Posts Tagged ‘urban planning’
|5 October , 2011|
|1:45 pm||to||5:00 pm|
The Heart Foundation invites you to a forum to learn more about the resource: Food-sensitive planning and urban design: A conceptual framework for achieving a sustainable and healthy food system.
- Associate Professor Trevor Budge (AM), La Trobe University
- Jenny Donovan, Inclusive Design
- Dr. Lukar Thornton, Deakin University
- Kirsten Larsen, Victorian Eco-Innovation Lab (VEIL), Melbourne University
‘Food-sensitive planning and urban design (FSPUD) does not simply assert that we have a problem in our cities, but sets out to identify new ways of tackling issues, providing a suite of ideas and innovations that cities should now embrace.’ (Trevor Budge, foreword to FSPUD).
This forum will be of interest to planners, architects, urban designers, engineers, public health professionals, policy makers, community members and elected representatives. It will explore the critical need to consider food in urban land use and development, and how that might be achieved.
1:45 – 5:00pm, Thursday 6 October 2011
Darebin Arts and Entertainment Centre, Cnr Bell Street and St. Georges Road, Preston
RSVP: acceptances only by 5pm Friday 30 September 2011 to cvhvic
Places are limited – booking essential
Posted in Events by Kate Archdeacon on September 15th, 2011
|13 October , 2011|
|14 October , 2011|
Climate change presents planners and decision-makers with unique challenges. How, when and at what scale climate change will impact us remains uncertain. What is clear is that adaptation needs to be part of our planning and risk management now.
3 Pillars Network in partnership with Net Balance, the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility and CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship present the 2nd Climate Change Adaptation Congress, a landmark event exploring the policy, strategies and business models needed to enable a climate resilient future for Australia. Planning for adaptation remains an outstanding challenge for the vast majority of Australian organisations. This is why we believe a practical and collaborative approach to addressing this issue is required. The Congress will create a space for knowledge sharing and ‘peer learning’ – drawing on the collective and unique expertise of organisations at all stages of adaptation planning. See About the Congress Structure for more details.
October 13 & 14, Melbourne Town Hall
Register now – early bird registration closes September 22. Download the Event Program.
The Housing We’d Choose explores the relationship between the housing we want, and the housing we have. The report presents original research on the housing preferences of Australians. A representative sample of over 700 residents in Sydney and Melbourne was asked to make real-world housing choices, limited by their budgets. The housing they chose was a much more varied mix than either city currently provides. In particular, the research suggests significant shortfalls of semi-detached housing and apartments in the middle and outer areas of both cities.
The second part of the report examines recent construction trends and argues that there are barriers to delivering more of the housing people say they want. These disincentives include the cost of materials and labour for buildings over four storeys, land assembly and preparation, and the risk and uncertainty of our planning systems, especially in Victoria.
A subsequent Grattan report will recommend changes to the design of the housing market in order to provide people with more of the homes they say they want. Download a Copy of the Main Report
|23 March , 2011|
|6:00 pm||to||7:30 pm|
Parts of North and West Melbourne, Kensington, Fishermans Bend and Docklands have been identified for renewal, but will this relieve the strain on the metropolitan fringe? What forms could it take, and who might it provide for? Informed commentators will discuss the types of development, ‘up versus out’ and multi-centred cities, residential densities, appropriate business spaces, affordable spaces for artists and heritage in the city’s old industrial zones.
- Jeff Gilmore – Executive Director Strategic Policy, Research and Forecasting, Department of Planning and Community Development, Melbourne
- David Moloney – Industrial Historian, National Trust of Victoria
- Dr Kate Shaw – ARC Research Fellow, Architecture Building and Planning, University of Melbourne
- David Waldren – General Manager, Grocon Carlton Brewery Development
Moderator: Peter Mares – Journalist and Presenter ABC Radio National.
Discussant: Dr Ruth Fincher – Professor of Geography, University of Melbourne
6.00pm to 7.30pm. Entry from 5.30pm, Wednesday 23 March 2011
BMW Edge, Federation Square, Corner Swanston and Flinders Streets, Melbourne
More details: http://www.thatsmelbourne.com.au/conversations
Source: Victoria Walks
Hoddle Street is often choked with traffic and is an unpleasant environment for walking. What ideas do you have about making this street more vibrant and people friendly?
VicRoads is currently undertaking a planning study to investigate options to improve the efficiency and reliability of all modes of transport along Hoddle Street, from the Eastern Freeway to just north of the M1 Freeway (Citylink). As with any transport planning investigation, it is important that we understand the interests, issues and concerns of all users – so we want to know what you think.
Hoddle Street is critical to north-south and east-west transport movements in inner Melbourne and to the flow of Eastern Freeway traffic to and from the CBD. As conditions change and demand continues to increase, the challenge will be to find ways to reduce congestion and improve transport flow whilst considering the needs and safety of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users. The study will examine key issues and investigate potential solutions, including grade separations and opportunities to enhance the efficiency of public transport.
Have your say
Your input is important in helping us better understand key issues relating to congestion, public transport, pedestrian and bicycle use, land use planning and urban design. Join in the discussion by clicking through on the questions on the website. You will be asked to register to participate, your privacy is protected and your name and email will never be disclosed.
Here’s your chance to join the discussion and help promote a more walking friendly environment!
Posted in Events by Kate Archdeacon on May 12th, 2010
Source: Climate Action Calendar
A Planning Institute Australia (PIA) Victoria Professional Development Seminar
Technical and practical perspective on the relevance and application of the principles of Environmentally Sustainable Development (ESD). An expert panel with a broad range of experiences will provide a comprehensive look at how planners may achieve ESD outcomes. Russell Kennedy will then provide a practical illustration of how the principles apply.
- Stephen Ingrouille – Principal, Going Solar
- Craig Czarny, FPIA CPP – Director, Hansen Partnership
- Brenda Kingston – Associate, Built Ecology
- David Vorchheimer, MPIA CPP – Senior Associate – Government, Planning and Environment, Russell Kennedy
Tue 25 May 5.30pm – 7.30pm
Russell Kennedy Solicitors, Level 12, 469 Latrobe St
$40 PIA Members, $50 ISV/VPELA Members, $55 Non-Members
RSVP by Friday May 21
More Info: http://planning.org.au/vic/images/stories/events/esd_250510.pdf
Posted in Models by Ferne Edwards on February 20th, 2009
Please find below a partial transcript of an interview between John Whitelegg (a recent guest of SustainableMelbourne.com’s at the Sustainable Cities Round Table) interviewed by Peter Mares on ABC Radio National (more details below). This article was also republished in a Going Solar Transport Newsletter, compiled by Stephen Ingrouille. Going Solar newsletter provides an excellent commentary on local sustainable transport issues in Melbourne.
Drive Slowly and Prosper - partial transcript
John Whitelegg: “â€¦. 80 per cent of the motorists say, when they look at the evidence, that they are very happy to go with lower speed limits when they see the impact that the higher speed limits have on child fatality, child serious injury. Motorists are not evil monsters. In the main, they’re very reasonable people and they’re very happy to drive at a lower speed when they are presented with the information of the severely damaging consequences of higher speed. And by the way, there’s detailed research on the loss of time when you’re making a journey to lower speed. If you’re doing a journey by car of, say, six, seven, eight kilometres and you’re driving at, say, 40 kilometres an hour rather than 50 kilometres an hour, you lose two minutes. You know, the time impact – put it that way – is trivial. And people can try it for themselves. Traffic moves more smoothly at lower speeds; traffic makes better use of the highway capacity. People don’t drive in a way where they accelerate aggressively and decelerate rapidly. You know, there are many advantages. I actually trust drivers to look at the evidence and arrive at a view. And the problem we’ve got is that politicians behave like a rabbit caught in the headlights of a passing car. They really don’t know what to do and they’re frightened of upsetting the electorateâ€¦. All it is saying is â€˜Look, do we want a society where we’re likely to squash children over the roadside because they have the temerity to try and cross the road between parked cars and are hit by a car going at 55 kilometres per hour? Do we want the kind of society that creates children-unfriendly cities and elderly unfriendly cities (and we’re running into so called demographic time bombs with more of us, including me, going to be over the age of 55, than ever before)? Do we want a friendly city for those kind of people or not? And really, really, what are the consequences of lower speed limits – and they are trivially insignificant, apart from reducing the number of dead children? And what’s wrong with that?”
Peter Mares: “I don’t think anyone would argue with reducing the number of dead children and I guess people would say â€˜No, it doesn’t necessarily have to be anti-motorist. But it is anti-car. I mean, it is saying the car having everyone getting about in their own individual car, that’s not going to make for an ideal city.”
John Whitelegg: “It’s not anti-car at all. The car is a wonderful thing for many kinds of journeys, many kinds of situations; it should be used responsibly and intelligently. But Australian cities, for example, very often have (what’s the percentage?) around 30 per cent, 35 per cent of all the car trips are less than two kilometres – two kilometres in length. That’s generally recognised around the world as not an intelligent use of cars. You know, we have to go for smart use, intelligent use of vehicles, appropriate use of vehicles and, again, I find in my work, whether it’s in Germany or Denmark or Sweden or the UK, or wherever, the people say, â€˜Yes, yes, we agree. And then we have to look for ways of implementing the changes in things like road design, speed limits, enforcement of speed limits and other things that reward the responsible user of the vehicle and punish the irresponsible user of the vehicle.”
Peter Mares: “Let’s now turn to perhaps the other benefit that there is to be had from this, and that’s the broader environmental benefit, particularly as we try to deal with climate change.”
John Whitelegg: “The climate change connections with a discussion of speed and health and child friendly cities are very strong, limiting speed of vehicles in cities. What it actually does is create a very attractive environment where people are more likely to reduce the use of the car from their own choice, from their own thinking. They work through it themselves and they switch to walking and cycling and public transport – they change their behaviour. If they do change their behaviour that way, there’s an immediate, very significant reduction in greenhouse gases in carbon dioxide. So, we actually have one of those classic win-win situations: we create healthy cities, safe cities more walking or cycling, more child-friendly cities, carbon-reduced cities, we deliver carbon dioxide reduction targets to sort out climate change.â€
Ref: The National Interest, ABC Radio National, 12/12/08
See the full transcript at: www.abc.net.au/rn/nationalinterest/stories/2008/2445020.htm#transcript
Posted in Models by Ferne Edwards on February 4th, 2009
The section below is republished with permission from the Going Solar Transport Newsletter #94, 20 January 2009, compiled by Stephen Ingrouille. Going Solar newsletter provides an excellent commentary on local sustainable transport issues in Melbourne. This article originally from The Age written by Debra Mayrhofer, 5/1/09, is an excellent introduction to the topic of “sustainable sharing” – the theme for the upcoming Sustainable Cities Round Table!
â€œI was waiting at the lights the other day; wondering why we were being held up when there was no opposing traffic. The pedestrians and cyclists beside me gave it up as a bad joke and just ignored the red signal. Finally we got the green light and the impatient motorist on my right screeched off, barely missing an elderly pedestrian whose slow pace had left him in no-man’s-land. There has to be a better way, I thought. And it seems there is. The first step is getting rid of most traffic lights. They diminish road safety, increase congestion, add to environmental pollution and compromise public space. Contrary to the trend of 20th-century planning, which assumed that efficient traffic flows and road safety depended on separating vehicles from the civic spaces, progressive cities around the world – including Bendigo – are removing traffic lights and gratuitous road signs.
Posted in Research by Ferne Edwards on September 3rd, 2008
A very interesting article was published in The Age recently about solutions to Melbourne’s water crisis. It discusses the big solutions versus the smaller (possibly distributed) ones. I’ve included some sections from the article below. To read the original article visit: http://www.theage.com.au/national/desal-and-water-tank-wars-20080824-41et.html?page=-1.
Desal and water tank wars
August 25, 2008
“DESALINATION and other big-ticket solutions to Melbourne’s water woes threaten to sideline alternatives, as a proposal to drop rainwater tanks is the subject of a row at the highest levels of State Government. “There are water tank wars going on,” a senior Government figure said, describing a debate being viewed as pivotal to the future of Victoria’s water planning. “With desalination plants and other water initiatives coming in, the rainwater tank has been singled out as something that may not be warranted in the future,” the figure said. …. The Age has obtained two confidential reports by University of Melbourne systems scientist and microbiologist Peter Coombes, which appear to challenge the Government’s big-project direction. Although his reports do not say it, their implication is that an alternative water strategy across Victoria could save taxpayers and home buyers billions of dollars by reducing reliance on expensive public water facilities. In one report he argues that previous simplistic estimates for water volumes generated by tanks in Melbourne are wrong, and badly misjudge the capability of tanks to supplement water supply. Although he refused to comment on the reports, Professor Coombes confirmed his work showed a tank in each Melbourne household could deliver a city-wide 120 gigalitres a year, more than twice previous estimates by water supplier Melbourne Water.”