City Development

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
National, state and city governments aspire to increase prosperity through globally competitive and more liveable cities. Through “world class” infrastructure, buildings and public spaces they aim to increase a city’s competitive advantage in attracting investment and talent. <a href="http://www.pmjournal-digital.com/pmjournal/december_2017___january_2018/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1244171#articleId1244171" target="_blank">Research</a> shows city governments, not states, nearly always deliver these projects overseas. The controversies in the Australian examples are largely the result of excluding local government.
Globally, mixed-use megaprojects have increasingly been seen as vehicles to make cities competitive as well as responding to local transport and housing issues. <a href="http://www.pmjournal-digital.com/pmjournal/december_2017___january_2018/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1244171#articleId1244171" target="_blank">My research</a> for a forthcoming book, Mixed-Use Megaprojects and the Competition for Capital, examines such projects on government land in Sydney, Melbourne, New York and Copenhagen.
What do Australian cities do differently?
The research examined projects in terms of governance, narrative, urban form, connectivity and public benefit. The findings underscore the argument that <a href="https://www.sgsep.com.au/publications/whats-new/sgs-contributes-to-important-new-book-on-metropolitan-governance" target="_blank">state governments lack the structural capacity or nimbleness</a> to manage the subtle interplay of various place-based programs necessary to coordinate enablers of modern competitiveness.
Compared to developments overseas, the Australian examples have several things in common:
1. More property industry influence. 2. Less strategic coordination with other land assets and transport projects. 3. Less public benefit outcomes. 4. Less commitment to legislated planning frameworks. 5. Less engagement with local knowledge.
The Barangaroo development in Sydney is perhaps the archetype of these patterns.
Despite much <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/barangaroo-4255" target="_blank">controversy over Barangaroo</a>, one thing can be agreed. The poor relationship between the city and state governments has contributed to a loss of trust in planning.
Excluding the city is not good policy
Firstly, this is a skills mistake. The city council has sophisticated capabilities and consistent place-based planning, design and approvals processes. These have been developed over decades.
The city also has established consultation processes and deep experience dealing with a range of stakeholders involved in inner-city development.
When the state intervenes to deliver a project and excludes the city, these processes and their advantages disappear.
Secondly, this is a political mistake. A sophisticated enemy is created that has working relationships with local stakeholders and constituents. With decades of planning work and expert knowledge disregarded, city governments are compelled to scrutinise the process and criticise the state from the sideline.
The City of Sydney appears to be winning the political, if not material, battle of Barangaroo. The <a href="https://meetings.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=118">lord mayor</a> has outlasted seven state premiers in the project’s lifetime along with numerous measures intended to reduce lord mayoral efficacy.
But the battle is the problem and it’s sure to continue under current patterns of (non)rules. Consider the following examples.
The minister for planning is <a href="https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20110817021058/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/142226/20130814-1220/www.barangaroo.com/media/43967/barangaroo+review+final+report+31+july+2011+compressed.pdf">free to make major changes to the plan without reference to any process</a>. This includes approving the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/30/the-rise-and-rise-of-barangaroo-how-a-monster-development-on-sydney-harbour-just-kept-on-getting-bigger">hotel-in-the-harbour</a> proposal even though it contravened state planning policy.
This ministerial power makes projects highly sensitive to political fluctuations. <a href="https://theconversation.com/all-the-signs-point-to-our-big-cities-need-for-democratic-metro-scale-governance-92417">Longer-term planning objectives</a> can be destabilised as a result.
The unsolicited proposal process has been another trust-breaker. Traditionally, government established the need for infrastructure within a metropolitan plan. It would call for tenders from the private sector, then evaluated those tenders in a competitive process. Now private sector participants are encouraged to approach government with development “ideas”.
A prime example <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/unsolicited-proposals/unsolicited%20proposals.pdf">involves the Crown Casino complex</a> at Barangaroo. This proposal required major changes to the approved plan. It more than doubled the allowable floor space of the previous hotel-in-the-harbour proposal it had been encouraged to replace <a href="https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20110817021058/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/142226/20130814-1220/www.barangaroo.com/media/43967/barangaroo+review+final+report+31+july+2011+compressed.pdf">to restore trust in planning</a>.
What might city involvement look like?
The <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/copenhagen-port-development/">Copenhagen City &amp; Port Development Corporation</a> is an arm’s length delivery authority, owned 95% by Copenhagen municipality and 5% by the state. It is responsible for delivering a number of mixed-use megaprojects.
As with all city areas, Copenhagen municipality develops the “<a href="https://www.kk.dk/artikel/lokalplaner-trin-trin">Lokalplan</a>” for precincts under standard processes and approves individual buildings and public spaces. <a href="https://byoghavn.dk/nordhavn/">North Harbour</a> has been delivered as adopted in 2009.
In New York, a private developer has delivered the Hudson Yards project above state railyards under the city’s standard planning process (<a href="https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/applicants/applicant-portal/lur.pdf">ULURP</a>). The state’s involvement is limited to the air rights lease.
This did not protect the Hudson Yards project from criticism. Nevertheless, it went through the lengthy standard consultative process and has been delivered according to the rezoning since 2005.
As an aside, the city governments of both European and US cases have adopted mandatory affordable housing laws. They are now delivering 25% in their megaprojects.
As an indulgence, let’s say we were in Copenhagen or New York. The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/30/the-rise-and-rise-of-barangaroo-how-a-monster-development-on-sydney-harbour-just-kept-on-getting-bigger">casino complex, hotel-in-the-harbour, or doubling of the site’s floorspace</a> would require revisiting the city’s Lokalplan or ULURP. This process would include public review and approvals by multiple city government agencies. In Sydney, one person, the state minister, decides on major changes to the plan.
This research shows the approaches needed to improve city competitiveness and fairness tend to be done better by city governments than by state governments. Yet in Australia the state has absolute control of these complex, city-based projects. Whether as part of a <a href="https://theconversation.com/metropolitan-governance-is-the-missing-link-in-australias-reform-agenda-55872">new metropolitan sphere of governance</a> or not, it is time to empower local city governments in the transformation of our cities.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mike-harris-576619" target="_blank">Mike Harris</a>, Lecturer in Landscape Architecture and Urban Design, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414" target="_blank">UNSW</a>
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-cities-pay-the-price-for-blocking-council-input-to-projects-that-shape-them-127017" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Australian cities pay the price for blocking council input to projects: Mike Harris

<html><body>
The release of planning documents for the ambitious redevelopment of 24 hectares of land around Central Station is an excellent example of how cities can be shaped by transport.
Around the world major transport nodes are generating exciting urban renewal projects that lead to significant development and the announcement of plans for redevelopment around Sydney’s Central Station is a world class example.
The redevelopment of this 24-hectare site into a precinct with 25,000 jobs will turn unfriendly railway tracks into a new urban precinct.
The proposed Central Precinct will be compared to the exciting redevelopment around Kings Cross Station in London, which led to significant new urban development that included jobs, homes and community amenities. On Friday November 1st the Urban Taskforce conference ‘CITIES SHAPED BY TRANSPORT’ will highlight the best global projects that link transport and new development including the Kings Cross Project, and NSW Transport Minister, Andrew Constance, will profile New South Wales projects including the Central Precinct.
The draft Strategic Vision for the Central Precinct highlights the Western Gateway Subprecinct which is zoned for buildings up to 35 metres in height within a floor space ratio of 3 to 1. This will allow some impressive new buildings and be an important part of the renewal of the precinct.
The Urban Taskforce conference will profile exciting transport strategies that drive urban development from Singapore, Jerusalem, Melbourne, London and Dublin as well as looking at how future technologies like Uber Elevate will change movement across urban areas.
The Urban Taskforce is keen to contribute our comments to the exhibition of the plans for the Central Precinct.
CHRIS JOHNSON is the Urban Taskforce CEO 
</body></html>

cjohnson-8xfqfuuCSq

Central Station redvelopment shows how cities can be shaped by transport: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
Premier Gladys Berejiklian has announced plans to work on a long-term vision for the historic Macquarie Street East Precinct on the eastern fringe of the CBD.
Former Prime Minister Paul Keating will join forces with the Chief Commissioner of the Greater Sydney Commission, and former Lord Mayor of Sydney, Lucy Turnbull to work on the landmark project.
The review will look at ways to improve the amenity and public usage of one of Sydney’s most historic precincts, which includes Hyde Park Barracks, State Library, Sydney Hospital and NSW Parliament.
Premier Gladys Berejiklian and Treasurer Dominic Perrottet today announced two of NSW’s most prominent Sydneysiders will work together to develop a long-term vision for the historic Macquarie Street East Precinct on the eastern fringe of the CBD.
“I am delighted two of the most passionate advocates for Sydney have agreed to work together on ways to enhance what is already one of the jewels in this city’s glittering crown,” Ms Berejiklian said.
“Our aim is to make this area, with its historic buildings and beautiful gardens, an even more vibrant place for locals and tourists to enjoy.”
Mr Perrottet said Mr Keating and Mrs Turnbull were both strong advocates for Sydney, with a keen desire to improve the city and make it more welcoming and accessible for everybody.
“The Macquarie Street East Precinct is home to some of Sydney’s most important public buildings and iconic open spaces,” Mr Perrottet said.
“With two such passionate people working together on this project I am sure we will be able to make the area even better, unlock potential for new ways to connect the precinct to the rest of the CBD, and improve the public’s experience and usage.”
Mr Keating and Mrs Turnbull both welcomed the opportunity to provide ideas and direction for the Macquarie Street East Precinct.
“This precinct is of central importance to the city and there is scope for rationalisation in the further dedication of public space,” Mr Keating said.
Mrs Turnbull said as Sydney continued to grow it was important to ensure the use of open space evolved and adapted.
“I feel very privileged to be given the opportunity to help create a long term vision for a precinct that encapsulates so much history, beauty and cultural relevance dating back tens of thousands of years,” Mrs Turnbull said. 
“It has long deserved better connections and access, so that more Sydneysiders and visitors can enjoy this precious precinct.”
An initial report from Mr Keating and Mrs Turnbull is expected to be completed by mid-2019.
 
</body></html>

Keating and Turnbull unite to work on Macquarie Street East precinct vision

<html><body>
Is there a case for revisiting the idea of new cities for Australia in the light of recent population projections and resurgent debate about the implications of a big Australia?
By big we’re talking in the order of <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3222.0Main%20Features62012%20(base)%20to%202101?opendocument&amp;tabname=Summary&amp;prodno=3222.0&amp;issue=2012%20(base)%20to%202101&amp;num=&amp;view" target="_blank">another 12 million people by mid-century</a>. That’s said to be <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-12/australia-is-struggling-to-handle-its-swelling-population/9535116" target="_blank">equivalent to adding a Canberra every year</a> for the next 30 years. But, on business-as-usual projections, three-quarters of that growth will be accommodated in our four biggest cities: Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3222.0main+features72012%20(base)%20to%202101" target="_blank">According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics</a>, this could mean a Sydney of almost 9 million people and Melbourne of almost 10 million by just after 2050.
The last time the nation seriously confronted the reality of sustained and accelerated population growth was in the early 1970s. And there was a mood to do something decisive. In 1972 an Australian Institute of Urban Studies task force emphatically <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/9420956?selectedversion=NBD1633419" target="_blank">recommended</a>:
efficient and humane alternatives to overconcentrated growth … A massive new-cities program needs to be started NOW.
Benjamen Gussen’s proposal for a ‘charter city’ in the Pilbara stimulated this imaginary depiction (above). Justin Bolleter.
The Whitlam government obliged with a <a href="http://www.johncainfoundation.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/lyndsay-neilson-presentation.pdf" target="_blank">national growth centre program</a>. Undertaken jointly with the states, this produced some positive outcomes. These included an expanded Albury-Wodonga and systematic longer-term planning for Campbelltown in southwest Sydney and eventually Joondalup in northwest Perth. Admittedly there were some duds, such as the tri-city <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/29/1038386312281" target="_blank">Bathurst-Vittoria-Orange</a> and Monarto outside Adelaide, now a free-range zoo.
Funding and enthusiasm trailed off. This more or less reflected trends globally, certainly in the UK, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2002/may/15/communities.guardiansocietysupplement" target="_blank">heartland of new town thinking</a>, where the Commission for New Towns was abolished by 1998.
But <a href="http://www.newtowninstitute.org/spip.php?article420">Paris carried on</a> and even the private sector in the US developed new communities, <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/howard/howard-magazine/ph-mg-ho-columbia-planned-cities-20170606-story" target="_blank">bringing innovation to the design process</a>. Other nations with high population growth, such as <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2017/12/12/why-hundreds-of-completely-new-cities-are-being-built-around-the-world/#4ad64fc514bf" target="_blank">China, maintained engagement</a>. Now even <a href="https://www.nic.org.uk/news/adonis-new-infrastructure-can-bring-first-new-towns-half-century-billions-national-economy/" target="_blank">Britain is returning</a> to <a href="http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06867/SN06867.pdf" target="_blank">new-look garden cities as models of sustainable growth</a>.
<h2>So what’s going on in Australia?</h2>
If Australia had a fair dinkum national urban and population policy, then future patterns of national settlement would be firmly in its sights. But we don’t, and those <a href="https://theconversation.com/hopes-of-a-new-urban-age-survive-ministers-fall-52975" target="_blank">hopes of a new era</a> under Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull just haven’t ignited. Instead, we mostly have a scattershot of initiatives, incentives and deals on offer within an overall economistic rhetoric of smartness and value capture.
Infrastructure Australia’s recent report, <a href="http://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/policy-publications/publications/files/future-cities/Future-Cities-Summary-Report-2018.pdf" target="_blank">Future Cities: Planning for our growing population</a>, is not much help. It concentrates on the largest cities only, and reiterates the conventional wisdom of their evolution towards higher-quality, higher-density cities.
It is worth asking why existing – and presumed inevitable – patterns of growth are the equivalent of a new city, but new urban places are not tabled as viable options.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210047/original/file-20180313-30983-q1df03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210047/original/file-20180313-30983-q1df03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Australia created a new city for its capital and annual population growth is now being equated to ‘new Canberras’, so why not consider more new cities? <a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/aerial-view-canberra-city-center-1040423728?src=iwImnPPAC2OgKnPtvdHwYg-1-18" target="_blank">Yicai/Shutterstock</a>
There is nothing approaching a coherent vision of national urban system planning. This scale of thinking has largely dropped out of the policy realm. The rise of design-driven planning has brought many benefits in balancing public and private interest, but these are usually played out at the local scale.
Metropolitan planning strategies display more comprehensive thinking but are jurisdictionally constrained. They also inevitably converge on the same suite of aspirations – growth management, housing supply and affordability, employment, density, mixed-use activity centres and transit-oriented development. And, as we see in Melbourne, the progressive liberalisation of urban growth boundaries to allow greater expansion <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-cities-and-their-metropolitan-plans-still-seem-to-be-parallel-universes-87603" target="_blank">misses opportunities for more radical rethinks</a>.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/all-the-signs-point-to-our-big-cities-need-for-democratic-metro-scale-governance-92417" target="_blank">Metropolitan governance is the order of the day</a>, without doubt, but what spatial framework does that sit in? The <a href="https://www.greater.sydney/" target="_blank">Greater Sydney Commission</a> is proving its worth in this direction and organising local authorities into a co-ordinated assemblage. But its strategy has almost nothing to say about the rest of the state.
There is no spatial state plan. Wollongong, Newcastle, the Central Coast (contributing over 200,000 daily return commuter trips into Sydney) and regional areas lie out of view.
Where state planning strategies do exist (such as Western Australia) these tend to be toothless and lacking in vision.
Since mid-2017 some bigger-picture thinking has surfaced in submissions and presentations to the House Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Transport and Cities, which is conducting a timely <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/ITC/DevelopmentofCities" target="_blank">inquiry into the Australian government’s role in city development</a>. The message is that there are no quick fixes, single solutions or optimum city sizes. There is also an awareness that the path dependency of growth in metropolitan areas will ensure their continuing primacy.
The <a href="https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/glossary/agglomeration-economies/" target="_blank">agglomeration economies</a> favouring non-metropolitan locations are admitedly weaker but a strengthening narrative relates to the links between 21st-century transportation and settlement. <a href="https://theconversation.com/high-speed-rail-at-200-billion-wed-better-get-it-right-62541" target="_blank">High-speed rail</a> is not just an inter-city technological marvel but – done well to an integrated spatial plan – becomes a nation-building instrument for expanding key regional centres.
Think longer term, think big
Long-term thinking compels bigger vision. The 2013 book <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/book/7215/" target="_blank">Made in Australia</a> by Richard Weller and Julian Bolleter attempts this, by daring to imagine a future beyond the conventional wisdom of low-density spread and urban consolidation. Guided by ABS national population projections – <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3222.0Main%20Features52012%20(base)%20to%202101?opendocument&amp;tabname=Summary&amp;prodno=3222.0&amp;issue=2012%20(base)%20to%202101&amp;num=&amp;view" target="_blank">70 million by 2101</a> – its sights are firmly <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.parksleisure.com.au/documents/item/2693" target="_blank">set on a whole new conception of megaregions and new cities</a>. Northern Australia, in particular, comes into view as a new urban frontier.
There are various scenarios to explore within a new city paradigm:
<ul>
<li>the polycentric city (think: Hunter to the Illawarra in NSW)</li>
<li>integrated planning for regional centres and expanded towns (a more targeted <a href="http://regional.gov.au/regional/programs/regional-growth-fund.aspx" target="_blank">Regional Growth Fund</a>)</li>
<li>regional satellites (network city regions focused on metropolitan cores)</li>
<li>upscaled master plan communities set within a regional vision (<a href="https://www.greaterspringfield.com.au/" target="_blank">Springfield</a>)</li>
<li>“new cities in cities” (<a href="https://theconversation.com/flying-into-uncertainty-western-sydneys-aerotropolis-poses-more-questions-than-answers-73682" target="_blank">Western Sydney aerotropolis</a>).</li>
</ul>
The contemporary new city idea cannot be a tired rerun of town and country planning policies from the past. These elevated post-war welfare-state British new towns as the benchmark and ignored their many shortcomings as urban environments.
The population tap is unlikely to be turned off even if politically leveraged downward. Humanitarian migration is also likely to grow. This means we need to have a debate that is not just about population size but also about its distribution.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92990/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Australia is a post-colonial country built largely through relatively new, planned cities. We have a capital city famously built from scratch. Australians should be able to engage with a more nuanced evaluation of the role of new cities in delivering the desired triple bottom line of urban productivity, liveability and sustainability.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robert-freestone-168551" target="_blank">Robert Freestone</a>, Professor of Planning, Faculty of Built Environment, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414" target="_blank">UNSW</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/elizabeth-taylor-97922" target="_blank">Elizabeth Taylor</a>, Vice Chancellor's Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063" target="_blank">RMIT University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/julian-bolleter-292111" target="_blank">Julian Bolleter</a>, Research Fellow, Australian Urban Design Research Centre, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-western-australia-1067" target="_blank">University of Western Australia</a>
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-cities-its-an-idea-worth-thinking-about-for-australia-92990" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Should Australia be thinking about a new city?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
When it comes to planning better cities for the future there’s one simple rule: connect people to places, people to transport and people to people.
The quality and efficiency of our connections have a major impact on how we experience city living. Too often when a city plans for connectivity the needs of people are neglected. We forget the deceptively simple principle that we must ensure that people are at the centre of how we plan, where we live, how we travel and how we get to work.
Despite our obvious need for connectivity, many of us are living in a state of “urban disconnect”. Cities have been designed for cars rather than people. Urban disconnect and discontent grow on the back of, and are compounded by, increasing pollution, depleting fossil fuels, rising fuel prices, traffic congestion and traffic fatalities.
As we become more disconnected, we suffer the consequences. These include greater inequality, a rise in obesity and social alienation – not to mention lost economic opportunities.
How to diagnose connectivity
Bringing the people and place connections to fruition requires an accurate diagnosis of current levels of connectivity. Connected places have three key attributes:
<ul>
<li>
People connectivity — this exists where a place promotes social interaction and community engagement; where there is a sense of place, identity, community attachment and social diversity; and where people from all walks of life come into everyday contact with each other. This builds social capital and empathy across the social-cultural spectrum.
</li>
<li>
Place connectivity — this involves land use that provides easy access to a mix of neighbourhood activities, enabling short-distance travel. This brings place A and place B closer together.
</li>
<li>
Transport connectivity — this exists where low-impact modes of travel allow for sustainable mobility, which enhances the quality and liveability of places, making the journey between place A and place B safe, efficient and enjoyable.
</li>
</ul>
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194067/original/file-20171109-13317-3xd8or.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Connections between people and places are what makes attractive urban places. Picture by Tommy Wong, Author provided
Place and people connectivity encourages place-making and creates vibrant, liveable and attractive urban places.
Place and transport connectivity, on the other hand, is about urban function and describes how accessible urban places are. High place and transport connectivity means that places A and B are brought closer together, or it is faster and easier to travel between them.
To measure the connectivity attributes of places and the success of strategies to meet people’s needs, I developed an audit tool for continual quantitative and qualitative evaluation. The tool can be used to measure the “before and after” situation of a place to assess whether strategies to improve connectivity have been successful.
The audit tool incorporates five key dimensions:
<ul>
<li>
city and neighbourhood structure
</li>
<li>
diversity
</li>
<li>
walkability and cyclability
</li>
<li>
place-making
</li>
<li>
transport.
</li>
</ul>
A case study in connectivity
As an example of using the audit tool, we assessed how King Street in San Francisco performs against the diversity dimension.
Embarcadero Boulevard in San Francisco (which becomes King Street) replaced the elevated Embarcadero Freeway after the magnitude 6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989.
King Street provides a direct east-west connection between Embarcadero and the I-280 on and off ramps at Fifth Street. The Fourth Street station is a stub-end terminal with six rail platforms. The section I studied runs from the San Francisco Bay Bridge to Fourth Street (highlighted in red in Figure 1).
Figure 1
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/193526/original/file-20171107-1011-1rby4u3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Geographical setting of King Street and Mission Bay. Image adapted from Google Earth, 2016, Author provided
Table 1 illustrates the diversity dimension of the audit tool as applied to King Street.
Table 1
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/193914/original/file-20171109-11963-fx8gzr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
 i) A lot is a land parcel within a block. There could be number of lots under different ownerships within a block. Drawn on maps from Google Earth, 2016. Adapted with permission, Author provided
Diversity of block sizes has resulted in a neighbourhood housing information technology companies, media houses, financial institutions, car rental, pharmacy, fire department, retail stores, bowling alley, art stores, design studios, dry cleaners, cafeterias and restaurants. This creates an opportunity for a diverse demographic mix.
Students from the Mission Bay campus of the University of California, San Francisco, a centre for health research and education, together with the mix of office goers add to the diversity and create demand for a number of demographically specific functions and services. Private investments have been attracted to the neighbourhood. Other benefits include jobs, residential growth and increased land prices.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194442/original/file-20171114-27622-1r7wo7j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
A quiet corner of the busy Kings Street. Picture by Reena Tiwari
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194443/original/file-20171114-27585-blj7ws.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Diverse travel modes and a mix of retail, recreation, office and apartments offer a place to work, live and play. Picture by Reena Tiwari
The presence of AT&amp;T Park, home of the Giants Major League Baseball team, plazas and parks enhance the recreational character of the place. This diverse mix of functions attracts people to visit, run businesses, work, shop and live. The result is a vibrant neighbourhood character and economy.
Various medium and high-rise residential condominium projects have been built on King Street. There are also multi-family residential buildings. The different types of apartments are a pull factor for all age groups and family sizes.
This has also resulted in an increase in public transit commute trips. Walking-to-work trips, measured in the influence zone of the streetcar-served Embarcadero Boulevard, have increased by 1.6%.
Similarly, I applied the audit tool to the other four dimensions of connectivity attributes for the boulevard.
A well-connected place scores high on many, but not necessarily all, of the variables. Generally, it is a mixed-use place, of medium to high density with fine urban grain. Importantly, people are able to connect to an efficient and well-integrated transport network with easy access to destinations.
By involving users and residents in place-making, a connected place reinforces the community’s positive identity and sense of ownership.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86214/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Reena Tiwari is the author of Connecting Places, Connecting People: A Paradigm for Living in the 21st Century (Routledge, September 2017, ISBN 9781138213067).
Reena Tiwari, Professor and Fellow of the Curtin Academy, Curtin University
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-city-that-forgets-about-human-connections-has-lost-its-way-86214" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

A city that forgets about human connections has lost its way: Reena Tiwari

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
European cultural and creative cities have stronger economic output and more jobs than their Australian counterparts. So why is our urban creative vibrancy associated with city size, not economic performance?
"Culture nurtures our souls and binds our communities together, while creativity helps reveal new answers to our challenges and anxieties. Industries that build on creativity and culture are also a source of great economic value and social well-being."
So opens the latest European Union report, The Cultural and Creative Cities Monitor 2017 Edition. The report and supporting data represent an effort to measure something we all know is important – the creative vibe of cities. 
Creativity is making its way more and more into policy discussions. Note the European policy announced last year, Towards an EU Strategy for International Cultural Resolutions, and the European Parliament’s resolution to deliver “coherent EU policy for cultural and creative industries”. 
Australia lacks a current national cultural and creative industries policy. There are clear parallels, though, with the national Global Innovation Strategy. Other innovation and creative programs are happening at state level, such as Innovate Queensland.
The European work shows that having cultural and creative cities can deliver significant economic benefits. The positive associations between cultural and creative cities and annual GDP per capita and jobs per capita are clear and strong.
Overall, they also found city size isn’t everything: smaller cities perform just as well as big cities. 
<h2>How do the biggest 36 Australian cities compare?</h2>
We don’t have the data to construct the same metrics as the EU. However, based on the publicly available data from the Regional Australia Institute, we use the Bohemian Index as a proxy indicator for creative economy. 
This index, devised by Richard Florida, measures “the concentration of working artists, musicians, writers, designers, and entertainers across metropolitan areas”.
Australian findings show no association between creatives and city output, measured as gross value added (GVA) per capita. There is only a slight positive relationship between jobs and creativity, as shown below. In contrast, the European Creative and Cultural Cities Index is highly and positively correlated to both GDP and jobs per capita.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/07/25/file-20170717-14267-w1hvkb.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/07/25/file-20170717-14267-w1hvkb.png" alt="">
Figure 1. Bohemian Index of Australia’s 36 largest cities and output (GVA) per capita and jobs per capita.
As we can see, there is a positive relationship between Australian city size and creative employment. This is the opposite of what the Europeans found. 
So what do Australia cities share with European cities in the way of creative economy and economic performance? Basically, there is a positive and strong correlation between a city’s Bohemian Index and new business start-up rate, trademark rate (see Figure 2) and rate of business owners.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/07/25/file-20170717-30889-1v3042m.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/07/25/file-20170717-30889-1v3042m.png" alt=""> Figure 2. Bohemian Index of Australia’s 36 largest cities and trademark applications.
Creativity also has significant positive associations with higher rates of bachelor degree qualifications or higher, housing affordability and commute time. 
Disturbingly for Australia, creativity is positively associated with income inequality (measured as 80:20 ratio) as well. Does this mean that our cities with more creative jobs also have more rich patrons and poor arts students?
Importantly, not all cities perform the same. Our 31 regional cities show a significant and negative relationship between unemployment rates and Bohemian Index. Maybe the metro “Big 5” can learn from our regional city strengths in delivering stronger creativity and lower unemployment. 
<h2>What can Australia learn from Europe?</h2>
Creative and cultural cities are obviously valued as important for global society, but European research clearly shows that these cities are also capable of delivering jobs and strong economic output. 
Do we want all Australian cities to resemble Gladstone, with its high jobs and output, or Hobart, with its strong creative occupations? The Europeans have shown us we can have both in the one city – and not just in the big cities.
Importantly, if Australia follows a policy-transfer approach to creative and cultural cities, we should be cautious. These policies are also promoting economic performance in Europe, but what will they do here when we don’t see the same relationships?
While the latest EU work shows you can measure the cultural and creative aspects of a city, it does stipulate that this is not a be-all-and-end-all metric. It’s more the start of the discussion: how can we better measure our cities’ creativity and cultural values?
Europe uses three metrics (combining quantitative and qualitative data) to gauge a city’s cultural vibrancy, creative economy and enabling culture environment. The work is long and involved. Cities are required to provide information on 29 indicators – number of seats in a theatre, for instance. 
We have just used one metric here, perhaps highlighting that poor data hinders good decision-making. A better measure of creative and cultural Australian cities could have provided different associations. 
Australia is the “lucky country”, so why can’t we have it all – jobs and creativity in all our cities?
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/leonie-pearson-151626" target="_blank">Leonie Pearson</a> is Adjunct Associate, University of Canberra and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

How can our cities match Europe's for finding value in their creative vibe?

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65561/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The return of land to Indigenous custodians in Australia over the past 20 years is a dramatic shift in Australian land tenure and management. Yet this revolution has, as yet, barely touched urban Australia.
Public and policy discussion about the future of urban Australia is framed as if Indigenous people were not present, and as if cities were not built on Aboriginal land. 
What would it take to think about cities as spaces where Indigenous and non-Indigenous systems, knowledge and values co-exist? What would recognising such co-existence mean for how the future of cities is decided?
<h2>Property and racial stereotypes</h2>
As in other urbanised nations, Australian cities are one of the main engine rooms of the national economy. Wealth creation is possible because of the system of private property rights that makes cities what they are today. 
Property shapes how cities function, how they look and how we live in them. And property fragments urban environments. It chops up the landscape with titles, fences, investment portfolios, development options and planning zones. 
In places like Australia, that system of property is imposed on Indigenous lands. It entrenches non-Indigenous property rights and excludes the people from whom the land was stolen. 
Most importantly, property works against the recognition that cities, too, are Indigenous places. It is a first important reason why the revolution in land titling and management has not penetrated Australian cities.
<h2>Urban areas off limits to land rights</h2>
While more than 30% of the continent has been returned to Indigenous control, almost none of that land is in urban areas. 
In contrast to Canada and New Zealand, it is exceptionally difficult for Indigenous people to gain access to land in urban Australia. There are few opportunities for land grants, and limited chance of success in native title, as recent research shows.
A second reason is racial stereotypes. Indigenous values are able to be acknowledged in natural but not in built environments. 
Places like Kakadu, Uluru and Budj Bim are where non-Indigenous Australia is willing to value traditional custodians’ contribution, knowledge and practice. Yet Aboriginal values in the built environment are virtually invisible. 
These racial stereotypes have been held a long time. They cast Indigenous people in urban environments as “too modern” to make legitimate claims. And they cast urban environments as too modified for ongoing Indigenous cultural connection. 
In jointly managed national parks, Indigenous majorities on boards of management are now a well-established approach. Yet the idea of having Indigenous people as majority decision-makers over urban development options or metropolitan-scale strategic planning is largely unthinkable. 
This is not an Indigenous problem. It is a problem of non-Indigenous racial stereotypes and the power of property rights.
<h2>Cities are political spaces of co-existence</h2>
Cities are nonetheless places where tensions simmer about recognition, reconciliation and land justice. The Tent Embassy in Canberra is perhaps the most symbolic and is an important model for other Aboriginal actions that assert sovereignty such as in Redfern, Perth, Brisbane and during Melbourne’s “Stolenwealth Games”.
The case is similar in other countries. In Vancouver, First Nations peoples issued the City of Vancouver with an eviction notice asserting unlawful occupation of their lands. The action came after the city council threatened to forcefully remove people, many of them Aboriginal, living in a homeless camp in a city park. 
In Honolulu’s Kaka’ako district, there is a direct relationship between the number of native Hawaiians sleeping rough under tarps and the rapid gentrification of their lands by upscale housing developments. 
Canada is also the place where we find some interesting examples of urban co-existence between Indigenous peoples and settler governments. The small city of Iqaluit was declared the capital of the Nunuvat territory in 1999, one of many dimensions of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. Iqaluit is a multicultural town under an admittedly constrained form of Inuit self-governance.
In 2014, Vancouver City Council declared the Year of Reconciliation. It passed a formal declaration acknowledging that the city was:
"… founded on the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations and that these territories were never ceded through treaty, war or surrender."
It is more than ironic that this is the same council that sought to remove the homeless camp. 
<h2>On the horizon 
</h2>
In Australia, too, some new opportunities signal possibilities for meaningful co-existence in cities. The settlement of the Noongar claim in southwest Western Australia heralds important opportunities for Noongar access to land and involvement in urban governance in the Perth metropolitan area and beyond.
Earlier this year, the Queensland parliament passed new planning legislation. It makes “valuing, protecting and promoting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge, culture and tradition” a central purpose of planning.
In Victoria, a recent review of Aboriginal heritage legislation has strengthened the role and powers of traditional custodians in the protection and ownership of their cultural heritage. It makes their role in urban development increasingly important.
How any of these opportunities unfold will depend on the willingness of non-Indigenous systems of urban governance and management to shift over. Allowing genuine space for Indigenous knowledge, law and cultural perspectives on urban decision-making would surely be significant to achieving a meaningful co-existence in cities.
<h2>Imagining different urban futures</h2>
Let’s imagine how urban Australia might be different. 
Imagine if caring for country principles were at the heart of the urban development system. Imagine if the planning and design of public space recognised these are some of the only places that Aboriginal people can access a land base in the city.
Imagine if we used density and zoning tools to provide reparation for land theft and to redistribute wealth. Imagine if mainstream urban planning processes recognised continuing co-existing Indigenous methods of land governance. Imagine if we did urban development in a way that honours Indigenous histories, knowledge and relationships with those places.
Wouldn’t that be a meaningful co-existence worth striving for in Australian cities?
Libby Porter is vice-chancellor's principal research fellow and Associate Professor, RMIT University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/libby-porter-300183" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

How can we meaningfully recognise cities as Indigenous places?

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/61851/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Mayors, CEOs, citizens and policy analysts are working to create uplifting images of their future cities. Their intended result is clear unifying visions for the city futures they desire.
So how can foresight make a difference in cities?
<h2>Visioning</h2>
The first way foresight improves cities is through visioning projects. The City of Greater Geelong is aiming to look ahead 20 to 30 years through its first visioning and strategy project, Geelong 2040. Interviewed about this, Geelong City CEO Kelvin Spiller said:
"Geelong 2040 will be a city-changing experience, for the long-term betterment of its residents and stakeholders. City visioning will be supported by community engagement. In the same manner that corporate engagement helps the carriage of new innovations upwards, visioning can do this for the planning of urban areas."
Perhaps longer-term visioning should be legislated to encourage managers to help cascade preferences upward and not only into the city vision.
<h2>Scenarios</h2>
The second way foresight shapes cities is by applying futures methods like scenarios. Scenarios use group problem-solving and collective cognition to shape insights into alternatives.
What are our 2040 city futures scenarios? Considering an emerging regional plan for Southeast Queensland, professor Sohail Inayatullah, the first UNESCO Chair in Futures Studies, created the following alternatives:
Scenario one: visions are achieved and our cities are still liveable. By 2040, the population has dramatically increased, but good governance, community consultation and foresight have mitigated negative possibilities (crime, congestion, pollution) and enhanced positive possibilities (job growth, green belt protection, water and energy management).
People want to move into these visionary cities, even with higher housing prices. A fair go is still possible.
Scenario two: cities arrive at the fate of being “hot and paved”. Market pressures kept driving up housing prices. Developers paid lip service to green and social concerns and a two-class society has emerged. Traffic problems did not decrease; rather, efforts to widen highways led to more congestion. Funding went to major highway connections while public transport and alternative working-from-home practices were overlooked.
Global warming has only made life worse – temperatures continue to rise, water shortages increase. Health indicators worsen.
Three tiers of government look to each other for solutions. Federal governments just seek to stay in power. Capacity for sustainable futures shrinks.
Scenario three: worse yet, 2040 could be wired and miserable. In this scenario, the previous 20 years have been a series of confrontations between local, state and federal governments, between developers and environmentalists, between individual freedom and security, young and old, rural and coastal areas, and new migrants (many environmental refugees) and old migrants.
It is a world of endless sprawl, congested highways and gang warfare. Technology and power are used to keep collective peace.
Scenario four: the concern is for the long-term future. Councils all over Australia continue to develop their own visions. As a result, there is a community capacity to innovate.
The percentage of people known as “cultural creatives” has grown dramatically. The values of sustainability, spirituality, innovation and global governance have become the official values.
The main changes are toward home-based work, public transport and active transport. Futures thinking is helping cities get ahead of challenges such as climate change, population growth and democratic policy selection.
Inayatullah’s new book, What Works, discusses other studies about city futures.
<h2>Sustainable actions</h2>
A third way foresight shapes futures is through sustainable actions. The following four southeast Queensland cities have undertaken city visioning in areas of public transport, energy and environment, and liveability.
Brisbane is planning subway metro and cross-river rail projects. These will benefit commuters in the middle and outer suburbs, who are increasingly experiencing long periods of gridlock.
On the Sunshine Coast, a 15-megawatt solar-powered plant is a first for Australian local government. It will offset the council’s entire electricity consumption by 2017.
On the Gold Coast, 7.3km of light rail extensions will be delivered before the 2018 Commonwealth Games. This will ease congestion, improve accessibility and promote economic growth.
In Logan, a Southbank development will create recreational space on river banks alongside floating restaurants to stimulate investment.
When I interviewed former Brisbane City CEO Jude Munro about city foresight, she observed:
"The benefits from closely linking land use and transport planning are a clear priority. However, more is required. Better legislation is called for to help cities to plan with foresight, but also city councils should be trialling a range of other measures being employed successfully in Australia."
"For example, having a community coalition of local leaders like the one the City of Logan is building can have positive insights for local governance teams to consider. Also, a dedicated team like the urban renewal team in Brisbane in the mid-1990s to mid-2000s could help re-establish principles of local area planning in cities of southeast Queensland."
In southeast Queensland, a new regional plan will unite its cities’ plans under a high-level strategic vision for the next 50 years.
Inayatullah, Spiller, Munro and I agree that, to ensure long-term actions work sustainably, cities should engage stakeholders and communities in visioning, involve futurists who understand how to apply and deepen scenarios and foresight methods, and create strategies within a futures framework. The last step relies upon:
<ul>
<li>
developing stronger sectoral, suburban and regionally aligned long-term plans;
</li>
<li>
aligning city short-term corporate plans to long-term visions;
</li>
<li>
working with state and federal government to align city visions with global East-West strategies, including geopolitical, economic and cultural elements; and
</li>
<li>
refreshing visions using futurists' methods to ensure a scientific and democratic engagement process.
</li>
</ul>
Foresight is synonymous with a transforming, renewable and complex urbanism. Globally, cities are driving change and applying foresight to open their markets and improve collective prosperity and places.
The need for sustainable urbanism compels us to update plans not only for physical infrastructure but also for “softer” matters of population, energy, ecology, safety, education, health and seamless connection up, down and across sectors, borders and cultures. The more we think ahead with greater depth and breadth of understanding and co-operation, the better our city futures will be.
Colin Russo is futurist, University of the Sunshine Coast and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/colin-russo-267108" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

A tale of five cities: applying foresight to shape their futures 

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVERS
Are humans now an “urban species”? Do we now live in an “Urban Age”? To understand the contemporary human condition, should we all learn to “see like a city”, or even think like a smart city?
Whether the focus is on governance, climate change, infrastructure, citizenship, public space or terrorism, the turn towards the urban is unmistakable. It seems inexorable, fuelled by human migrations, proliferating technological connections, global trade and policy shifts.
This was surely a long time coming; we moderns have always cultivated a sense of The City as human destiny. So have we arrived at our destiny, the urban age? Or is it merely a new stage in the human drama?
The executive director of UN Habitat, Joan Clos, recently said: "The unprecedented confluence of climate change, population boom and the rush to live in cities means that our critical human development will take place in cities."
Clos was announcing an initiative, the UN Sample of Cities, which “adopts cities as units of analysis and studies them together to discover patterns of similarities and differences”, furthering what is increasingly called “the science of cities”. Yet surely the “urban” has always been a synonym for complexity and surprise – can cities really be reduced to scientific certainty?
Although cities are increasingly used to organise research, policy and visions of the future, the fate of Homo urbanus is not clear-cut. New debates are emerging about the urban and its place in the world. Alongside utopian images of bright green cities and a luminescent urban planet, dystopian images of the urban are also emerging, continuing another of modernism’s aesthetic and literary traditions.
Whether one feels optimistic about urban futures or not, there is a sense that a primary task of our times is making cities work efficiently, sustainably and equitably. Paradoxically, this broad social feting of the city coincides with cracks appearing in the foundational concept of “the urban”.
<h2>No city is an island</h2>
In academic discussion at least, “the city” and “the urban” are increasingly under stress conceptually as well as empirically. How coherent and relevant are these categories in a world of blurred spatial and governance boundaries?
As we discuss in a recent virtual special issue of the journal Urban Studies, unease is growing among some scholars about how useful the urban is any more as a conceptual category. Holding onto the city lens too tightly may shut out complex human and natural realities.
This includes growing environmental interdependencies, which aren’t easily contained in traditional urban boundaries. Just think of the ever-growing “food miles” that define urban consumption in Western cities.
Dense connections between “humans” and “nature”, and “urban” and “rural” or “wild”, are arguably obscured in strong city-centric thinking, sidelined as something “out there”. But to accommodate growing evidence that cities are not inseparable from nature, traditional urban concepts are being stretched, pulled and twisted.
The recent Resilient Melbourne Strategy, for example, makes the crucial point that the city is nearly completely reliant on energy produced in the non-metropolitan region of the Latrobe Valley. But the landmark strategy, despite being admirably consultative, is still the product of only metropolitan councils.
While limiting the number of voices at the table is often a pragmatic necessity, it unavoidably imposes constraints of the sort that resilience-thinking itself tries to challenge.
If South Gippsland Shire Council were to be involved in the strategy, for instance, it may contest the recommended solution to Melbourne’s reliance on its region’s energy: “reduce this reliance” by diversifying energy sources.
Such diversification can be a very positive step, especially if it reduces fossil-fuel use and its intensification of the greatest inter-linker of all, climate change. But if such a strategy is pursued in a Melbourne-centric way, one that frames Gippsland as simply a replaceable, sub-optimal source of energy, that disregards the region’s vulnerability to such an urban bias.
So although “resilient cities” and “urban resilience” are increasingly well-known policy phrases, arguably the words strain at each other if a more-than-city perspective is not taken.
<h2>A new focus on processes rather than space</h2>
Urban studies scholars have been trying to rethink what the urban actually means in a world characterised by more and more cross-boundary relations, flows and churning processes of de-territorialisation and re-territorialisation.
In contrast to the growing use of “the city” and “the urban” as a self-evident policy lens, concern is growing that both categories are too static and bounded.
Philosopher Henri Lefebvre’s idea of “planetary urbanisation” is attracting renewed interest. Not without its critics, this idea emphasises urbanisation as a process, consisting of vast transboundary flows of capital, people, resources and waste that continually remake cities and – in the process – “rural”, “wild” and “global” spaces
One interpretation of this focus is that the urban is everywhere, a boundless idea expanding in our imagination as well as planet. These scholars push us to consider, for example, the ways in which the Alberta tar sands or mineral mining in the Andes might be considered “urban” phenomena, given how these extractive industries fuel the “cities”.
This interpretation of “the urban” as a “processual form”, not bounded space, challenges how we think about what makes “cities” sustainable. Are cycling lanes or allotment gardens enough to make urban life sustainable when the ecological footprint of “the city” is entangled with the planetary processes of environmental degradation?
Whether such conceptual or physical spread is a sign of “the urban’s” success or its vulnerabilities and near-demise is an open question. Both interpretations are hotly contested.
Overall, “the urban” is not a simple, self-evident, scientific concept. Rather, it is an increasingly contested, stressed idea. In a world in which we must deepen our awareness of cross-boundary interactions to achieve objectives such as enhanced resilience, we need to question as well as acknowledge our habitual city focus.
Lauren Rickards is senior Lecturer, Sustainability and Urban Planning, School of Global Urban and Social Studies; co-leader, Climate Change and Resilience Research Program, Centre for Urban Studies, RMIT University
Brendan Gleeson is director, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, University of Melbourne
Can O'Callaghan is lecturer in Geography, National University of Ireland Maynooth
Mark Boyle is director, National Institute of Regional and Spatial Analyses, and Professor of Human Geography, National University of Ireland Maynooth
All are authors for The Conversation and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

City Development

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

City Development

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News