Multi-Storey Car Mausoleums Are Our 'Horse Graveyards'

Good piece in today's West Australian by Kate Emery, who does us all a great service by drawing attention to the myopia of planning ('They shoot horses, don't they', West Australian, 11th November 2015), using the example of the 'horse graveyards' planned as an 'inevitable' result of dependence on horse-drawn transport in the 19th century.

Our horse graveyards are already with us, in the form of multi-storey car parks. These single-purpose mausoleums are home to inanimate car bodies for most of the day and empty by night.

There is nothing new in planners wanting to reduce our dependence on the private car by creating more accessible places. Twenty years ago, the Perth Metropolitan Transport Strategy stated on its front cover:

"Perth will be a place of vitality and well-being. There will be a sharing of spaces for living, work and leisure activities, which can be reached easily and safely by all members of the community".

If we were actually to achieve this, many of these car mausoleums would be redundant. Indeed, we can already see the beginnings of this in reduced charges (because of lower demand) for car parking in the central city.

Now we need to take the next step and start to reduce the amount of car parking, including requirements in local government town planning schemes - which also increases the density and activity we can get in an area. To do so requires governments to get serious about creating more accessible places, not simply set arbitrary infill development targets, and to make alternatives to the car (public transport, walking and cycling) feasible options for as many of us, in as many places and for as much of the day as possible.

West Australian, 11th November, 2015

Written and Posted by Ian Ker, Convenor, STCWA

Turning Back The Years - But Why?

Guardian Express, 26th November 2013

Twenty years ago, community consultation on what was then called the City Northern ByPass clearly said that if the road were to be built it should be put in tunnel and a coherent urban form re-established over the top. As a result, we now have the 'Northbridge Link', which has brought life and amenity back to an area that had been subject to traffic and planning blight for decades.

This regeneration has included reducing the traffic function of Newcastle Street and creating a more people-friendly environment and has led to retention and reinvigoration of heritage buildings and attractive new residential and commercial developments.

None of this would have happened if the traffic function of Newcastle Street had remained predominant.

Earlier this year, the Northbridge Tunnel was increased from two to three lanes in each direction to provide additional east-west traffic capacity across the north of the City.

Yet now we see proposals (http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/events/Council_agenda_131119.pdf, pp122-129) to provide yet more east-west traffic capacity on a road that already has problems at intersections with north-south arterials. The proposal would require changes (= reduction) to footpath widths, loss of trees and restriction of right turns to turn back the clock ten years. As the City of Perth's report says, this would be returning the cross-section of the street to what existed ten years ago and operating the kerbside lanes as clearways.

It is all the more disturbing that the initiator for this was a statement in the Department of Transport's Perth Central Business District Transport Plan 2012 that the operation of Newcastle Street to run two lanes of traffic in each direction during peak periods be considered. Is this the same Department of Transport that is trying to get people to use cars less (through TravelSmart) and to walk and cycle more? Has it lost it concern with 'moving people' as distinct from 'moving vehicles'?

To be fair to the City of Perth, it's report does acknowledge the detrimental impact on pedestrians and cyclists, especially with regard to crossing Newcastle Street, but it proposes to deal with this by formalising crossing points (including a signalised crossing for cyclists at Palmerston Street), but anyone familiar with the area knows that it is the ability to cross safely at many places, not just those designated by the traffic engineers, that makes it work as a place rather than a highway.

Inner-city areas in many cities were almost destroyed by traffic in the second half of the 20th century. Newcastle Street was in a state of limbo for decades. The new proposal runs the risk of turning this part of Northbridge back into a place dominated by traffic and would devalue the amenity and property values of the people and business-owners who have turned the tide of decay that previously characterised this important area.