Видео

1 is best. once we've saturated the inner city with high density compact living, then we need to focus on 2. once those suburban hubs have been densified, then focus on 4.

Why are you still planning to banish so many people to the suburban growth areas under scenario 2? Lots of support for a mixture of 2 and 4 here, which I broadly agree with, but why not 1, 2 and 4, with a dense inner city (Yarra, Stonnington, Port Phillip basically becoming 'the city'), middle-city infill, and no expansion of horrendous unsustainable suburbia? 2 on its own seems to include some carrots for developers, politicians, and middle Australia rather than being totally technocratic.

Please not the high traffic congestion option!

This clip is totally based on a fantasy given Victoria has a debt level that's equivalent to 3 States combined! What will the State Government be doing (by way of leading by example) and moving their offices out of the Melbourne City area to other parts of Victoria, e.g. Warrnambool, Sale, Terang, Mornington? People from the city can't move to these areas due to the lack of corporate work there. Where's the State Government incentive for businesses to move regional and create Regional Jobs? Oh, I forgot, Victoria is absolutely broke!

Climate change is driven by the sun and moderated by ocean currents. Its absurd to consider humans have any influence on climate. There is no evidence of more frequent or more severe weather. The only noticeable change in weather is very modest warming since 1850, the end of the little ice age. Modest warming should result in less frequent and less severe weather events. Stop lying to us.

The year, 2056; the Airport Rail Link has finally begun construction.

1, 2 and 4!

Australia loves destroying its history. If buildings are not heritage listed, you don’t get to see them in the future, but Melbourne has been totally destroyed and was so unique before the aspects of let’s destroy our grandfathers inheritance. It was incredibly difficult to build the buildings in Victoria in the first place, they did a marvellous job your destruction for your grandchildren future is disgraceful in all aspects and there is no regards from me only condemnation

As insightful as Infrastructure Victoria's modelling and recommendations are, it sadly counts for nought when we have arrogant, unaccountable governments like the current one (starting with Daniel Andrews), who completely disregard and sideline advice of bodies like Infrastructure Victoria and just unilaterally draw up reckless schemes like SRL to win votes in key areas.

Honestly, I can see a combination of these working, particularly 2 and 4. The centre city will always be dense and thats fine. Worst case option (imo where we are at the present day) is option 3. Endless sprawl with carpark deserts and long commutes.

NUMBER 1 IS THE ONLY 1

2 and 4 please - a network of consolidated, medium density cities with good connections, providing education, work, and healthcare opportunities at hubs in Melbourne and Victoria.

these are not mutually exclusive. The worst option for environmental use would be the Dispersed city, but I think the worst option overall would be to choose to focus on only one option.

I think a mixture of 2 and 4 would be most ideal, We have massive suburban hubs with high rise buildings and the other cities especially Geelong Ballarat and Bendigo densify and get high rises

2 and 4 don't seem mutually exclusive to me. I think a mix of those would be best.

Consolidated

It will be some of all of it. Compact City leaves the periphery to the really rich or the very poor. Consolidation and Regional make the most sense to make the most of existing infrastructure (roads, rails, schools, hospitals, parks libraries, swimming pools, tennis courts and ovals) already in place. The real question is which of these scenarios builds a State of worth and with lowered GHG, more walking and cycling, lower maintenance and which one needs the most new infrastructure paid for by.....____.

Number 2 would be the most ideal, majority of all the historical buildings in downtown to be replaced with Skyscrapers. Very transit oriented development would be ideal. If they do number one then downtown Melbourne would be way to crowded having more then 1 million people in downtown.

A mix of point 2 and 4 imo. Having everything centered in Melbourne as in point 1 tips the state's focus solely on inner Melbourne. Having multiple 'CBD' centres in both Metro and regional Victoria would benefit the whole state! Melbourne will always be the centre, but to see dense, tall urban development in places like Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo and maybe even LaTrobe would do wonders for the state. Areas dubbed as 'Activity centres' inside metro Melbourne should also go the way of Parramatta and Chatswood in Sydney. Ringwood, Box Hill, Clayton, Dandenong, Sunshine, Frankston, among others, should definitely go this way too!

That video should make sure no one in government actually needs to do anything for the foreseeable future

You cant go very far if everyone is stuck in one city. CBD cannot be the ONLY place everyone wants to go to.

Compact for sure. Dull endless sprawl is not a city.

1st for sure

You voted for a traitor and a tyrant and got nothing

😂

What's the point of asking for consultation when questioning, debating or discussing the climate change narrative is not allowed by infrastructure Victoria? Basically our country has policy directed by the world economic Forum and the United nations. We could get a majority of Victorians disagreeing with your plans and you'd still ram them through. This is pretend consultation run by a corrupt government which has handed over the people's sovereignty to foreign organisations

This video is very general and difficult to respond to. In my view we need to stop freeway and road building because of their huge carbon impact. Car based growth areas should also be stopped dead because of their fundamental unsustainability. We need to electrify all transport and discourage private car ownership. Retrofit existing urban areas as medium density mixed use communities based around walking cycling and with high quality public realm and building that have low carbon footprint and reduced energy consumption. Food production should be more localised to reduce transport for farm to home. Water needs to be better used locally through WSUD in towns and cities.Far better regulation of private development and business to maximise sustainability and community benefit is required.

informative video and great animation, but it can be better. Why is not your map facing north? there is a reason why we all use north-facing maps, and if you do not, you need to include a north arrow. this is unnecessarily confusing. please consider following true and tested map-making rules in your future videos. using north-facing maps, or having a north arrow and scale bar, help the viewer to understand the geographical relationships between the elements on the map and the reality much easier and faster. Thanks. :)

- Cutting bus fares won’t improve patronage for areas with only bus coverage, and for bus-train journeys which are fairly common due to good busses serving as feeders to train stations A cheaper fare won’t get any more riders on a bus every 40 min, because of horrid frequency. Anyone who’s journey needs bus-train would not benefit - unless if they changed their journey to something like DART routes, already well patronised Also, it would be better to electrify to melton - as development is happening *regardless* of whether line or stations are there. Even mere promises (eg Sayers Road Station) are being used even when there’s no plan. The houses will be there. It’s much more cost efficient to do it in one go.

Electrify only to Rockbank? Not Melton? Is this correct?

Better pricing for public transport trips is important but with with the C19 pandemic effecting the way we move around our cities other factors must be considered. New car sales are down. Motorcycle, scooter & bicycle sales are strong. As electric motors replace petrol/diesel engines sales of two-wheelers will get stronger. Access to public transport is a contributes to efficient service. Park & Ride facilities in Victoria are designed for cars. P&Rs are badly neglected and were over capacity before C19. If Victoria wants efficient public transport P&Rs must be redesigned and rebuilt. At least 5 motor scooters will fit in the space of 1 car. There should be secure, free parking for all two wheelers at public transport hubs. This parking should include lights & cameras for security, battery charge points and lockers for protective clothing.