Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Opinion

In the fight of your life
you need the best at your side

No word on how ACT Government plans to make money out of development along the tram corridor

By rommeldog56 5 February 2015 33

An interesting article on some of some apparent secrecy surrounding options for raising money by the ACT Government along the light rail corridor :

There is no doubt it will be more expensive to live along the tram corridor or to set up business there.  The question is, who will pay and how much?

I also see that in unveiling the master plan for Woden, the ACT Government has included a tram in the drawings – without any overhead cables!


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
33 Responses to
No word on how ACT Government plans to make money out of development along the tram corridor
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
rubaiyat 11:09 am 30 Apr 15

dungfungus said :

It’s probably chockers (as you experiencied) around peak hours like Action buses are and then very quiet or empty the rest of the day.

Just like cars and roads.

dungfungus 2:19 pm 09 Feb 15

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

MERC600 said :

Perhaps we need one of these German things, a sort of dangling mono rail.
This one was on the telly the other night. It opened in 1901 and still going strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg8A1tGbuE

It’s like a cross between and Action bus and a Capital Metro tram.
It doesn’t seem to carry any passengers (bus) and it is noisy with lots of flange creep squeal (tram).
An deal and visionary compromise for Canberra’s public transport future.

Presuming that “any” was a typo and it was meant to ‘many’, I can assure you when I rode the Wuppertal hanging train, it was a lot more packed than in the video.

There was one typo – I meant to say “ideal” but I meant “any” as that is what the video depicted.
It’s probably chockers (as you experiencied) around peak hours like Action buses are and then very quiet or empty the rest of the day.

MERC600 1:50 pm 09 Feb 15

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

MERC600 said :

Perhaps we need one of these German things, a sort of dangling mono rail.
This one was on the telly the other night. It opened in 1901 and still going strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg8A1tGbuE

It’s like a cross between and Action bus and a Capital Metro tram.
It doesn’t seem to carry any passengers (bus) and it is noisy with lots of flange creep squeal (tram).
An deal and visionary compromise for Canberra’s public transport future.

Presuming that “any” was a typo and it was meant to ‘many’, I can assure you when I rode the Wuppertal hanging train, it was a lot more packed than in the video.

The bloke on the telly said it usually moves around 80k per day. It also runs vintage carriages at times where you can get a feed, and a geek inside peoples apartments as it slides past .
As Maya mentioned it does have a hell of a infrastructure above and around it, possibly even too much for our holders of the treasury keys.

Maya123 1:46 pm 09 Feb 15

dungfungus said :

watto23 said :

Easy, rates on the route will go up. Those that want to live there will pay and those that don’t won’t.
Remember just because you don’t think its worth it, doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty who would pay a fortune to live there.

People who have the means to “pay a fortune to live there” don’t travel by public transport..

Really! Even if they can’t find a convenient place to park their car in Civic, etc. Then if they do, needing to run out and feed the metre. Not even when say catching the tram to a restaurant at Dickson, it means they will be able to have a glass or more of wine with their meal and not need to worry about then driving. People will come to love the convenience of a tram, being able to live close to it, catch the tram up and down the road.
The sort of people who will buy there are not necessarily the same sort of people who will buy in say Forrest or Deakin, and who will think trams are beneath them. They are likely to be younger and not so staid in their thinking.

Maya123 12:55 pm 09 Feb 15

dungfungus said :

MERC600 said :

Perhaps we need one of these German things, a sort of dangling mono rail.
This one was on the telly the other night. It opened in 1901 and still going strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg8A1tGbuE

It’s like a cross between and Action bus and a Capital Metro tram.
It doesn’t seem to carry any passengers (bus) and it is noisy with lots of flange creep squeal (tram).
An deal and visionary compromise for Canberra’s public transport future.

Presuming that “any” was a typo and it was meant to ‘many’, I can assure you when I rode the Wuppertal hanging train, it was a lot more packed than in the video.

dungfungus 12:43 pm 09 Feb 15

watto23 said :

dungfungus said :

watto23 said :

Easy, rates on the route will go up. Those that want to live there will pay and those that don’t won’t.
Remember just because you don’t think its worth it, doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty who would pay a fortune to live there.

People who have the means to “pay a fortune to live there” don’t travel by public transport.
And where will the people who move to Northbourne Avenue catch the tram to.
There are two choices. Gungahlin or Civic, the latter in easy walking or cycling distance.
Now tell me if it’s worth it.

I think you don’t understand the sort of people who want to live in apartments. There are many wealthy people in big cities who use public transport. And I’ve never said I like the current tram option. I think its too slow and a waste of money. I’d rather have rapid transit system between the town centres, than a slow high density traffic corridor.

I have a car and motorcycle license and do both. I’d use public transport if its convenient, but it isn’t. I also live in a suburb where the rates are affordable also!

However the facts are the return will be the apartments and rates on the rout and people will pay it. They already pay a fortune to live in new apartments elsewhere. Lots of people like that because they don’t like having to look after a garden for example, or prefer being able to walk to nearby places as well.

Let’s not confuse “big cities” like Paris with Canberra.
I know wealthy people in that city (and other European cities of similar sizes) who live in apartments but they don’t have cars.
The reason is that they have no where to park them where they live and limited options of where to park within the city they live in.
And before someone says “but there are lot’s of cities in Europe with populations the same size of Canberra that have trams” consider the reasons that I mentioned in the previous paragraph as well. Most of these smaller cities started as villages with a single main street and apartments were built there 100 years ago when cars were not available to the masses so trams became (and still are) the peoples transport.
Canberra started as a planned city with the car as the main mode of transport.

dungfungus 12:09 pm 09 Feb 15

MERC600 said :

Perhaps we need one of these German things, a sort of dangling mono rail.
This one was on the telly the other night. It opened in 1901 and still going strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg8A1tGbuE

It’s like a cross between and Action bus and a Capital Metro tram.
It doesn’t seem to carry any passengers (bus) and it is noisy with lots of flange creep squeal (tram).
An deal and visionary compromise for Canberra’s public transport future.

watto23 12:08 pm 09 Feb 15

dungfungus said :

watto23 said :

Easy, rates on the route will go up. Those that want to live there will pay and those that don’t won’t.
Remember just because you don’t think its worth it, doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty who would pay a fortune to live there.

People who have the means to “pay a fortune to live there” don’t travel by public transport.
And where will the people who move to Northbourne Avenue catch the tram to.
There are two choices. Gungahlin or Civic, the latter in easy walking or cycling distance.
Now tell me if it’s worth it.

I think you don’t understand the sort of people who want to live in apartments. There are many wealthy people in big cities who use public transport. And I’ve never said I like the current tram option. I think its too slow and a waste of money. I’d rather have rapid transit system between the town centres, than a slow high density traffic corridor.

I have a car and motorcycle license and do both. I’d use public transport if its convenient, but it isn’t. I also live in a suburb where the rates are affordable also!

However the facts are the return will be the apartments and rates on the rout and people will pay it. They already pay a fortune to live in new apartments elsewhere. Lots of people like that because they don’t like having to look after a garden for example, or prefer being able to walk to nearby places as well.

Maya123 11:07 am 09 Feb 15

MERC600 said :

Perhaps we need one of these German things, a sort of dangling mono rail.
This one was on the telly the other night. It opened in 1901 and still going strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg8A1tGbuE

I’ve ridden that. It goes places where a ground based tram couldn’t go, such as along streams. It was one of my more memorable rides. But it does have rather a lot of infrastructure about it, far more than a conventional tram; plus we have more room to build on the ground than Wuppertal has.

MERC600 10:30 am 09 Feb 15

Perhaps we need one of these German things, a sort of dangling mono rail.
This one was on the telly the other night. It opened in 1901 and still going strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg8A1tGbuE

dungfungus 6:39 pm 08 Feb 15

Ryoma said :

I’m getting mixed up with who said what, so I’ll just make the point that there’s a line of argument being advanced here along the following lines:

“I’m not living anywhere near this particular piece of infrastructure, so I shouldn’t have to pay for it. By the same token, those who are near it should pay the whole lot, especially if something new is introduced.”

If we took that set of opinions to its fullest extent, it would basically mean that most of us could not attend either Canberra or Calvary Hospitals, attend either UC or ANU (and yes, they’re Federally funded, but presumably the same laws would apply), and people could only catch the buses that left from near their houses. Also, you could only attend one library branch, and your local school and sports areas.

For those of the older generations, who managed to buy here when Canberra was smaller and sleepier, (and, for arguments’ sake, before this type of policy came into play), well, they’d all be living in the *right* zones where there is now existing infrastructure. But they’d pay a fortune for it.

At the other end of the scale, anyone buying in the new Molonglo Valley suburbs, and most of Gungahlin, would have nothing at all beyond basic infrastructure. The attitude would be purely user-pays; “no, I’m sorry, there is no health service out here, because the fixed cost of building a hospital is too high for the current population – it only becomes viable once there are 125,000 people here.”

When people bought housing out here, they may have argued with this line of thinking, only to be told: “Well, if you can’t afford $700K for housing, that’s your problem. Don’t expect those of us who got in first to subsidise you. Besides, you’re the one who chose to live kilometres from the existing infrastructure.”

But hang on – doesn’t part of the value of both residential (regardless of type) and commercial real estate reflect the level of infrastructure available? Well, yes, Virginia, it does, in a roundabout way in both sales prices and rental yields, and also through the rates levied on an area.

The reasons the ACT Government is trying to undertake this project are broader than just transport (and on the basis of transport alone, I have concerns too; Gungahlin has very few jobs relative to Civic at present, so I can see very full trams heading to Civic each morning, and empty ones coming back – and the reverse at night). But what if by putting permanent infrastructure into place, it helped to give business confidence to invest not only in Gungahlin, but along Flemington Road – and if they sold Canberra Racecourse for housing or commercial development, would that shift things?

This type of project is needed to start somewhere, and the corridor exists along Flemington Road. I’d personally have preferred to see it start at the Molonglo Valley, or between Civic and the Airport, to be put in place ahead of the Monaro Highway upgrades.

Main point here; all Canberrans benefit from infrastructure spending over time. Yes, it often seems lopsided, and I’m not going to argue that it’s always (or even often) done well, or done fairly. That comes with being a safe seat. But we can generally all access health, fire, police, library and other services across Canberra. To do this well, governments of all flavours need to spread the fixed costs across as much of the population as possible, to bring the price per person down.

The alternative, where people draw lines on maps and only share services with people “just like us”, is an American model; http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/feb/05/detroit-city-collapsing-gentrifying

I understand people’s concerns, but there is a bigger picture here. If we as a city do not hang together (even when we as individuals do not agree with decisions made), we will most assuredly hang separately.

“This type of project is needed to start somewhere…….”
That is correct but this project isn’t needed at all.

Ryoma 5:44 pm 08 Feb 15

I’m getting mixed up with who said what, so I’ll just make the point that there’s a line of argument being advanced here along the following lines:

“I’m not living anywhere near this particular piece of infrastructure, so I shouldn’t have to pay for it. By the same token, those who are near it should pay the whole lot, especially if something new is introduced.”

If we took that set of opinions to its fullest extent, it would basically mean that most of us could not attend either Canberra or Calvary Hospitals, attend either UC or ANU (and yes, they’re Federally funded, but presumably the same laws would apply), and people could only catch the buses that left from near their houses. Also, you could only attend one library branch, and your local school and sports areas.

For those of the older generations, who managed to buy here when Canberra was smaller and sleepier, (and, for arguments’ sake, before this type of policy came into play), well, they’d all be living in the *right* zones where there is now existing infrastructure. But they’d pay a fortune for it.

At the other end of the scale, anyone buying in the new Molonglo Valley suburbs, and most of Gungahlin, would have nothing at all beyond basic infrastructure. The attitude would be purely user-pays; “no, I’m sorry, there is no health service out here, because the fixed cost of building a hospital is too high for the current population – it only becomes viable once there are 125,000 people here.”

When people bought housing out here, they may have argued with this line of thinking, only to be told: “Well, if you can’t afford $700K for housing, that’s your problem. Don’t expect those of us who got in first to subsidise you. Besides, you’re the one who chose to live kilometres from the existing infrastructure.”

But hang on – doesn’t part of the value of both residential (regardless of type) and commercial real estate reflect the level of infrastructure available? Well, yes, Virginia, it does, in a roundabout way in both sales prices and rental yields, and also through the rates levied on an area.

The reasons the ACT Government is trying to undertake this project are broader than just transport (and on the basis of transport alone, I have concerns too; Gungahlin has very few jobs relative to Civic at present, so I can see very full trams heading to Civic each morning, and empty ones coming back – and the reverse at night). But what if by putting permanent infrastructure into place, it helped to give business confidence to invest not only in Gungahlin, but along Flemington Road – and if they sold Canberra Racecourse for housing or commercial development, would that shift things?

This type of project is needed to start somewhere, and the corridor exists along Flemington Road. I’d personally have preferred to see it start at the Molonglo Valley, or between Civic and the Airport, to be put in place ahead of the Monaro Highway upgrades.

Main point here; all Canberrans benefit from infrastructure spending over time. Yes, it often seems lopsided, and I’m not going to argue that it’s always (or even often) done well, or done fairly. That comes with being a safe seat. But we can generally all access health, fire, police, library and other services across Canberra. To do this well, governments of all flavours need to spread the fixed costs across as much of the population as possible, to bring the price per person down.

The alternative, where people draw lines on maps and only share services with people “just like us”, is an American model; http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/feb/05/detroit-city-collapsing-gentrifying

I understand people’s concerns, but there is a bigger picture here. If we as a city do not hang together (even when we as individuals do not agree with decisions made), we will most assuredly hang separately.

dungfungus 5:34 pm 08 Feb 15

JC said :

Nightshade said :

JC said :

As for light rail you and others miss the fact that it is not just those along the route getting a benefit. For every couple of passengers that is one less car on the road taking space, polluting and competing for the finite number of car parks around town

Maybe, but part of the plan is for extensive new development along the route. Chances are, not all those new people will want to go where the tram is going, and we will end up with more cars on the road and competing for parking spaces – not fewer.

A lot of the development has already happened. Just look at Flemmington road. But yeah not every one along the route will or can use it, no argument but tram or no team these developments are still going to happen. So for every one attracted to the tram that is still one less competing on the road.

Good point JC.
The whole project has been underwritten by the wishful but false assumption that everyone living in Gungahlin works in Civic and therefore they will use the tram.
But people that may be attracted to a tram already probably use the buses which provide a better service now that what any tram will provide.
And that bus service already extends beyond Civic to all parts of Canberra which the tram/s will never do.
Never let common sense get in the way of a fantasy (especially if a government agency is involved).

dungfungus 1:18 pm 08 Feb 15

Maya123 said :

Nightshade said :

JC said :

As for light rail you and others miss the fact that it is not just those along the route getting a benefit. For every couple of passengers that is one less car on the road taking space, polluting and competing for the finite number of car parks around town

Maybe, but part of the plan is for extensive new development along the route. Chances are, not all those new people will want to go where the tram is going, and we will end up with more cars on the road and competing for parking spaces – not fewer.

I don’t see the logic there. I don’t think anyone is saying that absolutely everyone living along the tram route will use it. They will continue to drive, as they are doing now. As per example, I had a neighbour who drove to work everyday, despite living only a very short walk from a bus route that in about 15 minutes would have taken her directly to work. When I suggested how convenient the bus was, she stated to me, “I don’t catch buses,” in a voice that said she was better than that and buses were beneath her. She sure went down in my opinion after that.
Those people who will continue to drive are likely driving now, so that will continue, but others will catch the tram, so that will be a reduction in cars on the road. The tram will be one factor that will get less people driving. Less will drive as the routes are extended, and as good cycling facilities are added. I don’t live where I will have a chance to ride the tram very often, but as hopefully it is extended it will come closer to where I live. But everyone benefits from less cars on the road. I am also able to appreciate that the tram needs to start somewhere and that all people will not be able to regularly use it to start with.

I don’t ride bikes.That’s not because I am better – it’s because I have a balance problem.
A lot of people don’t like standing and clutching grab straps and rails on buses and trams either.
Good luck with doing the weekly shopping and picking up the kids in a tram.

JC 12:35 pm 08 Feb 15

Nightshade said :

JC said :

As for light rail you and others miss the fact that it is not just those along the route getting a benefit. For every couple of passengers that is one less car on the road taking space, polluting and competing for the finite number of car parks around town

Maybe, but part of the plan is for extensive new development along the route. Chances are, not all those new people will want to go where the tram is going, and we will end up with more cars on the road and competing for parking spaces – not fewer.

A lot of the development has already happened. Just look at Flemmington road. But yeah not every one along the route will or can use it, no argument but tram or no team these developments are still going to happen. So for every one attracted to the tram that is still one less competing on the road.

Maya123 11:14 am 08 Feb 15

Nightshade said :

JC said :

As for light rail you and others miss the fact that it is not just those along the route getting a benefit. For every couple of passengers that is one less car on the road taking space, polluting and competing for the finite number of car parks around town

Maybe, but part of the plan is for extensive new development along the route. Chances are, not all those new people will want to go where the tram is going, and we will end up with more cars on the road and competing for parking spaces – not fewer.

I don’t see the logic there. I don’t think anyone is saying that absolutely everyone living along the tram route will use it. They will continue to drive, as they are doing now. As per example, I had a neighbour who drove to work everyday, despite living only a very short walk from a bus route that in about 15 minutes would have taken her directly to work. When I suggested how convenient the bus was, she stated to me, “I don’t catch buses,” in a voice that said she was better than that and buses were beneath her. She sure went down in my opinion after that.
Those people who will continue to drive are likely driving now, so that will continue, but others will catch the tram, so that will be a reduction in cars on the road. The tram will be one factor that will get less people driving. Less will drive as the routes are extended, and as good cycling facilities are added. I don’t live where I will have a chance to ride the tram very often, but as hopefully it is extended it will come closer to where I live. But everyone benefits from less cars on the road. I am also able to appreciate that the tram needs to start somewhere and that all people will not be able to regularly use it to start with.

Nightshade 10:29 am 08 Feb 15

JC said :

As for light rail you and others miss the fact that it is not just those along the route getting a benefit. For every couple of passengers that is one less car on the road taking space, polluting and competing for the finite number of car parks around town

Maybe, but part of the plan is for extensive new development along the route. Chances are, not all those new people will want to go where the tram is going, and we will end up with more cars on the road and competing for parking spaces – not fewer.

JC 12:52 am 08 Feb 15

rommeldog56 said :

JC said :

rommeldog56 said :

watto23 said :

Easy, rates on the route will go up. Those that want to live there will pay and those that don’t won’t.
Remember just because you don’t think its worth it, doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty who would pay a fortune to live there.

I have no problem with Annual Rates along the Tram corriodore increasing more that the rest in recognition of proximity. As long as that is disclosed to buyers before hand and not after all the developments have been sold.

I have no problem either. But in fairness the rates of those that live within 5km of the Canberra hospital should go up, same with those within 5km of Calvary, but only by half that of TCH because Calvary only offers a limited service.

Those that live one suburb from main arterial roads should also pay more, and if an arterial road is duplicated then for a period of 10 years they should pay double.

Those within walking distance of schools should pay a special school levy, and of course those that live withing 5km of Fyshwick or Mitchell should be paying an adult entertainment levy owing to their close proximity to said services that operate in these suburbs. With the school levy and the entertainment levy it doesn’t matter if residents don’t utilise said services, the fact they are and they get a benefit, or perceived benefit compared to those living in Tuggeranong they should pay more.

Last I remember, roads are everywhere, schools are everywhere, shopping centres are everywhere, Hospitals are strategically located – as are are police stations, fire stations, etc. So we all pay because we all benefit. Thats fair enough.

The tram, on the other hand only benefits those living along its corridore. But i fully agree, their Annual Rates should rise substanially.

Of course roads and schools shopping centre are everywhere but for some people access to them is better than others. Take where I live for example I have no primary school for my kids so they need to go to the school in the next suburb. So thy are getting better access to that government resource.

Look at hospitals too south side gets the better hospital does more than Calvary yet I pay the same amount. Just look at the recent debate about the government wanting to restrict northern mothers to Calvary. Hardly fair hey when one facility is ru down one very modern.

As for light rail you and others miss the fact that it is not just thouse point along the route getting a Benicia. For every couple of passenger that is one less car on the road taking space, polluting and competing for the finite number of carparka around town

All academic anyway the way rates work in the act is based on land value. So if suspected light rail increases land value along the route then they will pay more anyway.

JC 12:45 am 08 Feb 15

Maya123 said :

JC said :

rommeldog56 said :

watto23 said :

Easy, rates on the route will go up. Those that want to live there will pay and those that don’t won’t.
Remember just because you don’t think its worth it, doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty who would pay a fortune to live there.

I have no problem with Annual Rates along the Tram corriodore increasing more that the rest in recognition of proximity. As long as that is disclosed to buyers before hand and not after all the developments have been sold.

I have no problem either. But in fairness the rates of those that live within 5km of the Canberra hospital should go up, same with those within 5km of Calvary, but only by half that of TCH because Calvary only offers a limited service.

Those that live one suburb from main arterial roads should also pay more, and if an arterial road is duplicated then for a period of 10 years they should pay double.

Those within walking distance of schools should pay a special school levy, and of course those that live withing 5km of Fyshwick or Mitchell should be paying an adult entertainment levy owing to their close proximity to said services that operate in these suburbs. With the school levy and the entertainment levy it doesn’t matter if residents don’t utilise said services, the fact they are and they get a benefit, or perceived benefit compared to those living in Tuggeranong they should pay more.

Doesn’t Tuggeranong have schools, or arterial roads such as the Monaro Hwy!! Of course it does.

Yep but I said tax thoughs living one suburb from an aterial road or walking distance of a school because they are getting something others further away don’t Fairs fair.

rubaiyat 2:46 pm 07 Feb 15

“I also see that in unveiling the master plan for Woden, the ACT Government has included a tram in the drawings – without any overhead cables!”

Actually there is light rail technology that is wireless, not that the ACT government looks like it is going to use that. Nor driverless systems.

I think it only fair that those getting the benefits of the new transport pay. The utility of having clean, frequent and attractive transport at your doorstep is worth something. In Sydney everyone clusters around transport because driving is such a lost cause.

The big problem, as usual with the ACT, is the lack of forward planning especially coherent forward planning. If this was the way of the future why is there nothing planned, even rights of way for Molonglo?

Where is the overall planning for the whole of Canberra? If everyone knew this was heading for a real solution for everyone instead of a tiny proportion of the tiny proportion in cooee of the line in Gungahlin, then the government would have more support.

I did a quick overlay of Canberra and despite the badly designed urban sprawl you can reach nearly all of Canberra with about 4 lines.

I strongly disagree with the proposed Civic Gungahlin route because it really services next to no-one. The better initial route should run from Dickson down Lonsdale Street through Garema Place and out over Commonwealth Bridge past most of the important destinations in the Parliamentary triangle and onto Manuka and Kingston.

Then Stage 2 build on that with another line running from Belconnen to Civic and on to Woden, Molonglo and Weston.

Only Stage 3 should run to Gungahlin when they actually build something en-route instead of the mostly empty paddocks and distant housing.

In all cases the object is to pick up and put down people en-route and to truly close by destinations, not lay the tracks down Northbourne Ave and Flemington Road because they are wide roads and it is an excuse to chop down all the trees.

The Government plan will fail because in nearly all cases the route does not go where people really want to go and is way too far away from potential passengers, for them to bother catching buses (doubly inconvenient) or walking to the line.

Light rail takes two forms, Light Rapid along an extended route, or slower but more convenient frequent pick-up and put down, absolutely convenient for the residential and commercial lining the route.

The Gungahlin line does neither. It is not fast, it is the same speed as the bus it replaces but is LESS convenient because it doesn’t cover the same extended destinations. It also is remote from potential passengers. Dickson for example, a popular destination, is a good walk across a several busy roads, and Gungahlin is designed with residential well away from the Civic Centre and is along a long route through open countryside lacking destinations.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site