New Developments : Is this the Look that the Light Rail will Bring ?

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t reckon it looks too bad, pretty tall though, not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. Not sure why some people are opposed to tall apartment blocks, would they prefer urban sprawl instead?

Sadly many would prefer urban sprawl.
Some more interesting designs and concepts would be nice though, along with colour. Some mundane, bland apartment blocks like this example are okay for those that want them, but they would not appeal to everyone. They look unfriendly; where the resident goes to hide themselves away and not involve themselves with others. More choice is needed. Perhaps some apartments could offer a communal garden, instead of just the manicured space, where residents could grow a few vegetables or flowers, and meet the other residents. This could be an internal courtyard, around the edge, or perhaps on the roof. Create a sense of community. Also non-smoking apartment blocks, so residents don’t have to breath their neighbours’ fumes. There would be other ideas. It would be nice if apartment blocks could be built to help foster a sense of community, but many as they are designed now, seem to be built to do the opposite of that.

Why pity people who want urban sprawl?
Canberra was designed around wide, open spaces. Detractors call this urban sprawl. Who wants to live in a box?
The light rail threatens to destroy the Canberra concept in the name of “progress”.
Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?

You’re arguing against yourself there.
“Why pity people who want urban sprawl?”
“Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?”

Fair comment.
I should have been more succinct. I meant that we shouldn’t pity the people who want (and have) urban sprawl; we should in fact envy them.
It is time we reined in the sprawl but not to allow in-fill. I like Canberra just how it is and I cannot see any point in burdening ratepayers with the cost of something that we simply do not need.

Easy simple economics…. If they don’t increase population and thus rates, as everything inflation increases, your rates will go up even more to cover the inflated costs. The more you can spread the costs the less rates need to go up. So you should be encouraging as many people as possible to move into medium and high density property. The govt makes a lot more money then 🙂

rosscoact said :

Tarinedier said :

There isn’t even a tenuous link to light rail in this development. Why don’t you just pick an ethnic/religious/political group you dislike, then your headline can be: Are these the type of people that the Light Rail will bring?

I agree, this is a ludicrous discussion by the Statler and Waldorf collective.

You still watch Muppets?
Are they on the ABC or SBS?

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t reckon it looks too bad, pretty tall though, not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. Not sure why some people are opposed to tall apartment blocks, would they prefer urban sprawl instead?

Sadly many would prefer urban sprawl.
Some more interesting designs and concepts would be nice though, along with colour. Some mundane, bland apartment blocks like this example are okay for those that want them, but they would not appeal to everyone. They look unfriendly; where the resident goes to hide themselves away and not involve themselves with others. More choice is needed. Perhaps some apartments could offer a communal garden, instead of just the manicured space, where residents could grow a few vegetables or flowers, and meet the other residents. This could be an internal courtyard, around the edge, or perhaps on the roof. Create a sense of community. Also non-smoking apartment blocks, so residents don’t have to breath their neighbours’ fumes. There would be other ideas. It would be nice if apartment blocks could be built to help foster a sense of community, but many as they are designed now, seem to be built to do the opposite of that.

Why pity people who want urban sprawl?
Canberra was designed around wide, open spaces. Detractors call this urban sprawl. Who wants to live in a box?
The light rail threatens to destroy the Canberra concept in the name of “progress”.
Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?

You’re arguing against yourself there.
“Why pity people who want urban sprawl?”
“Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?”

Fair comment.
I should have been more succinct. I meant that we shouldn’t pity the people who want (and have) urban sprawl; we should in fact envy them.
It is time we reined in the sprawl but not to allow in-fill. I like Canberra just how it is and I cannot see any point in burdening ratepayers with the cost of something that we simply do not need.

rosscoact said :

Tarinedier said :

There isn’t even a tenuous link to light rail in this development. Why don’t you just pick an ethnic/religious/political group you dislike, then your headline can be: Are these the type of people that the Light Rail will bring?

I agree, this is a ludicrous discussion by the Statler and Waldorf collective.

And on this subject we could do with a bit more of the Rainbow Connection and, as Maya suggests, some greening of sorts – even if, as Kermit said, It’s Not Easy Being…. – the grim, lifeless colours and brutalist design ultimately have nothing to do with trams, it’s just the way of the world, apparently.

Tarinedier said :

There isn’t even a tenuous link to light rail in this development. Why don’t you just pick an ethnic/religious/political group you dislike, then your headline can be: Are these the type of people that the Light Rail will bring?

I agree, this is a ludicrous discussion by the Statler and Waldorf collective.

Tarinedier said :

There isn’t even a tenuous link to light rail in this development. Why don’t you just pick an ethnic/religious/political group you dislike, then your headline can be: Are these the type of people that the Light Rail will bring?

+1

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t reckon it looks too bad, pretty tall though, not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. Not sure why some people are opposed to tall apartment blocks, would they prefer urban sprawl instead?

Sadly many would prefer urban sprawl.
Some more interesting designs and concepts would be nice though, along with colour. Some mundane, bland apartment blocks like this example are okay for those that want them, but they would not appeal to everyone. They look unfriendly; where the resident goes to hide themselves away and not involve themselves with others. More choice is needed. Perhaps some apartments could offer a communal garden, instead of just the manicured space, where residents could grow a few vegetables or flowers, and meet the other residents. This could be an internal courtyard, around the edge, or perhaps on the roof. Create a sense of community. Also non-smoking apartment blocks, so residents don’t have to breath their neighbours’ fumes. There would be other ideas. It would be nice if apartment blocks could be built to help foster a sense of community, but many as they are designed now, seem to be built to do the opposite of that.

Why pity people who want urban sprawl?
Canberra was designed around wide, open spaces. Detractors call this urban sprawl. Who wants to live in a box?
The light rail threatens to destroy the Canberra concept in the name of “progress”.
Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?

You’re arguing against yourself there.
“Why pity people who want urban sprawl?”
“Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?”

Ben_Dover said :

If “higher density development” along Northborne is to be the saviour of the light rail city, will they start be demolishing all the slums public housing, which makes the main road into Canberra look like a venture into Bogota?

I think think that the ACT Govt has already said they will be demolished those to allow for redevelopment. Thats a goiod thing. But why do they use the Light Rail as the excuse/reason to do that ? That decision could have been made at any time by any ACT Gov’t.

Maya123 said :

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t reckon it looks too bad, pretty tall though, not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. Not sure why some people are opposed to tall apartment blocks, would they prefer urban sprawl instead?

Sadly many would prefer urban sprawl.
Some more interesting designs and concepts would be nice though, along with colour. Some mundane, bland apartment blocks like this example are okay for those that want them, but they would not appeal to everyone. They look unfriendly; where the resident goes to hide themselves away and not involve themselves with others. More choice is needed. Perhaps some apartments could offer a communal garden, instead of just the manicured space, where residents could grow a few vegetables or flowers, and meet the other residents. This could be an internal courtyard, around the edge, or perhaps on the roof. Create a sense of community. Also non-smoking apartment blocks, so residents don’t have to breath their neighbours’ fumes. There would be other ideas. It would be nice if apartment blocks could be built to help foster a sense of community, but many as they are designed now, seem to be built to do the opposite of that.

Why pity people who want urban sprawl?
Canberra was designed around wide, open spaces. Detractors call this urban sprawl. Who wants to live in a box?
The light rail threatens to destroy the Canberra concept in the name of “progress”.
Wouldn’t it be nice for Canberra to stop expanding and consolidate?

If “higher density development” along Northborne is to be the saviour of the light rail city, will they start be demolishing all the slums public housing, which makes the main road into Canberra look like a venture into Bogota?

Their are lots of articles in Fairfax Media publications about the various Australian light rail projects being proposed, under way and recently completed.
All have a common denominator, namely massive cost increases and overruns.
Fairfax like to churn these articles around, for example, an article about the Canberra project may not appear in the SMH but will appear in the Newcastle Morning Herald.
The Canberra Times appears to only pick up and publish “good news stories” about light rail and then selectively fails to publish the “bad news” ones.
One such article appeared in the SMH last week and I supplied the link on another RiotACT thread.
It needs to be supplied again because the longer the Canberra project is contemplated the higher the cost will blowout.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-light-rail-line-costs-blow-out-to-22-billion-8211-600-million-more-than-budgeted-20141109-11jazn.html
Indeed, what we are talking about on this thread may be entirely academic because there is no way that the Canberra project should proceed with the knowledge of the revelations in this story.
Clearly, The Canberra Times is supporting the light rail project or protecting the government from adverse publicity about light rail generally.
I am surprised Mr “no light rail” Coe hasn’t latched on to this SMH article, yet.

Tarinedier said :

There isn’t even a tenuous link to light rail in this development. Why don’t you just pick an ethnic/religious/political group you dislike, then your headline can be: Are these the type of people that the Light Rail will bring?

Why don’t you learn to read ? The OP was trying to use the example of a new high density development in Tuggers to ask if that is what can be expected all along the corridor – including along the gateway into Canberra – Northborne Avenue. As said in the OP – beauty is in the eye of the beholder though.

It is obvious that Light Rail is coming. I just dont want to see one stuff up ie. the Light Rail, made worse by another stuff up ie. poor aesthetics of the higher density buildings – the planning and approval of which will almost certainly be rushed through to improve the density along the corridor as quickly as possible (so as to reduce the $ cost of the underwriting by the ACT Govt/Ratepayers).

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t reckon it looks too bad, pretty tall though, not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. Not sure why some people are opposed to tall apartment blocks, would they prefer urban sprawl instead?

Sadly many would prefer urban sprawl.
Some more interesting designs and concepts would be nice though, along with colour. Some mundane, bland apartment blocks like this example are okay for those that want them, but they would not appeal to everyone. They look unfriendly; where the resident goes to hide themselves away and not involve themselves with others. More choice is needed. Perhaps some apartments could offer a communal garden, instead of just the manicured space, where residents could grow a few vegetables or flowers, and meet the other residents. This could be an internal courtyard, around the edge, or perhaps on the roof. Create a sense of community. Also non-smoking apartment blocks, so residents don’t have to breath their neighbours’ fumes. There would be other ideas. It would be nice if apartment blocks could be built to help foster a sense of community, but many as they are designed now, seem to be built to do the opposite of that.

I don’t reckon it looks too bad, pretty tall though, not that that’s neccessarily a bad thing. Not sure why some peoplke are opposed to tall apartment blocks, would they prefer urban sprawl instead?

MERC600 said :

Why won’t a bus trundling along this corridor do the same job. Why does it need a tram?

Trams are “visionary” and “vibrant” while they trundle down the same route and Capital Metro will probably ban buses from the route (even though their latest slick promotional video depicts buses in Northbourne Avenue).

puggy said :

dungfungus said :

How the light rail is supposed to compliment the proposed high density hasn’t been explained credibly.

Put simply, if you live along the corridor, you’d be expected to commute via light rail during peak times and leave the car at home. And that’s fair enough. But that’s the theory only. Sure as night follows day, they’ll screw it up.

If you work along the corridor you would be likely to use the tram but we all know this is nonsense so people will have to use their cars like most other Canberrans.

Why won’t a bus trundling along this corridor do the same job. Why does it need a tram?

VERY bland inside and out. Where is the colour? And no, white and shades of grey doesn’t count as colour here.
Am I the only person who likes colour, or is this reflecting the general public’s bland tastes?

Sub 300k will take pressure off the housing market.
However wont get light rail ever

dungfungus said :

How the light rail is supposed to compliment the proposed high density hasn’t been explained credibly.

Put simply, if you live along the corridor, you’d be expected to commute via light rail during peak times and leave the car at home. And that’s fair enough. But that’s the theory only. Sure as night follows day, they’ll screw it up.

There isn’t even a tenuous link to light rail in this development. Why don’t you just pick an ethnic/religious/political group you dislike, then your headline can be: Are these the type of people that the Light Rail will bring?

Looks better than Nishi though – no bits of grey packing crate or pallet sticks masquerading as “hipster Green cladding” …

The style of units built along Flemington Road closer to Ngunnawal will be the order of the day along Northbourne Avenue (ugly).
There have been no announcements about how the dramatic increase in motor vehicle traffic in the densified Northbourne Avenue will be handled. I am assuming the units will have carparking for residents and the question arises is how will the gridlocked be handled when they all hit the road at the same time. How the light rail is supposed to compliment the proposed high density hasn’t been explained credibly.