Suburbs and the art of place blogging

Last week I attended the Right to the City symposium at the Sydney University Faculty of Architecture. The symposium sought to make connections between artists, activists, planners and architects in seeking ways to "remake" the city “in more socially connected and sustainable ways”, responding to the increasingly fragmented and complex nature of urban life by “developing critical spatial practices that engage in micro-political actions”.

The presentations were interesting if a little uneven in quality, not surprising given the symposium’s diverse range of perspectives and participants. It was more disappointing that there seemed to be (at least in the sessions I attended) relatively little emphasis on outer suburbs or the urban fringe. Most of the “micro-political actions” were targeted towards inner-city areas and predicated on a relatively dense population; for example, interventions that depended on high levels of pedestrian traffic.

An exception to this inner-city focus was Linda Carroli’s participation in a forum on place blogs. Carroli is a writer, researcher and consultant who works in the cultural/arts sector. She is particularly interested in the critical and cultural exploration of place, looking at the role of artists, designers, planners, architects and other urbanists in the process of change. An integral part of this project is her blog, Placeblog. While this is not itself strictly speaking a place-based blog, Carroli’s location in the Brisbane suburb of Aspley informs her wider work. 

The other panellists and presenters in this forum were involved with more “traditional” place blogs focussed on specific locations, all located in inner and middle-ring suburbs such as Kings Cross/Darlinghurst, Ultimo and Marrickville. The discussion was interesting, particularly when it touched on issues of class and gentrification.

As Jesse Adams Stein, who chaired the session states on her Penultimo blog, “Place blogs enact a very specific act of watching, witnessing, monitoring, recording, sometimes celebrating, sometimes protesting – on a very local level” (click here for her summary of the forum outcomes). In this context I raised the question, “why are hardly any place blogs written about specific outer suburban locations such as places in Western Sydney?” which produced a wide range of responses.

Some thought this was due to the lack of access to computers and/or a lack of familiarity with blogging software in these areas. However the consensus (and my view) was that while this may be applicable in some places, it was hardly a universal explanation. The same applies to assumptions about class differences, given the range of income groups represented in areas like Western Sydney.

It was also pointed out that many residents in these communities run and participate in blogs – it’s just that they are mainly about things other than place. Those that have a spatial focus tend to look at wider regions and to deal either with broader cultural, social and spatial issues or specific problems such as the lack of transport infrastructure.

Leaving aside my half-joking response that place blogs are the harbingers of gentrification, there may be other reasons for this discrepancy. First, the nature of suburban life means that the nature of place is different.

In the inner city, people can live, shop, relax and go to school all in the same location and often their workplace is nearby as well. In the suburbs, however, they may live in one suburb, work in another, shop in a third and send their children to school in a fourth.  

This means that outer urban areas are often less “fine-grained” than inner urban ones – I don’t mean this pejoratively, but in the sense that social activity takes place over a much larger geographic range in car-based low-density suburbs.

This makes it difficult to write about place without writing about a wider region (thus ending up with the sorts of “issues” blogs I mentioned earlier) – or conversely, writing about stuff that may be way too local, like what your neighbours are up to. Indeed, the “communities” that many suburban dwellers belong to are not spatially based at all – an outcome that ironically is now being facilitated by the same sort of technology that makes place blogging possible.

This should not discourage blogs about places in outer urban areas, but I suspect that they will always have a different “feel” to their inner-city counterparts. The exception may be place blogs centred on the old centres around Western Sydney (such as those located on the rail lines) or the new ones that are starting to appear in places such as Rouse Hill, documenting the rate of change occurring in many of these places.

A blog about one of the latter would be particularly interesting. Anyone want to take up the challenge?

Posted in Cultural Development, Social Media, Sydney metro area, Western Sydney | 2 Comments

Last food orders on the urban frontier?

Recently I was asked to comment for a newspaper article on the plight of the last piggery in the Sydney basin, which is under pressure from urban expansion.

The piggery is located in the corridor for the South West Rail Link currently under construction and close to the proposed Leppington town centre, which will form the centrepiece for the south west growth centre’s planned 100,000 new homes. Not only is it the only piggery left in Sydney, it also has a pathogen-free herd which means that it supplies hospitals with organs for research and use in transplantation.

While the government wants to resume only a portion of the site, the area required is essential to the piggery’s waste management procedures and if it is resumed the piggery will have to close. Unfortunately even if its owners received full compensation it would be unlikely to reopen anywhere near Sydney. As one of the owners observed, few councils would agree to approve an application for a new piggery; “we’re just above, or below, nuclear waste dumps on the scale of developments that governments want. It’s the smell.”

As I pointed out in my response, intensive animal farming has its limits in an increasing urban setting – even if it was there first. This is particularly if the farm is close to a new town centre or other planned high-density development; obviously more people are affected and it is more difficult to either screen the farm area or provide a significant buffer zone, especially if the farming operation involves noise or small.

However, I was also at pains to point out that it was vital to retain agricultural land in the Sydney basin, especially for the city’s food security. As Sinclair, Bunker and Holloway note in their 2003 paper, the Sydney basin (at that time) produced the greatest amount of perishable produce in NSW. They also observed that as land became more valuable because of its potential for conversion to residential use, agricultural uses also became more intensive, especially as farmers relocated from other areas as they were developed.

However, as more and more land is turned into housing lots, farms start to close down. From my observations, the resulting collapse in agriculture can happen surprisingly quickly. Farmers rely upon a range of support services such as transport providers, farming equipment and other specialist suppliers and in some cases packing and distribution facilities. In turn, these suppliers rely on a “critical mass” of farms to provide demand.

As farms cease to operate these support services become unviable and also close down. Without these specialist services in the local area the remaining framers struggle to hang on and in turn also decide to shut up shop, a decision aided by the increasing value of the land in terms of its potential for urban development.

Another point which I raised briefly when I was contacted by the paper but which wasn’t included for space reasons was that the way in which the planning process for the south west and north west growth centres had been rolled out had resulted in these issues not being adequately addressed. The original plans had included “green wedges” which would preserve some high-amenity natural bushland and farming areas within the growth centres.

North West and South West Growth Centres (from Planning NSW website)

North West and South West Growth Centres (from Planning NSW website)

However this caused a furore when the plans were released. The problem was that those property owners whose land was directly affected by the new development would be fully compensated whilst those in the “green wedges” would receive no compensation at all. Not surprisingly the latter objected. The government went to water and announced it would acquire all the land including that which was set aside in the plan to be preserved as rural.

To “compensate” for this the government also increased the number of dwellings it was proposing to develop in the growth centres, in part to off-set the additional land acquisition costs involved. As a result the green wedges disappeared overnight.

Without a detailed comparison of the piggery’s location with the original growth centre plans it is impossible to know whether it was located in one of the original green wedges or would have been acquired for development anyway. However this is beside the point; a proper planning and land acquisition process for the growth centres would have at least attempted to identify and protect key aspects of agriculture within an urban setting.

This hasn’t happened and the new state government has announced that it was to expand development at the urban fringe even further. Unfortunately it now looks increasingly likely that food production will fade away on the urban frontier.

Posted in Environment, Growth, Planning, Population, Sydney metro area, Western Sydney | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

O’Farrell’s new Ministry has a few surprises

The NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell today announced his new ministry, with a few surprises.

Much has been made in the media about the two new MPs, Robyn Parker (Maitland) who is Environment and Heritage Minister and Graham Annesley (Miranda), who takes over Sport and Recreation. Victor Dominello (Ryde) who was in the previous parliament but not the shadow Cabinet has been appointed Minister for Citizenship, Communities and Aboriginal Affairs.

There are however a few other interesting things about the new Ministry, based on the list reproduced below from the Australian:

  • Consistent with his election commitment, O’Farrell has brought planning and infrastructure together under one Minister, Brad Hazzard (Wakehurst), who is also Minister Assisting the Premier on Infrastructure NSW (another election promise). However he has also appointed Andrew Stoner (Oxley), the Nationals leader, as Minister for Regional Infrastructure and Services. In effect this means that there are two Ministers with responsibility for infrastructure, as well as by implication the Premier. It will be fascinating to see how this pans out.
  • O’Farrell has retained and broadened the regional ministry concept introduced by the previous Labour government back in 1997. The previous government also adopted then gradually abandoned a corresponding regional approach to the delivery of both State-wide initiatives (eg, the State Plan) and metropolitan ones (eg, the Metropolitan Strategy), while retaining the regional minsters, often in name only.
  • Under the new government, regional ministries now cover most of the state. Three of these regional ministries (Central Coast, North Coast and Western NSW) are held by MPs with seats in the relevant areas. Two (Hunter and the Illawarra) are held by MLCs, while the sixth (Western Sydney) is held by O’Farrell himself (again an election commitment). The new Government’s embrace of regional ministries and the appointment of Stoner as Minister for Regional Infrastructure  and Services may signal a return to a more regionalised approach to deliver, though what that means within Sydney is yet to be seen.
  • While it is an encouraging sign of the region’s significance to the new government that O’Farrell appointed himself as Western Sydney Minister, it is unfortunate that not one of the new faces in the Ministry is from Western Sydney, despite its strong representation in the new government. The Cabinet is overwhelmingly made up of members from the North Shore and rural areas – understandable to some extent, given the nature of the Coalition government and the fact that virtually all the Western Sydney MPs were neophytes, but still disappointing.  O’Farrell should move to redress this imbalance in the appointment of positions such as Parliamentary Secretaries and Committee Chairs and members.
  • The appointment of George Souris (Upper Hunter) as Minister for the Arts (as well as Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Hospitality and Racing) was a surprise to some who had expected the addition of the Arts to Robyn Parker’s (Maitland) portfolios of Environment and Heritage. While keeping Arts with Souris’s other responsibilities may be more consistent with the current Departmental structure, linking it to Environment and in particular Heritage would have seemed a more natural fit. Hopefully the Arts portfolio will enjoy a higher profile and more funding under the new Government, irrespective of who has Ministerial responsibility for it.
  • The Ministries of Climate Change and Water have disappeared from the new Cabinet. The implications for the corresponding departments are yet to be announced, though one possibility is that responsibility for Water will fall under the Resources portfolio and Climate Change – assuming it has a future as a separate entity – under Environment.
Name Portolio(s) Seat (or MLC), Party
Barry O’Farrell Premier, Minister for Western Sydney Liberal, Ku-ring-gai
Andrew Stoner Deputy Premier, Minister for Trade and Investment and Minister for Regional Infrastructure and Services National, Oxley
Jillian Skinner Minister for Health and Minister for Medical Research Liberal, North Shore
Adrian Piccoli Minister for Education National, Murrumbidgee
Michael Gallacher Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Minister for the Hunter and Vice- President of the Executive Council Liberal, MLC
Duncan Gay Minister for Roads and Ports National, MLC
Brad Hazzard Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and Minister Assisting the Premier on Infrastructure NSW Liberal, Wakehurst
Christopher Hartcher Minister for Resources and Energy, Special Minister of State and Minister for the Central Coast Liberal, Terrigal
Gladys Berejiklian Minister for Transport Liberal, Willoughby
George Souris Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Hospitality and Racing and Minister for the Arts National, Upper Hunter
Mike Baird Treasurer Liberal, Manly
Greg Pearce Minister for Finance and Services and Minister for the Illawarra Liberal, MLC
Katrina Hodgkinson Minister for Primary Industries and Minister for Small Business National, Burrinjuck
Andrew Constance Minister for Ageing and Minister for Disability Services Liberal, Bega
Gregory Smith Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Liberal, Epping
Don Page Minister for Local Government and Minister for the North Coast National, Ballina
Pru Goward Minister for Family and Community Services and Minister for Women Liberal, Goulburn
Anthony Roberts Minister for Fair Trading Liberal, Lane Cove
Kevin Humphries Minister for Mental Health, Minister for Healthy Lifestyles and Minister for Western NSW National, Barwon
Robyn Parker Minister for the Environment and Minister for Heritage Liberal, Maitland
Victor Dominello Minister for Citizenship and Communities and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Liberal, Ryde
Graham Annesley Minister for Sport and Recreation Liberal, Miranda
Posted in Cultural Development, Governance, Infrastructure, Planning, Sydney metro area, Western Sydney | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Update: Seven things O’Farrell should do in the first 100 days

A couple of updates on my last post:

First, a letter from Sandy Thomas (another member of the Sydney Morning Herald Public Transport Inquiry that reported last year) published in today’s Herald offers another and probably more achievable scenario on how the North West Rail Link (NWRL) can be built without loss of face by either Federal or State Governments.

He points out that the former State Government submitted a detailed proposal to Infrastructure Australia (IA) for funding for the NWRL. The letter notes that despite this, the funding for the Parramatta-Epping Rail Link was subsequently offered by the Federal Government from another non-IA pool. In summary, Thomas proposes that the previous State Government’s NWRL application for IA funding be revived and properly examined by IA as a basis for funding the North West line.

Second, it has been suggested that a “number eight” for my list should be full retention of the old Kings School site in Parramatta in public hands.

One of the last actions of the Keneally government was to announce that the bulk of the site would be retained and redeveloped as an arts and cultural precinct, with the sale of a small section to the Catholic Church providing some funding. It would appear that the Church still harbours some desire to obtain the whole site and the new government has not yet indicated whether it will continue to support the precinct proposal.

Old Kings School site

I strongly support this cause, but the “top seven” actions I listed in my last post were mainly to do with public transport infrastructure and strategic planning. However, reassuring the Western Sydney community that the Kings School site will be retained and developed as planned by the previous government (and not sold to fill some budgetary “black hole”) is something Mr O’Farrell could do easily in his first 100 days.

If I prepare a similar “top seven” for Western Sydney, developing the Kings School as an arts and cultural precinct in public hands will certainly be on my list!

Posted in Cultural Development, Governance, Infrastructure, Local Government, Public Transport, Transport, Western Sydney | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Seven things O’Farrell should do in the first 100 days

There is no doubt that Mr O’Farrell and his party scored an emphatic victory in the NSW election, rewriting the record books in the process. While the main factor in the result was the electorate’s obvious dissatisfaction with the performance of the previous government, the size of its win has given the new Government an unprecedented mandate to implement its policy agenda. The question is, where should they start?

The new Premier has got off on the right foot by announcing that he will implement a first 100-day action plan which will have a primary focus on transport issues. Although there is some debate about whether the electorate regards transport or health issues as the highest priority for action, there is no doubt that the previous government’s underinvestment in public transport infrastructure and its chaotic administration of the transport portfolio were the most public symbols of its failure.

Just as success has a thousand parents while failure is an orphan, new governments find themselves with lots of new friends and plenty of people offering free advice about their policy priorities (unlike new oppositions, which only get post-mortems for free). I’m joining a long queue, but in this spirit I’d like to offer seven suggestions on what the Premier should do in the next 100 days, specifically relating to planning and transport:

1. Don’t reinvent the wheel – just get it turning. There is no need for the new government to restart all transport and metropolitan planning from scratch. Transport in particular has been the subject of exhaustive planning processes, through the previous government’s transport strategies and those prepared independently, most notably the Sydney Morning Herald’s Public Transport Inquiry (in which I participated).  These have identified the key infrastructure projects required in the next 10 to 15 years.

While existing plans will need to be updated and the whole planning process rebuilt in the longer term (see suggestion no. 3), there are already more than enough planned projects on which work can begin. What we really need is a commitment to their funding and implementation, the things that have been sadly lacking in the past three decades. In the first 100 days the new government needs to consolidate the existing plans as a basis for immediate action.

Epping Station (from Wikipedia)

Epping Station (from Wikipedia)

2. Repeal Part 3A – but clarify what it will be replaced with. The new government’s commitment to repeal Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, which allows the government to take over from councils the assessment of “state significant” development applications, is very welcome. Under the previous government the definition of “state significant” had been increasingly widened to the point where it no longer had any meaning.

This commitment can easily be implemented within 100 days. However, there will still be some need for government input on the really major project proposals that will have a significant impact on a wider region.  To deal with these – and to reduce the temptation for future governments to reintroduce Part 3A-type powers via the back door – a collaborative framework between state and local governments needs to be established at the same time Part 3A is abolished (see next suggestion).

3. Set up a real partnership with local government to run the planning process. The promises made by the new government and reiterated by shadow ministers in the run-up to the election to consult and work with councils and Regional Organisations of Councils (ROCs) are also welcome, especially in the context of regional and metropolitan planning.

This initiative requires a meaningful and sustained commitment from both sides. The new Government should establish a dialogue with local government in the first 100 days to develop a new medium and long-term planning process as well as a mechanism to handle major development proposals – a difficult task with over 150 councils. This means that councils will also need to cooperate through the ROCs or other structures to present a coherent and strategic response.

4. 50:50 or 30:70 – it’s also a case of where people want to live. Mr O’Farrell has already made a commitment to change the target for the ratio between the population urban redevelopment in existing suburbs and new housing in greenfields areas from the current 70 to 30 percent to a 50:50 balance.

This needs to be carefully considered. Population movement is usually gradual process – people tend to move outwards in a “shuffle” as they change houses in Sydney, and not by leaps and bounds. While cheaper housing at the urban fringe might cause an initial flurry of interest, this demand may not be sustained as people increasingly consider the cost of transport and limited range of services available in these areas.

The new government therefore should commit in the first 100 days to a process to examine whether people actually want to move out to the outer suburbs in such numbers. And if the government proceeds, it must to commit to providing all the infrastructure required when these new suburbs are developed. To do otherwise would be to continue the vicious cycle of backlog and underinvestment that has plagued development in Western Sydney since the 1950s.

5. Sort out who’s going to prioritise transport infrastructure – and make sure the RTA doesn’t get in first. The new government has proposed the establishment of a new body called Infrastructure NSW to oversee all major infrastructure decisions as well as a separate Independent Transport Authority to oversee all public transport planning and operations.

While the infrastructure authority concept has drawn on the Herald’s Transport Inquiry’s recommendations, the proposal to create two separate authorities is an important difference. The Inquiry’s proposal was for a single authority to oversee all aspects of public transport, including infrastructure.

Having two bodies instead of one creates a potential for duplication and even conflict. The new transport authority will presumably have to pitch its proposals to the infrastructure body, competing with other departments including experienced hands such as the Roads and Traffic Authority. There is also a danger that public transport could be disadvantaged if Infrastructure NSW adopts narrow assessment frameworks to assess these projects.

To avoid this happening, the new government needs to move quickly to clarify the relationship between the two authorities. It also needs to ensure that public transport receives the priority it deserves and that Infrastructure NSW uses a broad range of environmental and social criteria in project assessment.

6. Recognise that the money for infrastructure has to come from somewhere. The Sydney Morning Herald’s Public Transport Inquiry not only identified and costed a range of transport options, it also looked at how to fund these projects.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, or a free transport system.  The Inquiry nominated a mix of funding options to raise the funds required, including fare increases, parking, registration and other levies, congestion charges and Commonwealth Government support. While at first glance none of these would seem to be very popular, the Inquiry also found that a significant majority of people are willing to pay for the redevelopment of the public transport network, so important do they regard this issue. The 100-day plan needs to include a commitment to identify funding sources for public transport infrastructure.

7. It shouldn’t be “either/or” – commit to build Parramatta-Epping AND the North West Rail Links as one project. While it is difficult to argue against the new government’s case that the North West is a higher priority than the Parramatta-Epping line, both are too important to become a political football between State and Federal Government. 

 

If both governments dig in, there is a strong risk that the Federal Government will simply trouser the $2.1 billion it has offered for the Parramatta-Epping link and use the money elsewhere. This would be a dismal result for NSW and Mr O’Farrell and the new Transport Minister should quickly exercise some nimble footwork to reach a compromise.

One solution would be to treat both links as a single, staged project, effectively providing a link from Parramatta via Epping to Rouse Hill and incorporating the full extension of the North West link to meet the existing Richmond Line.

The total cost would be considerable, but (along with the South West Link under construction) would be a major investment in Western Sydney’s future. It would mean that all major employment centres and residential release areas in the region would be linked by rail to each other, as well as to major destinations in eastern Sydney.

There would also be major savings in combining the projects, which lend themselves to a staged approach. Planning for the North West project is much more recent and considerably more advanced than for Parramatta-Epping, especially as the route for the latter is yet to be finalised.

This means that tunnelling could start in the North West and then continue straight after completion onto the Parramatta-Epping Link once planning for that is finished. Fit-out of both sectors could proceed in the same way and then North-West line completed to the Richmond Line.

Posted in Governance, Growth, Infrastructure, Local Government, Public Transport, Sydney metro area, Transport, Western Sydney | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

What are the real differences between bus and rail?

Recently transport consultant Jarrett Walker posted an interesting article on his Human Transit blog regarding the intrinsic and non-intrinsic differences between rail and bus technology, drawing on an article in the Infrastructurist blog which had asked its readers if streetcars (trams) were better than buses and if so, why.

This article identified 36 reasons for the superiority of trams. These Jarrett classified into three groups:

  • “misdirected differences”, for example, those such as electric propulsion and dedicated rights of way which are often associated with rail-based technology but which can be (and have been) applied to buses;
  • “cultural feedback effects” which relate to the way trains, trams and buses are treated culturally, for example perceptions that “buses are for poor people” or that rail-based systems are more permanent are not technical differences but rather cultural constructs that can become self-reinforcing;
  • “intrinsic differences”. Those are the “real” technical differences between bus and rail such as capacity, ride quality, energy efficiency and costs. Jarrett claimed that there were only seven such differences and only three were clearly to rail’s advantage.

This is a thoughtful piece and provoked lively debate. I didn’t entirely agree with Jarrett’s approach and took a slightly different tack. This is an edited version of my response (it’s useful but not essential to read Jarrett’s piece first).

 I think the approach of trying to identify the real “uniqueness” of bus and rail technology is important but I don’t think can be completely divorced from the nature of the corridors and services involved.

This is especially true at the “extremes”. For example, to provide a small, localised transport service in low density outer-suburban or rural areas (either on demand or on a scheduled basis), bus technology using existing roads is clearly the only answer because of its low cost and flexibility. Nobody would contemplate using any form of rail technology for something like this.

Translohr guided vehicle in Clermont-Ferrand, France

Translohr guided vehicle in Clermont-Ferrand, France (all images from Wikipedia)

At the other end of the scale would be high speed and/or high frequency and high capacity services in dedicated and completely grade-separated corridors such as high-speed suburban and interurban rail services or underground metros. Even if all the “non-intrinsic” differences were eliminated, bus technology would simply not be able to offer the same level of service in these situations for a number of reasons.

An example is the Perth-Mandurah high-speed suburban rail line in WA, where buses would be unlikely to be able to offer the same fast travel times even if they had a dedicated corridor (in this context, maximum speed is probably another intrinsic difference between the two technologies, though it has to be acknowledged that for many transport corridors this probably isn’t a significant issue).

Adelaide O-Bahn (guided busway)

Adelaide O-Bahn (guided busway)

In the case of metros, if you were to take buses as your starting point, eliminated the non-intrinsic differences and minimised the intrinsic ones in order to meet the demands of providing a high-capacity, underground service, you would have to add electric traction, vehicle guidance, automated signalling systems, multiple trailers, platform loading etc, etc. The result would then be virtually indistinguishable from rail technology, apart from running on rubber tyres, so it would end up looking pretty much like the tyre-based Paris metro lines – and probably cost about the same as metal rail technology anyway.

In fact the Infrastructurist article (that inspired Jarrett’s article) talks mainly about the differences between streetcars and buses, not rail versus road-based transport generally. The points Jarrett has raised are also most relevant when applied to street-running bus services and trams, or a little further up the foodchain, busways and dedicated light rail corridors. In both cases there is much more overlap between bus and rail-based services than at the extremes I mentioned earlier.

Melbourne tram leased from Mulhouse

Melbourne tram leased from Mulhouse

There are a few other issues worth noting regarding this debate, however. Generally speaking, bus technology has to be more fully “optioned-up” from its base form than rail to eliminate the non-intrinsic factors and mitigate the others. Ride quality is a good example. Basic trams running on well-maintained tracks in mixed-flow situations will usually offer a better ride than buses in a similar situation.

It is only in dedicated corridors that the latter have the potential to approach the standard of the former and even this requires careful planning and additional construction costs – for example, the decision to build the Western Sydney bus transitways to light rail standard to allow for their potential conversion, or the extent to which the Brisbane busways were engineered to improve ride quality.

Los Angeles light rail

Los Angeles light rail

In some respects it’s a bit like choosing between a top-of-the-range car with all the extras built in or the basic model and then adding on the extras. Often the latter would end up being more expensive and the technology not as well integrated as the “de-luxe” model. In the case of busways, I understand that the cost of the dedicated busways in Sydney and Brisbane approached that of light rail.

This isn’t necessarily a reason not to build busways if they offer other advantages, but if all the options Jarrett’s article mentioned are added (such as electric traction, vehicle guidance, etc) to mitigate the “non-intrinsic” differences, they could well cost more than light rail. This expense also often results in trade-offs being made in relation to busways, as highlighted in many of the responses to Jarrett’s post.

A couple of other observations. I would add another intrinsic difference – rail, by its nature, has a built-in standardised “guidance system”. While there are differences in rail gauges and other associated technology, and railcar or tram of a given gauge will conform to this basic guidance system. This means it is possible for many tram and light rail systems to purchase vehicles off the shelf or lease them from other systems with little modification.

Cologne light rail operating as a metro

Cologne light rail operating as a metro

Of course, basic buses used for ordinary street-running of course have very few compatibility issues, but the situation is much more complex in relation to guided buses. There are at least four different basic technologies (kerb-guided, central rail, optical and electromagnetic) in use and eight or nine incompatible guidance systems based on these technologies. This isn’t to argue against the concept of guided busways, which have a lot of potential, but unless a dominant guidance technology emerges, rail should be considered to have an advantage in this area. You simply can’t buy a guided bus off the shelf.

Another interesting area of difference is flexibility and scale. Of course, buses have an advantage that the same vehicles can go very easily from running mixed-flow systems servicing local bus-stops in outer suburban areas to providing dedicated busway services in higher-density corridors.

While trams and light rail can’t match the flexibility of buses at the suburban level, they can be more easily scaled up at the other end. The transport system in Cologne and some other German cities are good examples, where trams can start in outer suburbs with basic on-street services, then run in dedicated corridors as light-rail services in middle-ring suburbs, much like busways – however, they then go underground to provide metro-like high capacity services in the CBD, a feat that would be much more difficult to do with buses.

Posted in Infrastructure, Public Transport, Transport | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Nets of iron

After my last post about rail infrastructure, my attention was drawn to the apexart website.

apexart is a not-for-profit contemporary visual arts organisation located in Lower Manhattan, New York. Through exhibitions, international residency, publication initiatives, and programs and events, it is committed to “cultural and intellectual diversity and aims to stimulate public dialogue about contemporary art”. It attempts to “promote consideration” among local audiences while extending this dialogue to international audiences through print and electronic outreach.

One program run by apexart is “Franchise“, which involves a worldwide open call for 400-word proposals asking participants why the franchise should come to their town and provide all of the support necessary to produce an exhibition. The winner gets to be be the director and curator of his or her own apexart franchise with an $8,000 budget, small salary and almost complete control. apexart provides funding and guidance. This includes an apexart brochure in an edition of 10,000 and its distribution around the world. To quote apexart, “the Franchise is an opportunity to help bring a new idea to fruition in a new place and to illustrate that the center of the world is wherever you are.”

Damascus-Hejaz Station - open only from 1913 to 1917 (from Wikipedia)

Damascus-Hejaz Station - open only from 1913 to 1917 (from Wikipedia)

The 2011 winners, Eric Gottesman and Toleen Touq are based in Amman, Jordan, and their entry is worth quoting in full:

We Have Woven the Motherlands with Nets of Iron

At the turn of the 20th century, the Hejaz, a narrow-gauge railway built south from Damascus to transport pilgrims to Mecca during the Hajj, represented a tangible, if utopic, dream of a united Middle East. Part divine aspiration, part vehicle for political gain, the train was designed to connect Istanbul through present-day Turkey, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia to the holiest cities of Islam. A decade later, the British, eager to replace the Ottoman Empire with its own, initiated what would become decades of European battles in the region. The dream was obliterated: Lawrence of Arabia and a Bedouin army blew the railway apart during WWI. It never recovered but the tracks still remain. After the rise and fall of empires, what is left of the withered dream to transcend physical and metaphysical borders? Having endured wars and conquests, the trains persist, limping along, rented out to nostalgic tourists and enthusiasts.

A modern light rail system threatens to replace the historic Hejaz as urban Amman sprawls eastward into the desert. Trains, like Arab unity itself, have a romantic geography: nearly obsolete, valued for historical symbolism, begging to be updated or made once again relevant. We propose to revisit this older way of moving through the Jordanian landscape, to restage the dream of regional cohesion, to repopulate the Hejaz with events created by artists from the countries through which the train once ran.

We will invite artists from each of the four countries of the Hejaz (Jordan, Saudi, Syria, and Turkey) to produce installations, performances on movable platforms, archival projects using remnants of the rail lines and other projects, all of which will take place on the rails in Jordan.

The

The Hedjaz Jordan Railway "International Train" at Amman Station (from Wikipedia)

The relationship between railways, nationalism and colonialism is long and complex, but it is interesting that the idea of a Middle East united through a rail network has been around for so long, even if it was shattered by world wars, oil wars and other conflicts. And while trains may have become “nearly obsolete” in this part of the world, they are being “made once again relevant”. Recently the  concept of a rather grandly-titled “International Rail Network” for the Middle East was revived and while progress to date has been haphazard, the Gulf Arab states are now planning to spend more than $US100 billion on rail projects across the region.

Posted in Public Transport, Transport | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Rail infrastructure – a sorry tale of three continents

Two media articles today paint an interesting picture of the current status of rail transport in Australia – and also provide a disturbing contrast with what is happening in the rest of the world.

The first is a Fairfax article which reports that a survey by research firm UMR shows that almost 80 per cent of Australians would consider using high-speed rail if it was available for holiday travel, while almost 9 per cent of those surveyed support the reopening of country railways. Perhaps not surprisingly, 60 per cent strongly supported the concept of cheap $1 rail tickets for individuals and families during holidays, while 30% supported the idea.

The survey appears to have been undertaken in the context of reducing the national holiday road toll; the distances involved and whether the questions were put in relation to rural or metropolitan train travel (or both) was not indicated in the article. However, even allowing for this and the fact that the research was commissioned by the national rail union, the results show a striking level of support for rail travel.

In the second rail-related news story to emerge today, Downer EDI has announced that the next generation of Sydney commuter trains will not start operating until late May or early June because of production delays. The company will also take a $250 million hit on the Waratah train contract, on top of a $190 million provision made last year.

Although the company claimed in December that it would hand the first Waratah trains to RailCorp by early January, it now says it has found bugs in the train’s electronics and has had to recruit “more senior staff with experience in train-building” and change its production schedule. This delay will make delivery of the trains to RailCorp 14 months behind schedule.

Contrast this state of affairs – a rolling stock order continually deferred and the unfulfilled desire of Australians for high-speed rail travel – with what is happening on two other continents, Asia and North America.

In China, the 1,318 kilometre high-speed link between Beijing and Shanghai has just opened, cutting travel time in half to less than five hours.  This is the longest high-speed line in the world – the entire French TGV system totals 1,700 kilometres.

Chinese High Speed Train - courtesy Wikipedia

Chinese High Speed Train - courtesy Wikipedia

 In little over a decade China has constructed the world’s largest high-speed rail network, at over 8,350 kilometres. It is expected that the system will reach 16,000 kilometres by 2016. Thousands of kilometres of urban railways are also planned to add to the systems and lines already opened.

China is not alone. Other Asian countries from Thailand to the Middle East have recently opened or are constructing major metro lines and high speed rail links, with even more ambitious plans for the future.

Los Angeles metro trains - courtesy Wikipedia

Los Angeles metro trains - courtesy Wikipedia

Even in North America, the land of the private car, 21 new light and heavy rail systems opened over the past decade and many existing ones were extended. In the next 12 months five new light rail lines or extensions will open, along with two new commuter rail corridors. A dozen public transport projects will begin construction, joining over 25 projects already underway.

So, in less than the time it has taken the (previous) Australian Government to announce and abandon an extensive feasibility inquiry into high speed rail – and then its successor to convene another “strategic study”  – the Chinese have built over 8,000 kilometres of high-speed track.

And in the time it has taken the NSW Government to build one suburban rail extension (Epping to Chatswood), commence another (South West Rail Link) and announce, cancel and re-announce about half a dozen other metros and heavy rail links, scores of North American and Chinese cities have built major rail extensions, new lines and in some cases constructed complete metro or light rail systems.

I know that Australia has greater distances and lower population densities than either North America or China, but surely we can do better than this. Judging by the UMR research, the Australian public certainly think so.

Posted in Infrastructure, Public Transport, Transport | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

You call that an amalgamation? THIS is an amalgamation!

Recently I was involved in a project undertaken by the Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government, studying examples of amalgamations and other forms of council consolidation across Australia and New Zealand. The largest amalgamation we looked had around 320,000 people and the council concerned was among the six or eight largest councils in Australia. This is not the largest recent amalgamation, however; last year’s merger to form Auckland Council has resulted in a council with a population over 1.4 million, making it the largest in Australasia.

However, before the New Zealanders start to look at the record books (and leaving aside for a moment the question of whether amalgamations are a good thing or not), even the Auckland amalgamation is dwarfed by media reports of plans in southern China to create the world’s biggest mega-city with a population of 42 million by amalgamating nine existing municipalities. These include Guangzhou, which already has a population of around 25 million and is currently the world’s second-largest city.

Even in area the new city will be vast, at over 41,400 square kilometres.  This is an area described in the online articles as “twice the size of Wales” – or to put it in Antipodean terms, 60% of the size of Tasmania. This is China’s manufacturing heartland, comprising almost 10% of the Chinese economy.

The proposal seems to be aimed at standardising a range of services such as public transport and health care which are offered at the municipal level in China, making it easier for citizens of each of the existing cities to access services across an area where huge population growth is rendering existing boundaries largely meaningless.  It is also intended to give the region an advantage over competing urban areas around Beijing and Shanghai.

The merger will be supported by around 150 major infrastructure projects which will integrate and expand the existing transport, energy, water and telecommunications systems. These plans include 29 rail lines including an express line to Hong Kong. The total cost is around $196 billion.

Just how these projects will be financed is unclear and perhaps not surprisingly there is little news of any opposition to the amalgamation in the Western media, but at least it is refreshing that council amalgamation is seen in China as a basis for additional investment on a vast scale – and not just an excuse for governments to save money!

Posted in Growth, Infrastructure, Local Government, Planning, Population, Public Transport, Transport | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The long break

Apologies to anyone following this blog – a combination of intensive project work, the Christmas break and a familiy emergency meant that I had to take a major break from posting. While the latter is continuing, I hope to be able to make more regular posts in future.

All the best for 2011.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment