, Parkville, Arden, Fishermans Bend, Richmond to Docklands and Sunshine were listed as priority precincts. However, now Footscray joins the list that is now a part of Plan Melbourne.

On the Suburban Rail Loop, the addendum notes how the SRL will align with Plan Melbourne policy that requires a precinct-wide approach in planning for new development and investment opportunities on the existing and planning public transport network and also notes how the project will enable "Melbourne to grow in strategic precincts along the project corridor". This is undoubtedly a reference to the National Employment and Innovation Clusters (NEICs) the SRL will service: <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/suburban-rail-loop-in-focus-clayton">Monash University/Mulgrave</a>, La Trobe University/Bundoora and Sunshine.  While not designated an NEIC, Deakin University's Burwood campus or the immediate surrounds are set to host an SRL station as well.

All reports and supporting documents can be viewed at <a href="https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/schemes-and-amendments/browse-amendments?query=vc168&amp;search_mode=id#Amendments--VC168">planning.vic.gov.au</a>.
</body></html>

Changes to Plan Melbourne gazetted, adds Suburban Rail Loop and other active projects to city's strategic plan

<html><body>
<h2>OPINION:</h2>

Had you been reading either of Melbourne's printed-matter newspapers over the weekend, you'd have noticed the media circus surrounding the Melbourne Airport Rail Link was still firing on all cylinders.

It's been bubbling away for months and different parties appear to be leaking to different newspapers and everyone seems to be attempting to play the other party against any number of other counterparties.

It's been fascinating to watch the reaction - in said newspaper comment sections and on social media - and for this seasoned observer, it's been an equally fascinating real-time insight into how the emotions of consumers of media ebb and flow, depending on what they read/watch.

Old arguments are re-surfacing... "Why are we spending billions on business people and tourists when we could spend money on [insert project/cause here]?", the über-green/lefty bubble are emboldened... "Aviation is the devil. Therefore we should ban it, and therefore we don't need a rail link", and the purists in the business world are still trotting out the same old neo-liberal 'gumpf'.

In the absence of any detail on the project - what it will look like, how quickly will it transport people to and from the airport, what are the other benefits of building it - it feels as though many people are emotionally on edge and on a rapid journey to despair depending on the relative positive or negative bent on a media report.

This is what happens in an information vacuum. 

Political parties propose infrastructure projects, promise they'll get the bureaucrats to check things over and develop business cases which take well over a year all the while engaged voters are left to their own devices, pursuing circular arguments.

If only there were a better way of doing things.

<h2>The story thus far</h2>

Malcolm Turnbull surprised most people by calling a press conference on the kerb of Melbourne airport to announce his government would stump up $5 billion to build an airport rail link to Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport.

A few weeks later, the Andrews Government came around to the idea and said they'll match the federal government's $5 billion with their own $ 5 billion putting a whopping $10 billion in play.

Not long after the state government made its announcement, a consortium headed by IFM (which has takes in Melbourne Airport and Southern Cross Station) said it would stump up another $5 billion in private funds. This funding is on top of the $10 billion in public financing that would see a tunnel built much like the one advocated for by the Rail Futures Institute. The project was named <a href="https://www.airrailmelbourne.com.au/">AirRail Melbourne</a>.

Last year we saw stories on The Age and Herald Sun which purported to give us an insight into the decision making progress at the stat level. The state government wasn't happy with some of the terms of the proposed AirRail proposal - specifically the per-train price of running other services through this tunnel (despite the investment of public funds in the project).

We then saw more reports the state government is now considering alternatives - like building Melbourne Metro 2 and having Geelong trains running through that corridor, freeing up more space on the 4 track Sunshine corridor.

Over the weekend, both The Age and Herald Sun have been framing the latest insight into the apparent latest thinking on the airport rail project as new services running on congested tracks.

<h2>If you're confused, you're not alone</h2>

While the above is a heavily condensed summary of what I've been reading over the past 6-12 months, you are forgiven if you are confused.

In all, the media circus that seems to be carrying the Melbourne Airport Rail Link, could be wrong and have taken us all down a completely different path to what eventually will be announced. 

We're just going to have to endure the circular arguments and keep on waiting until a public statement on the project is made.
</body></html>

The Melbourne Airport Rail Link decision making process rolls on through the media

<html><body>
Developed by RMIT health and urban researchers, the Australian Urban Observatory is an innovative new mapping programme which is being dubbed the essential new tool for government and industry, "from policymakers wanting to improve the health and liveability of their cities to developers look for the next suburbs to invest in."

The Observatory was launched on Wednesday 5th of February at RMIT's signature research and innovation event, Engaging for Impact 2020, by Melbourne Lord Mayor Sally Capp.

The geographical mapping service is based on research knowledge about public health and urban environments and brings together critical data on easy-to-use maps the first time in Australia.

"Simplicity of data is key," says lead investigator Dr Melanie Davern, from the RMIT Centre for Urban Research. The app could help develop a clear understanding of real liveability for anyone from developers, planners, policymakers and students as well as members of the general community.

<blockquote>
Drawing on over eight years of research findings by the RMIT Healthy Liveable Cities Group, the Observatory maps liveability indicators across the country’s 21 largest cities and measures liveability across cities, council areas, suburbs and neighbourhoods,” Davern said.

We’ve taken the data out of the tables and put it onto the map to display a real-world view of how this information exists in our cities and where we can change urban design and planning to really influence the health and liveability of Australian cities.

Policy makers looking to encourage active lifestyles for residents can easily access and understand key ingredients of liveability - like walkability, access to schools, public transport, and public open spaces - to decide which areas and people need resources the most.

They can even examine other neighbourhoods and suburbs across the country to find out what is working in comparable geographic areas.

Developers looking for the next place to invest can find indicators for whole suburbs or narrow down to individual neighbourhoods.

Using detailed liveability indicators, they can determine exactly which areas are the best places for new development or support future investment.
</blockquote>

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pryGOPOxJMw" width="100%"></iframe>

The app uses Geographic Information System (GIS) maps to display public health data across key areas of liveability, including:

<ul>
<li>Walkability</li>
	<li>Public transport</li>
	<li>Social infrastructure and services</li>
	<li>Employment</li>
	<li>Food</li>
	<li>Housing</li>
	<li>Public open space</li>
</ul>
This data allows the platform to provide users with detailed information about their communities and the local factors influencing physical and mental health.

<blockquote>
Through the Observatory we are creating a new national resource of liveability indicators needed to identify, measure, monitor and target responses to critical social, economic and environmental challenges that are arising with Australia’s rapidly growing population,.

Each indicator in the platform has been chosen because it is associated with health outcomes and is connected to government policies.

They have been designed so that all Australians can learn more about the connection between health and urban planning, and how they support the planning of healthy, equitable and sustainable cities.
<cite>Dr Melanie Davern</cite>
</blockquote>

The Observatory is a collaborative project between RMIT University, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Centre for Research Excellence in Healthy Liveable Communities, the National Environmental Science Program supported Clean Air and Urban Landscapes Hub, and the NHMRC funded Australian Prevention Partnership Centre and state partners. 

More information is available at <a href="https://auo.org.au/">auo.org.au</a>
</body></html>

RMIT researchers launch the Australian Urban Observatory which maps liveability in major cities

<html><body>
<h2>Opinion:</h2>

Whenever someone writes or talks about decentralisation as part of an overall population policy in Australia, I tend to roll my eyes, mentally note the growing list of fans of the overarching policy and then move on.

It all boils down to this: how in an era of continual tax cuts can we expect to pay for the infrastructure - not just transport infrastructure but everything else as well - to ensure the growing regional population base has similar access to services and quality of life as the established cities?

The latest in the decentralisation merry-go-round is an op-ed published in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/03/fiona-simsons-2020s-vision-lets-double-the-population-outside-capital-cities">The Guardian</a> by the National Farmers Federation President Fiona Simson.  In it, Simson acknowledges the barriers to greater numbers of people living in regional and rural areas but also makes the mistake of offering a tax-cut as a solution to growing employment to attract the people "out there".

<blockquote>
As a lifetime resident (save a couple of years away for study) of regional Australia, I can attest to just how good country living is. I can also attest to its challenges.

Unfortunately for many the dream of leaving the city’s bounds behind is diminished after learning of these challenges. Due diligence quickly uncovers the often-appalling lack of health services, internet and mobile phone connectivity that is nowhere near on par with urban networks; almost non-existent public transport options; and just the glaring evidence that our regions are plainly not seen as a priority in the eyes of decision makers.
<cite>Fiona Simson - NFF President via Guardian Australia</cite>
</blockquote>

If the regionals are already starting from behind - as the National Farmers Federation President insomuch says - how or why should we encourage even more people to move to the regions when both Coalition and Labor governments are more than happy to jump on the tax cut bandwagon for short-term gain?

Health infrastructure and ongoing funding must come from the national or state government purse - and those purses are filled with taxes.  The abortion that is the now even-more multi-modal NBN requires public funding (although you could argue, private sector funding - through the telcos - can build more mobile towers and networks).  

Public Transport absolutely requires public funding and when the regions are concerned there are even more push-pull factors, namely the need to provide high quality and high frequency service to the relevant state capital to provide a conduit for country people to get to the big smoke plus also the need to  service local communities with non-car transport options within regional towns and cities.

Simson advocates for City Deal-type arrangements to be organised in various regions that have specific advantages.  Naturally, agriculture features prominently in the op-ed and Fiona Simson is in a far better situation to comment on regional advantages in the agricultural sector, however it's the advocating for less tax revenue that doesn't sit well with me.

<blockquote>
The Business Council of Australia also supports an expansion of the City Deals approach to regional Australia and sees the huge opportunity for its big business members to increase their footprint in regional Australia.

It may also be prudent to provide fiscal incentives.

One idea is to apply a decreased tax rate to individual and companies living and operating a certain distance away from capital cities.
<cite>Fiona Simon - NFF President via Guardian Australia</cite>
</blockquote>

"But the private sector has a role to play in financing and building infrastructure for the bush".  Building the infrastructure on behalf of governments? sure, most people can work with that.  Financing or proposing what to build in the first place? Just look at the unraveling mess of the market-led proposal for the West Gate Tunnel.  

Imagine a West Gate Tunnel-like project cock-up out in the regional areas in the context of tax cuts galore right in every sector of the economy.  Who's going to step in to resolve cost-overruns or project delays?  Why, the state or federal government of course.  Along with its diminishing per-capita tax take.  

I acknowledge there may be other sustainable ways to grow the regions other than through direct taxation, but if the starter's gun fires when we know tax cuts are going to be sloshing their way through the economy over 10, 20 or 30 years, we're handicapping ourselves from the outset. It's good old Australian 'she'll be right' short-termism that needs to end.

And likewise, we need to debate how to grow regional towns and cities.  For instance, just rezoning land next to existing developed areas in regional towns so suburban developers can take over is just replicating the problem of unrelenting fringe development in the capitals.  Do we really want to push that onto regional towns and cities?

<h2>Also...</h2>

Can you spot the missing regional cities in this list?

<blockquote>
Australia has a total land area of 7,692,024 square kilometres, yet the cities of Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide combined only total around 8,202 sq km.

Even factoring in the growth in areas of south-east Queensland and Newcastle and other cities such as Hobart, Canberra and Darwin, it’s accurate to say we need to spread out
<cite>Fiona Simson - NFF President via Guardian Australia</cite>
</blockquote>

Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo combined half about half a million people living in them and as George Megalogenis pointed out in his recent Melbourne Century piece in <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/melbourne-is-set-to-become-the-country-s-most-populous-city-by-2026-with-vast-ramifications-20191128-p53f29">The Age</a>, on current ABS data and predictions, Geelong will enter the top 10 biggest cities list in Australia this century.

I'm willing to give the NFF President the benefit of the doubt - maybe it was word economisation the Guardian editors decreed - however to not include regional areas of Victoria on a list of possible areas to grow for decentralisation purposes is just strange.

Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo are linked to Melbourne in ways that Wollongong, the Central Coast and Newcastle can only dream of - infrastructure already exists that allows higher-speed rail services to connect the three western big regionals in Victoria with Melbourne.  And plans are afoot to gradually upgrade these lines even further, starting with Geelong.

The City of Bendigo already has a population of 112,000 with a regional population - that takes in cities like Castlemaine and towns like Heathcote - of 240,000.  By 2050,<a href="https://www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2017-12/City-of-Greater-Bendigo-Priority-Projects-booklet.pdf"> the city wants to see the city itself top 200,000 and the region hit 350,000</a>.

To not even mention cities like these in the context of a decentralisation op-ed is odd - they are the very places that could act as the bulwark for further regional growth in towns in those regional cities' orbit.

Bendigo could be to Echuca and Swan Hill what Melbourne is to Bendigo.  Ballarat could be to Ararat and Stawell what Melbourne is to Ballarat.  Geelong could be to Winchelsea and Colac what Melbourne is to Geelong.  Traralgon could be to Sale, Moe and Morwell what Melbourne is to the entire La Trobe Valley. All on a much grander scale, and so on.
</body></html>

Decentralisation sounds fine in principle, but who is willing to pay for it?

<html><body>
The City of Melbourne has finalised the design for the upgrade of Elizabeth Street in Melbourne's CBD that will see partial closures of the roadway to cars, increased pedestrianised areas and tram stop improvements.

The southbound car lane between Flinders Lane and Flinders Street will close and make way for a bike lane, expanded footpath and a better-integrated terminus stop for the 19, 57 and 59 tram routes.

City of Melbourne Lord Mayor, Sally Capp, noted what Elizabeth Street was prior to European settlement - a creek, how the area had been subject to flooding in the past and that the new plans will seek to mitigate flood risk in future.

<blockquote>
Elizabeth Street was once a creek that flowed into the Yarra River and it has been the site of major flooding throughout Melbourne's history," the Lord Mayor said.

We have seen how quickly and severely the weather can change this summer and we know the trends indicate that we will experience extreme weather events more frequently.

Intense storms lead to increased flash flooding and Elizabeth Street remains a low point in the catchment so we have worked closely with authorities while designing this project.
</blockquote>

<cite>Melbourne Lord Mayor Sally Capp</cite>

The council is now advertising a planning permit for the project that outlines the closure of the southbound traffic lane, the installation of new drainage works, the new street furniture to be added and the changes that will be made to lighting and footpath paving.

Lord Mayor Sally Capp said that up to 9000 people traverse the area every hour in the morning and afternoon peaks, making the intersection one of the busiest in Melbourne's CBD and between 2004 and 2015 there was a 65% decline in the number of motor vehicles using Elizabeth Street.

<blockquote>
Pedestrians outnumber all other street users on Elizabeth Street but have the least amount of space.
</blockquote>

<cite>Melbourne Lord Mayor Sally Capp</cite>

Closing the southbound car lane and expanding the footpath will increase pedestrian space by 400 square metres between Flinders Lane and Flinders Street or the approximate size of a basketball court.

Work is set to begin on the southern section of Elizabeth Street's upgrade in mid-2020 with completion set for the end of the year.

For more information on the changes to Elizabeth Street, see <a href="https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/building-and-development/shaping-the-city/city-projects/pages/elizabeth-street.aspx">melbourne.vic.gov.au</a>.
</body></html>

City of Melbourne finalises Elizabeth Street upgrade plans

<html><body>
<h2>Comment:</h2>

It's like a well-worn and much-loved piece of furniture in your grandmother's living room, it's always there; Burnley station - when any significant amount of rain falls over the inner Melbourne suburb - becomes inaccessible due to its pedestrian underpass succumbing to flood. 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
Hey <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/springst?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#springst</a> - this, like all old school station entrances that include underpasses, is not on - where's the medium term budget to re-do station entrances so people can access the network regardless of the weather conditions? <a href="https://t.co/iAMvKlZn3u">https://t.co/iAMvKlZn3u</a>
— Alastair Taylor (@tayser82) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/tayser82/status/1220108238542098433?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2020</a>
</blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>Operations quickly change so that every train starts running express through the station, stranding passengers in the local area and displacing others who were planning to alight at Burnley.

Maybe it's my sketchy memory of the twitter fog, but so often can I recall alerts stating that Burnley station is temporarily closed, that I have to wonder if we're all in a blind stupor that will see us sleepwalk into more issues down the track once big-ticket transport projects come online.

Burnley's outdated infrastructure is no different to the track layout at Caulfield (and the speed restrictions over its pedestrian subway) or Sandown Park's pedestrian underpass - actually, insert any station that was rebuilt around the same time here -  or the sections of track where wooden and cement sleepers are mixed providing a rougher ride for passengers.  Or sections of the network where the overhead electrical equipment is too easily accessible to thieves who want to flog some copper for cash.

It's the little bits and pieces, here, there and over there too that need the spotlight and need fixing.  Sometimes they get fixed in a larger project, like for instance, despite the Level Crossing Removal Authority's comms team being quite the well-oiled machine, they still haven't published any stats that state how many old wooden sleepers have now been replaced by concrete right across the network.

Level Crossing Removal projects appear to be the main way we're replacing sleepers (and in some cases rail) that 'upgrades' the ride quality for passengers but there are gaps. 

Take a journey on the Pakenham line and you'll notice differences between Clayton and Westall and Noble Park and Dandenong - that's because these sections are still predominantly wooden sleepers that are surrounded at both ends by sections of track running over concrete which provides the smoother journey.

The Suburban Rail Loop is going to link railway lines all around the metro outside the inner city and without having seen the business case - only the bureaucrats can see that, still, at this stage - it's not outside the bounds of possibility that it will be true that patronage will be go up, a lot, and not just in the peak direction of travel.

A whizz-bang automated/driverless high-frequency public transport corridor that opens up new employment and residential centres for densification/diversification, it's hard not to soak up the spin and exclaim: awesome stuff!  But just focusing on ribbon-cutting for these types of projects and appearing to do nothing about existing small-scale network and station issues that speak to long term resilience (or the lack thereof) are worrying.

The SRL will be dependent on the existing arterial railway lines to do even heavier lifting.  Sure the spin doctors can advise their ministers to point out projects like the Metro Tunnel whose parts form a much larger overall upgrade to existing railway lines. Yet, in that case, that's only two out of 7 that will be linked as part of SRL phase 1.  

What plans are there to rebuild the entrance to Burnley station so the major junction station won't get isolated when even more passengers are using the station?   

Or perhaps it might be better to ask what plans are there for upgrading, actually, fixing, any other station or piece of network infrastructure that's currently susceptible to weather and operational events that plague the network at random?
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Alastair Taylor

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News