Posts
An average Brisbane suburban family has decided to go car free to save money and improve their health. Not only that, they have decided to record their experiences in an online diary, which you can read regular updates on here. While some of our current political leaders tell us it's "green" to drive a 4WD everywhere it's great to see that Brisbane people are taking our social, environmental and economic challenges seriously and taking genuine action to improve the city.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Family go "car(e)free" in Brisbane
An average Brisbane suburban family has decided to go car free to save money and improve their health. Not only that, they have decided to record their experiences in an online diary, which you can read regular updates on here. While some of our current political leaders tell us it's "green" to drive a 4WD everywhere it's great to see that Brisbane people are taking our social, environmental and economic challenges seriously and taking genuine action to improve the city.
Media Tuesday 4 March
State plans for Ipswich CBD and public transport interchange
Monday's announcement by the Premier, Anna Bligh, of plans by the State to take control of planning in Ipswich's CBD has been welcomed by the community transport group, Community Action for Sustainable Transport [CAST].
CAST supports the move to upgrade the railway station and bus interchange.
The existing station and interchange are failing to properly cater for the increasing demand for public transport services by the Ipswich community.
The need for better quality facilities and services for commuters has been apparent for the last five years following the explosive growth in housing and workplaces in surrounding suburbs.
CAST particularly supports the intention to construct office space to house up to 1200 State
Government workers.
We have regularly urged the State to relocate many of its Government departments from Brisbane's
CBD to suburban hubs and regional growth areas like Ipswich and Cleveland, said CAST president David White.
The benefits to the community generally and to the State of decentralising its workplaces and services include substantial cost savings from reduced travelling times, and significant reductions in demands for new and costly infrastructure to cope with transport congestion caused by local workers and families having to travel long distances every day during peak hours.
The State now needs to take action to complete the Darra to Springfield line and all associated stations by 2011, and to fast-track construction of the connection between Springfield and Ipswich.
This will be essential if the new workers in the Ipswich CBD are to have fast and efficient access to their workplaces.
We do however believe that the intention to introduce a private investor to construct the new centre has the potential to increase the cost of the project unnecessarily. The State's record of success using public-private partnerships is not good.
Contact David White: 0403 871 082
Monday's announcement by the Premier, Anna Bligh, of plans by the State to take control of planning in Ipswich's CBD has been welcomed by the community transport group, Community Action for Sustainable Transport [CAST].
CAST supports the move to upgrade the railway station and bus interchange.
The existing station and interchange are failing to properly cater for the increasing demand for public transport services by the Ipswich community.
The need for better quality facilities and services for commuters has been apparent for the last five years following the explosive growth in housing and workplaces in surrounding suburbs.
CAST particularly supports the intention to construct office space to house up to 1200 State
Government workers.
We have regularly urged the State to relocate many of its Government departments from Brisbane's
CBD to suburban hubs and regional growth areas like Ipswich and Cleveland, said CAST president David White.
The benefits to the community generally and to the State of decentralising its workplaces and services include substantial cost savings from reduced travelling times, and significant reductions in demands for new and costly infrastructure to cope with transport congestion caused by local workers and families having to travel long distances every day during peak hours.
The State now needs to take action to complete the Darra to Springfield line and all associated stations by 2011, and to fast-track construction of the connection between Springfield and Ipswich.
This will be essential if the new workers in the Ipswich CBD are to have fast and efficient access to their workplaces.
We do however believe that the intention to introduce a private investor to construct the new centre has the potential to increase the cost of the project unnecessarily. The State's record of success using public-private partnerships is not good.
Contact David White: 0403 871 082
Friday, February 08, 2008
Hale Street Bridge Update
WHAT PRICE FOR CITY HALL ACCOUNTABILITY?
by Darren Godwell, President, West End Community Association.
The State government's Co-ordinator General report on the inner-city toll-bridge at Hale Street paints a picture of an auction where the price keeps on rising well after you've made the final bid.
"For the HSL to proceed.would require an increased project budget above that of the $245 million approved by Council".
At the last council election candidate Newman made a $180 million promise to build a toll-bridge. Today Lord Mayor Newman says it'll cost $450 million.
The report's measured tone rings alarm bells - "it may be necessary for a new financial analysis.to ensure the project is good 'value' and is able to service the cost of project with the toll revenues collected."
The Co-ordinator General's insight tells us City Hall is having difficulty coming to grips with another major project. Sadly, if Newman persists the end result will be either a larger subsidy from the pockets of Brisbane's ratepayers through more rates increase or a top-up from the taxpayers of Queensland. So it's either the pockets of ratepayers or the pockets of taxpayers.
"Most projects of this size in recent times have been subject to significant cost-escalation pressures...It is likely that this project was also finding significant cost pressure and difficulty of remaining within the Council-approved budget."
The Lord Mayor's new alternative is to scale-back the approaches onto the bridge.
Logically, the State government finds that "a reduction in project scope is likely to result in reduced benefits [and] the project business case will need to be revisited to ensure that the 'value' of the project is acceptable".
Here's the rub. To test for "value" and to consider its "acceptability" before the local Council election we'll need to see City Hall's "project modification report". But Council's revised report is not due until the 20th March - five days after the election.
The Co-ordinator General rightly asks are we getting 'good value' from ratepayers' monies. To figure out what's 'good value' we'll also need to know if the project works.
The independent umpire reveals that City Hall made interesting choices from the beginning: "BCC did not seek the assistance of the Coordinator-General.BCC instead undertook a voluntary assessment process. However, a 'voluntary assessment process' may not necessarily be conducted with the same robustness and rigor."
Rigor was never to bother this process. Process became a rude joke when the Mayor's staff solicited big business and interstate relatives to make submissions supporting the proposal.
The latest revelation is City Hall's obligations under the "conditional approval" by the State government. Specifically, filing an acceptable "traffic management plan" for both construction and operational stages. Including a "public transport management plan" to detail impacts on non-car commuters.
We now know City Hall has only assessed a portion of the traffic impacts. Amazingly, the Coordinator General reveals, this project is only half tested. There is no assessment of the traffic impacts on the southern end.
"BCC was not asked to and did not submit a traffic management report for the proposed southside works. I note that Main Roads do not intend to request a traffic management report for these works as, in their opinion, any impact would be on local traffic only in the immediate area."
This finding points to the Labor majority in Council who approved the project without the full information on all of the impacts.
South Brisbane Councillor Helen Abrahams is left out on a limb by not knowing the impacts on local businesses, streets, suburbs and constituents. To a lesser degree, the local State Member, Anna Bligh, is also exposed by this oversight.
The Coordinator General recommends that State government compel City Hall for a traffic management plan for the southern side. This plan is critical to making an accurate assessment. The final report may prove unpalatable reading for the people of the Gabba, Highgate Hill, South Bank, South Brisbane and West End.
Once every four years, people hold their Lord Mayor and local Councillors to account. To do this properly, in the interest of seeing public monies well spent, the people of Brisbane will need to have all the pieces, traffic and financial, on the table before the election.
by Darren Godwell, President, West End Community Association.
The State government's Co-ordinator General report on the inner-city toll-bridge at Hale Street paints a picture of an auction where the price keeps on rising well after you've made the final bid.
"For the HSL to proceed.would require an increased project budget above that of the $245 million approved by Council".
At the last council election candidate Newman made a $180 million promise to build a toll-bridge. Today Lord Mayor Newman says it'll cost $450 million.
The report's measured tone rings alarm bells - "it may be necessary for a new financial analysis.to ensure the project is good 'value' and is able to service the cost of project with the toll revenues collected."
The Co-ordinator General's insight tells us City Hall is having difficulty coming to grips with another major project. Sadly, if Newman persists the end result will be either a larger subsidy from the pockets of Brisbane's ratepayers through more rates increase or a top-up from the taxpayers of Queensland. So it's either the pockets of ratepayers or the pockets of taxpayers.
"Most projects of this size in recent times have been subject to significant cost-escalation pressures...It is likely that this project was also finding significant cost pressure and difficulty of remaining within the Council-approved budget."
The Lord Mayor's new alternative is to scale-back the approaches onto the bridge.
Logically, the State government finds that "a reduction in project scope is likely to result in reduced benefits [and] the project business case will need to be revisited to ensure that the 'value' of the project is acceptable".
Here's the rub. To test for "value" and to consider its "acceptability" before the local Council election we'll need to see City Hall's "project modification report". But Council's revised report is not due until the 20th March - five days after the election.
The Co-ordinator General rightly asks are we getting 'good value' from ratepayers' monies. To figure out what's 'good value' we'll also need to know if the project works.
The independent umpire reveals that City Hall made interesting choices from the beginning: "BCC did not seek the assistance of the Coordinator-General.BCC instead undertook a voluntary assessment process. However, a 'voluntary assessment process' may not necessarily be conducted with the same robustness and rigor."
Rigor was never to bother this process. Process became a rude joke when the Mayor's staff solicited big business and interstate relatives to make submissions supporting the proposal.
The latest revelation is City Hall's obligations under the "conditional approval" by the State government. Specifically, filing an acceptable "traffic management plan" for both construction and operational stages. Including a "public transport management plan" to detail impacts on non-car commuters.
We now know City Hall has only assessed a portion of the traffic impacts. Amazingly, the Coordinator General reveals, this project is only half tested. There is no assessment of the traffic impacts on the southern end.
"BCC was not asked to and did not submit a traffic management report for the proposed southside works. I note that Main Roads do not intend to request a traffic management report for these works as, in their opinion, any impact would be on local traffic only in the immediate area."
This finding points to the Labor majority in Council who approved the project without the full information on all of the impacts.
South Brisbane Councillor Helen Abrahams is left out on a limb by not knowing the impacts on local businesses, streets, suburbs and constituents. To a lesser degree, the local State Member, Anna Bligh, is also exposed by this oversight.
The Coordinator General recommends that State government compel City Hall for a traffic management plan for the southern side. This plan is critical to making an accurate assessment. The final report may prove unpalatable reading for the people of the Gabba, Highgate Hill, South Bank, South Brisbane and West End.
Once every four years, people hold their Lord Mayor and local Councillors to account. To do this properly, in the interest of seeing public monies well spent, the people of Brisbane will need to have all the pieces, traffic and financial, on the table before the election.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Smart Card Discounts
David Bremner, a Brisbane resident, has done an excellent evaluation of the discount scheme that has been offered by TransLink for SmartCard users.
You can read the full evaluation here:
http://brisbaneseasterngateway.googlepages.com/translinkticketrawdeal
You can read the full evaluation here:
http://brisbaneseasterngateway.googlepages.com/translinkticketrawdeal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
