Welcome to Los Angeles

via theage.com.au

No no no no no bad bad bad bad wrong wrong wrong wrong!

What part of this plan can be possibly construed as even being remotely sustainable? What will happen in 15 years when this land area is full? Expand again? And in 30 years? Expand again? The problem with having no physical features to stop the expansion of an urban area, is that barring any laws to the contrary, the urban area will just keep growing.

All those extra people, commuting all that extra distance to their worksites will clog up the existing infrastructure more than it already is. We’re taking away green space, and creating additional pollution in an already polluted city.

The knee-jerk reaction will be to create more roads, but the ROI on roads has been proven to be lower than that for rail. Problem is, rail requires a greater initial investment.

The best solution is to increase density in as many areas as possible, and reclaim inner-city industrial areas (I’m looking at you, Port of Melbourne) for housing and commercial use. Density is the answer, not expansion.

I can’t believe we’re still reading from a 1960s playbook when it comes to urban design. This is an absolute disgrace.