Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Is 'the suburbs' a useful idea anymore?

By Alan Davies - posted Tuesday, 2 August 2016


While the great bulk of suburban jobs are in relatively small centres (such as Ormond), around a fifth are in large concentrations like Clayton, Box Hill and Tullamarine. These are much smaller than the CBD but they indicate an emerging polycentric urban form with most specialising in one or more particular industries (see Are all suburban centres the same?).

I don’t expect the term ‘suburb’ is likely to fall into disuse any time soon, but we need to get over the idea that we live in a binary world comprising a tiny active centre on the one hand, and a giant inactive suburban dormitory suitable only for resting, on the other.

Here’s a better representation of contemporary reality: there are a number of key places in the metropolitan area where activities want to agglomerate and where the wider community is best served if they do. Because it’s extraordinarily expensive to build and operate transport infrastructure, these locations are likely to be characterised by a high level of accessibility to other parts of the metropolitan area.

Advertisement

They include the CBD and much of the inner city, but they also include places like Clayton, Tullamarine, Box Hill,Ringwood, Footscray, Sunshine, Knox, Broadmeadows and Dandenong.

So asking if a 13 storey residential tower is too much for “the suburbs” – as if the 2,400 square kilometres of built-up Melbourne that lies outside the inner city is all the same – is the wrong question. The “suburbs” is an idea that’s lost most of its usefulness.

The right question is whether or not a markedly higher concentration of activities is appropriate in a place such as Ormond, having regard to strategic considerations like the capacity of infrastructure. The question of whether or not 13 storeys is appropriate on a particular site in Ormond – in this case the rail station – is a consequential and secondary question that should have regard to urban design considerations.

I note though that, as pointed out here, the area surrounding the rail station is already zoned for commercial and mixed uses.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

This article was first published on Crikey.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

4 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Alan Davies is a principal of Melbourne-based economic and planning consultancy, Pollard Davies Pty Ltd (davipoll@bigpond.net.au) and is the editor of the The Urbanist blog.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Alan Davies

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 4 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy