Regional Cities

<html><body><div class="assets">
The Business Council of Australia chief executive Jennifer Westacott says the federal government needs a plan to kick-start 10 regional economies.
Westacott outlined criteria to identify places around Australia that can make the greatest economic contribution.
<div class="assets">
"We need to pick ten places, sit down with those communities, and get the ball rolling," she says.
</div>
<div class="assets">
The locations would have access to gateway infrastructure like an airport or major transport routes and be home to one of two existing successful industries.
</div>
<div class="assets">
Other criteria include:
</div>
<div class="assets">
* Strategic importance like Darwin and Cairns
</div>
<div class="assets">
* Close to major power grids
</div>
<div class="assets">
* A university and TAFE
</div>
<div class="assets">
* Quality health services to support expanding population
</div>
<div class="assets">
* Capacity to increase the supply of housing and industrial land
</div>
<div class="assets">
* Appetite to take pressure and congestions off major cities.
</div>
<div class="assets">
"We cannot spend twelve months arguing about which places should be chosen. Using my criteria, the places select themselves," Ms Westacott will say in a speech to the National press Club today.
</div>
<div class="assets">
"Not every place can be selected, and we cannot make decisions based on electoral politics. Let's just get on with it."
<div class="assets">
Westacott also called for agriculture, water policy and drought strategy to no longer be viewed in isolation.
<div class="teads-adCall">She wants the CSIRO and federal government to jointly prepare a white paper to examine water infrastructure, cropping cycles and resilience, water storage and regulation, and carbon farming.</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Business Council calls for 10 regional cities to get special status to stimulate the economy

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/79760/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Investing in regional cities’ economic performance makes good sense.
Contrary to popular opinion, new research out today shows regional cities generate national economic growth and jobs at the same rate as big metropolitan cities. They are worthy of economic investment in their own right – not just on social and equity grounds.
However, for regional cities to capture their potential A$378 billion output to 2031, immediate action is needed. Success will see regional cities in 2031 produce twice as much as all the new economy industries produce in today’s metropolitan cities.
Drawing on lessons from the UK, the collaborative work by the Regional Australia Institute and the UK Centre for Cities spotlights criteria and data all Australian cities can use to help get themselves investment-ready. 
Build on individual strengths
The Regional Australia Institute’s latest work confirms that city population size does not determine economic performance. There is no significant statistical difference between the economic performance of Australia’s big five metro cities (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide) and its 31 regional cities in historical output, productivity and participation rates.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/06/26/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-27%20at%209.17.29%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/06/26/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-27%20at%209.17.29%20AM.png" alt="">
So, regional cities are as well positioned to create investment returns as their big five metro cousins. The same rules apply – investment that builds on existing city strengths and capabilities will produce returns. 
No two cities have the same strengths and capabilities. However, regional cities do fall into four economic performance groups – gaining, expanding, slipping, and slow and steady. This helps define the investment focus they might require. 
For example, the report finds Fraser Coast (Hervey Bay), Sunshine Coast-Noosa and Gold Coast are gaining cities. Their progress is fuelled by high population growth rates (around 2.7% annually from 2001 to 2013). But stimulating local businesses will deliver big job growth opportunities. 
 
Similarly, the expanding cities of Cairns, Central Coast and Toowoomba are forecast to have annual output growth of 3.2% to 3.9% until 2031, building on strong foundations of business entries. But they need to create more high-income jobs.
Geelong and Ballarat have low annual population growth rates of around 1.2% to 1.5%. They are classified as slow and steady cities. But their relatively high creative industries scores, coupled with robust rates of business entries, means they have great foundations for growth. They need to stimulate local businesses to deliver city growth. 
Get ready to deal
Regional cities remain great places to live. They often score more highly than larger cities on measures of wellbeing and social connection. 
But if there’s no shared vision, or local leaders can’t get along well enough to back a shared set of priorities, or debate is dominated by opinion in spite of evidence, local politics may win the day. Negotiations to secure substantial city investment will then likely fail.
The federal government’s Smart Cities Plan has identified City Deals as the vehicle for investment in regional cities. 
This collaborative, cross-portfolio, cross-jurisdictional investment mechanism needs all players working together (federal, state and local government), along with community, university and private sector partners. This leaves no place for dominant single interests at the table.
Clearly, the most organised regional cities ready to deal are those capable of getting collaborative regional leadership and strategic planning. 
For example, the G21 region in Victoria (including Greater Geelong, Queenscliffe, Surf Coast, Colac Otway and Golden Plains) has well-established credentials in this area. This has enabled the region to move quickly on City Deal negotiations. 
Moving past talk to be investment-ready
There’s $378 billion on the table, but Australia’s capacity to harness it will depend on achieving two key goals.
First, shifting the entrenched view that the smart money invests only in our big metro cities. This is wrong. Regional cities are just as well positioned to create investment returns as the big five metro centres. 
Second, regions need to get “investment-ready” for success. This means they need to be able to collaborate well enough to develop an informed set of shared priorities for investment, supported by evidence and linked to a clear growth strategy that builds on existing economic strengths and capabilities. They need to demonstrate their capacity to deliver.
While there has been much conjecture on the relevance and appropriateness of City Deals in Australia, it is mainly focused on big cities. But both big and small cities drive our national growth.
Leonie Pearson is Adjunct Associate, University of Canberra and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/leonie-pearson-151626" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Bust the regional city myths and look beyond the ‘big 5’ for a $378b return: Leonie Pearson

<html><body>
Like clockwork, the bi-annual debate on the merits of High Speed Rail is upon us again.  Usually coinciding with elections (state and federal) the debate is policy gold for the Greens as it's a big ticket item that, as a minor party, they'll never have to fund.  Likewise for the major parties, it will take so long to become a reality, it's never part of their forward estimates either.  Notionally it sounds like a good idea - Melbourne to Sydney in less than 3 hours.  It looks like a good idea - all those pretty renders of blurry trains going so fast it sweeps the hair off the heads of the models standing in the vicinity of a space age looking station.  But is it actually a good idea?

The Melbourne - Sydney flight route is the third busiest in the world, carrying over 8 million passengers per annum.  That's no mean feat for a country of only 23 million, especially when you compare the population and densities of other countries also in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_busiest_passenger_air_routes" target="_blank">top 10</a> - South Korea, Japan, China and India.  With such high passenger numbers, you'd expect competition to be high.  And with the first 3 mentioned, not only are there several airlines servicing those routes, but also a high speed rail link which leaves Australia - with four major domestic airlines and no high speed rail!

Melbourne - Sydney route is of course serviced by standard rail - the<a href="http://www.railaustralia.com.au/xpt.php" target="_blank"> </a><a href="http://www.railaustralia.com.au/xpt.php" target="_blank">XPT</a> link, although with a travel time of roughly 11 hours its hardly a direct competitor for a 1 hour 20 min plane ride.  And at $110 for a mid week economy fare, its not really price competitive either; though kids 15 years and under currently travel for $1 - Bargain!  However through a combination of high fuel prices, a crowded airspace (as evidenced by Sydney's increasingly desperate search for a second airport site), and a growing national environmental conscience, the thirst for a high speed rail link has become greater and greater, so much so that there was even a political party solely dedicated to the cause during the recent Federal Election - <a href="http://bullettrainforaustralia.com.au/" target="_blank">The Bullet Train For Australia Party</a>!

Despite millions of dollars being spent over the last few years on various feasibility studies (<a href="http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/files/HSR_Phase1_Report.pdf" target="_blank">Phase 1 report</a> released August 2011, <a href="http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/files/HSR_Phase_2-Main_Report_Low_Res.pdf" target="_blank">Phase 2 report</a> released April 2013), Australia is still no closer to HSR becoming a reality and with good reason -  an estimated price tag for a complete Brisbane-Sydney-Canberra-Melbourne link of $114 Billion.  It's no wonder transport experts such as Alan Davies have said the project is starting to smell awfully like the 'B' word - Boondoggle (for those unsure what a 'Boondoggle' is, see Melbourne's planned East-West tunnel).  

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/imagejmlv.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Japanse Maglev testbed, capable of 500km/h. Image courtesy businessinsider.com.au"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-702px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/imagejmlv.jpg?itok=nUDG8yDb" title="The Japanse Maglev testbed, capable of 500km/h. Image courtesy businessinsider.com.au" typeof="foaf:Image"></a>

Various experts agree that the CBR is break even at best, and that in order to keep fares at a competitive price, we'll never actually recoup the $114 Billion price tag.  That's copious amounts of your and my money potentially spent with no real ROI, and would almost certainly mean that private investors would balk at getting involved, leaving the Federal government to foot the entire cost.

In order to make these numbers viable the train would have to take an awful lot of mode share away from planes.  Whilst theoretically possible, I can't see what the incentive to change would be given the price is unlikely to be orders of magnitude lower, and the projected travel time is still more than double than that of air!  Even taking into account travel time to and from the airport, its still unlikely to be better, so as much as I love the idea of a train link, my assessment of the HSR plan as it stands remains - Boondoggle!

But fret not.  Before you decide to give in and strap on the reflective vest and help Tony Abbott build yet another pointless freeway, it doesn't mean HSR is not possible under a different guise.  My biggest concern for the current plan is this: Whilst it is not planned to be fully operational until 2065, the technology is outdated now!  If technology allowed us to cut the journey time considerably, then perhaps the incentive to switch is much more substantial.

Shanghai's airport link train, the Maglev, uses magnetic levitation technology and travels at approximately 400 km/h.  However the Japanese are currently working on an improved unit, with their planned Tokyo - Nagoya Maglev train to be operational by 2027.  A 24 km test track exists and planned speeds are apparently 581 km/h; to put this into perspective the 900 km Melbourne to Sydney journey would take a mere 1.5 hours!  Now that's a serious saving yet before you throw your stop/slow sign away and abandon your post at the construction site of the East West Tunnel to run home and buy shares in the company that builds Maglev trains, there could be an even faster solution!

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/Image3cstv.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Renders of the Hyperloop concept. Images courtesy cisatv.com"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-702px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/Image3cstv.jpg?itok=nS7cO5jM" title="Renders of the Hyperloop concept. Images courtesy cisatv.com" typeof="foaf:Image"></a>

Last month Tesla Motors Inc CEO Elon Musk, unveiled a a new mode of super fast transport called the <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/musk-shows-hyperloop-transport-design-for-people-to-cars" target="_blank">Hyperloop</a>.  Described as "a cross between a Concorde, a railgun, and an air-hockey table", people would travel in pods in a tube at speeds up to 1100 km/h, thus reducing a Melbourne to Sydney trip to a mind boggling 50 minutes!  Add to that Musk's claim that it could run on solar power and that construction cost would be only one tenth of current HSR solutions and it certainly provides some food for thought, even if it is still at a conceptual stage.

Whilst HSR may currently look like a pie-in-the-sky proposal, rapid technological advances certainly suggest there is hope for the future.  Whilst the current plan may be too slow to make it feasible, that's not to say we should at least prepare for the future.  Ensuring we make the necessary reservations for the route is paramount - the last thing we need is to blow out any future cost due to expensive land acquisitions.  Train technology is currently moving at an extraordinary pace and it's not out of the question that any of the above proposals, or maybe even something faster, would be available in the coming decades.  

So next time you're being thrown all about the place whilst standing in a packed Hitachi train on your commute to Flinders Street, consider trying out your train surfing skills on a train going 10 times as fast!  Or on the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/easey-does-it-end-to-end-gains-its-train-set" target="_blank">roof of a building in Collingwood</a> for that matter...
</body></html>

TheHeadOnTheDoor

HSR - High Speed Rail or Highly Sceptical Rip-off?

<html><body>
The Federal Government has made Phase 2 of its previous election commitment into the study of High-Speed Rail along Australia's East Coast public.

Direct link to all the documentation <a href="http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/" target="_blank">here</a>.

Setting aside cost and the timeframe for implementation for the moment (as that's what the mainstream debate will focus on) -  let me emphasise we must ensure the regional cities - those that have a mooted station - have proper structure plans in place to harness the opportunity which fast connectivity to capital and other regional cities will bring.

It's unfortunate Julia Gillard has already been spruiking the commuting benefits of the project with this  first (bottom) tweet:

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/jg_hsr_tweet.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Tweet from the Prime Minister 11/4/13"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-351px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_351px/public/pictures/article-images/jg_hsr_tweet.png?itok=fmyYjPdB" title="Tweet from the Prime Minister 11/4/13" typeof="foaf:Image"></a>

Selling High Speed Rail as a commuting option to alleviate housing affordability in Sydney is the absolute wrong message we should be selling this project on.  In fact using the system as any kind of long-distance commuting option should be discouraged.

Selling the benefits of the project to the public this way will have the effect of extending the issues of mass movement of people from the outer more affordable fringe areas of cities to the centralised employment centres, predominantly located in our respective central cities - it's garden city planning on steroids!

Fast commute? absolutely.  Cheap to commute? not on your nelly - in 2065 it's estimated an Albury - Melbourne fare would be $42 one way.

Instead, Victoria and New South Wales have a unique opportunity to leverage the infrastructure to grow their regional centres - the Australian Inland Empire if you will.

Shepparton, Albury-Wodonga, Wagga Wagga are the three cities between Melbourne and Canberra that are likely to have a station with regionally-focused services.   Our supplimentary debate about the benefits of High Speed Rail should include the respective councils of these regions and focus from the Federal and State levels of government should be on growing the economies of these respective cities to the point where new industries: be they services, manufacturing or further expansion of agri-business can flourish.

Growing and diversifying these economies will be made easier, as the fast access to and from the three capital cities on the route will provide quick access to airports for global connectivity.  It's not rocket science, regional cities are lower-cost employment environments which businesses can leverage to create jobs which in turn will attract people to live in these cities - not commute to them.

Melbourne, and Sydney, are learning that in order to grow their respective cities, urban high-density, short-commute principles are the best to implement - as they take advantage of existing infrastructure, local economic activity expands and diversifies and this knowledge <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/developments" target="_blank">the development market is now catering for</a> throughout capital metropolitan areas can be applied to these regional centres.

It's not just the capitals which should grow into true urban centres; regional cities are equally as relevant and deserving of a strong urban focus.
</body></html>

Regional Cities

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Regional Cities

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News