urban planning + development – urban + regional development infrastructure
The SW1 development (Brisbane), which won the Australia Award for Urban Design
occurring through market demand and, if accompanied by investment in a high quality of design for both buildings and the public domain, can help support diverse and vibrant communities with access to local services and make more efficient use of established infrastructure. The promotion of the integration of land use and infrastructure planning within the Policy provides guidance to local authorities on the benefits that accrue through spatial planning arrangements that appropriately consider the interdependencies of land use and infrastructure planning, the impacts on costs of living resulting from excessive infrastructure costs arising through inefficient patterns of development, and better managing the impacts of congestion. At this stage, whilst the Policy places some weight on the need to reduce traffic congestion, it fails to engage sufficiently on the topic of public transport provision. This raises the thorny issue of the allocation of funds for road construction versus other forms of transport, but needs to be seen in the context of other policy areas, including climate change, an ageing population and peak oil. Appropriate links are made within the Policy to improvements in sustainable design, creating more inclusive communities and environmental management, particularly of natural systems that are impacted by urban development. Translating these into actions is recognised as the responsibility of state, territory and local governments; however, through the Policy, the government has the capacity to play a leadership role in respect to climate change, national environment protection and investment in infrastructure. The Policy recognises that coordinated action is needed to stop the widespread degradation of Australia’s natural resources, including water and biodiversity, along with engaging in appropriate strategies to mitigate the impacts of potential natural hazards, many of which may be accentuated by the likely affects of climate change. It also acknowledges the critical importance of arable land, especially on the fringes of the major urban centres, and the critical role that all levels of government have in protecting the productive capacity of this asset in the context of national food security. With higher rates of crime and social disadvantage generally concentrated in locations with poor accessibility to education, employment and services, the Policy acknowledges that social exclusion experienced by those communities affects the broader fabric of society. 36 • the australian local government INFRASTRUCTURE yearbook 2011/2012
The recent trend towards the aggregation of services (including in some circumstances retail) due to economies of scale can lead to social exclusion and a disaggregation of communities, and force people to travel further. Whilst this trend may be good for productivity and minimising the cost of providing services, it does not contribute to liveability or a high quality of life, particularly for the transport-vulnerable people in society who rely on conveniently located and accessible facilities. This requires that strong consideration is given to maintaining centres and other facilities in local communities where market forces might suggest otherwise and increase population densities around social services to maintain a critical mass that can support them at the local level. The statement in the Policy that access to adequate and affordable housing is fundamental to supporting quality of life is linked to the need for future housing stock to change in order to meet the needs of Australia’s changing demographics. The Policy promotes the concept of affordable living, of which the cost of housing is one component – encouraging alternative forms of accommodation, cultural diversity, and community health and wellbeing are others. From a governance perspective, the Policy highlights that administrative processes and ‘red tape’ can waste considerable time and resources. The efficiency and effectiveness of planning systems can be improved – a theme repeated in the Productivity Commission’s recent inquiry into planning and zoning laws – which will benefit business, communities and governments alike. It is important, however, that these improvements are not pursued at the expense of appropriate social and environmental safeguards. In conclusion, the National Urban Policy is one part of a broad suite of interdependent policies and initiatives, many of which are referred to in the document. It won’t appeal to all, in part because it does not provide the solutions, but rather the overarching context, objectives and principles that, as it states, aim to create a framework for stakeholders. Whilst there is clear scope to build on the Policy and engage in the delivery of its objectives, it reinforces that ‘business as usual’ is not going to equip Australia’s major urban centres with the tools needed to deal with the challenges faced. With the stewardship for the planning and development of those centres firmly in the hands of state, territory and local governments, it will be important for them to collaboratively engage with the government in this space.