Urban Policy

<html><body>
Australia has no enduring tradition of having a national urban policy, unlike the UK, from where we sometimes import policies. The Commonwealth government has a long history of intervening in cities, from addressing housing shortages to funding urban infrastructure, but has shied away from a formal national settlement strategy.
Sometimes the Commonwealth claims to have no constitutional case for involvement in city planning. Yet we’re comfortable with spatial planning at the local, metropolitan and regional scale, so planning at the national level makes sense too.
We also seem comfortable with the federal government doing investment deals with individual cities and regions – so-called <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/cities/city-deals/index.aspx" target="_blank">City Deals</a>. Why not use this fiscal clout to drive a more systematic program of reform? Reform priorities include how our metropolitan areas are governed and how they finance much-needed investment in infrastructure.
To date, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/" target="_blank">nine City Deals</a> have been announced. These cover <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/townsville" target="_blank">Townsville</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/launceston" target="_blank">Launceston</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/western-sydney" target="_blank">Western Sydney</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/darwin" target="_blank">Darwin</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/hobart" target="_blank">Hobart</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/geelong" target="_blank">Geelong</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/adelaide" target="_blank">Adelaide</a>, <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/perth" target="_blank">Perth</a> and <a href="https://citydeals.infrastructure.gov.au/south-east-queensland" target="_blank">Southeast Queensland</a>. Could this seemingly ad hoc collection of City Deals become part of a more coherent and effective national settlement strategy? And are we up to the enduring challenge of translating these plans and strategies into action?
<h2>Are we alone in this?</h2>
In the UK, urban policy was for many years based on the principle of “<a href="https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C11251433" target="_blank">bending main programs</a>” to focus on areas judged most in need of government assistance. This was sometimes used to justify having little or no new money allocated to urban policy initiatives. However, it also reflected the reality that the main spending programs of national government are often altogether bigger with much more fiscal clout on the ground.
We also need to recognise that there is more to growth and development than investing in hard infrastructure like roads and railways. Schools, hospitals, parks and cultural facilities play a vital role in creating liveable communities at any spatial scale.
When these facilities lag behind the rapid construction of homes, our towns and cities are poorer places to live in. Nor are they places of resilience where we are better able to cope with the environmental changes and technological disruptions of the 21st century.
<h2>Why a national strategy?</h2>
The UN Sustainable Development Goals, and in particular <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg11" target="_blank">SDG 11</a>, recognise that having a national urban policy is an important foundation for achieving sustainable urban development. But in Australia we have not established long-term federal funding agreements for the sustainable development of major cities. Nor are there incentives to reform how we govern and deliver public services and infrastructure at the metropolitan scale.
A strategy of establishing metropolitan governance and financial reforms would assist Australian cities to compete and be successful in a 21st-century, globally connected world. At the same time, it would still enable decisions to be based on local preferences and capabilities. This reform could be the central feature of a national approach to partnership with cities.
This national cities partnership could provide a much better framework in which individual City Deals become more effective. An agreement could include national performance outcomes and help drive reforms to metropolitan governance and financing. It could also provide a platform for a national settlement strategy that finally gets to grips with where our growing population might live and live well.
By focusing on the metropolitan scale, we will also be better placed to answer difficult questions like “who should serve as Australia’s metropolitan leaders?” and “who represents metropolitan communities and works with them to make hard decisions about their future?”.
Currently, we have States and their agencies working at the metropolitan level. We have local governments that, understandably, focus on their local issues. Only occasionally do local councils build cooperative structures at a regional or metropolitan scale. Local government amalgamation is not a solution to this issue, as there remains an important role for local as well as metropolitan-scale institutions.
<h2>What would a national cities partnership look like?</h2>
Australia has five metropolitan areas with populations over 1 million people. When regional cities with populations over 100,000 are also considered, there are 17 major cities and metropolitan areas that could join in developing a national cities partnership agreement.
The core principles for this partnership could be:
<ul>
<li>
collaboration between different levels of government at scales that make economic sense and are socially meaningful – e.g. metropolitan regions for big cities, and perhaps major regional cities and their hinterlands in rural and regional areas
</li>
<li>
reforms to allow for the emergence of city and metropolitan leaders, who can talk on behalf of major urban communities and work with stakeholders such as business and non-government actors
</li>
<li>
working hard to engage the public as well as peak bodies in thinking about the future of their region
</li>
<li>
translating plans into action, through ongoing community support and concerted and coherent Commonwealth investment programs.
</li>
</ul>
<h2>Commonwealth needs to take the lead</h2>
Disengagement at this time by the Commonwealth government would be disastrous, so we wish Minister Alan Tudge well in keeping cities on the government’s policy agenda.
A business-as-usual approach to federal intervention may not make things worse, but it won’t set up the reforms Australian cities need to thrive and grow sustainably.
A strategy to establish a national-city partnership agreement offers a way forward. It would provide a framework to make City Deals more effective. The partnership could enable the emergence of a new breed of metropolitan and city leaders to help elevate public dialogue about the future of our cities and drive financial reforms that would allow them to deliver and be responsible to their communities.
All of this should appeal to those in government who want to see policy evolve and develop and our cities grow into more prosperous, liveable and resilient places.
This article draws on separate presentations made by the authors at the 2019 <a href="https://piacongress19.com.au/" target="_blank">National Congress of the Planning Institute of Australia</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/117839/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-burton-5155" target="_blank">Paul Burton</a>, Professor of Urban Management and Planning &amp; Director, Cities Research Institute, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828" target="_blank">Griffith University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/luke-nicholls-756766" target="_blank">Luke Nicholls</a>, Associate, Institute for Public Policy and Governance, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-technology-sydney-936" target="_blank">University of Technology Sydney</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/a-patchwork-of-city-deals-or-a-national-settlement-strategy-whats-best-for-our-growing-cities-117839" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

A patchwork of City Deals or a national settlement strategy: what’s best for our growing cities? Paul Burton & Luke Nicholls 

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
The Australian Institute of Architects has welcomed the incoming Morrison government’s acknowledgement of the importance of housing and urban policy and infrastructure, as it renewed its call for a focus on building safety, sustainability and effective design.
With the introduction of a dedicated Minister for Housing – the Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar – and the elevation into Cabinet of the Minister for Population, Cities and Urban Infrastructure - Alan Tudge - the Institute said it highlighted the critical nature of these policy areas for the health, wellbeing and quality of life of all Australians. 
The Institute has also applauded the creation of an Assistant Ministry for Community Housing, Homelessness and Community Services, under the leadership of Luke Howarth, in light of Australia’s affordable and social housing challenges.  
A focus on sustainability is also to be commended, with the appointment of Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction Angus Taylor.
Australia’s growth challenge should generate benefits for the country if met with planned and well-integrated solutions. 
We welcome the focus on cities and housing as key areas that with considered policy, design and delivery can create real impact for everyday Australians. 
The importance of planning and the interconnection of infrastructure and housing solutions is well understood by architects, who work across scales and devise solutions to these complex issues in their daily practice.
This is the key to creating integrated, effective cities where all people can benefit– if we get it right.
In the lead-up to the election, the Institute had called for the integration of housing with infrastructure services and the strengthening of the role of the Minister for Cities.
We look forward to working with Minister Tudge in his expanded role. 
We will continue to push for design and sustainability benchmarks and a national architecture policy in urban policy.
The Institute has worked collaboratively with these Ministers in their previous roles and looks forward to engaging with them and other Ministers again to build effective policies for the Australian future.
The Institute will continue to push for increased safety measures for the building and construction industry, in line with the Shergold Weir Building Confidence report last year, to maintain the integrity of our national standards.
Nationally consistent building standards can also generate strong carbon emissions reductions – the Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council estimates development and construction could drive up to 28 per cent of the nation’s 2030 target – and the Institute will continue to support decarbonisation across industries. 
Ongoing action on climate change through a plan for net zero carbon buildings by 2040, and fair and open procurement policies are also key priorities for the Institute.
As the new government sets it priorities for the term ahead, the Institute will continue its work to create solutions for Australia’s built environment that benefit the communities, while championing our professionals and effective design.
Professor Helen Lochhead is the National President of the Australian Institute of Architects
</body></html>

Housing and urban focus welcome in new ministry: Helen Lockheed 

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Do you feel lonely? If you do, you are not alone. While you may think it’s a personal mental health issue, the collective social impact is an <a href="https://www.bhg.com.au/loneliness-epidemic-australia" target="_blank">epidemic</a>.
You may also underestimate the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)30142-9/fulltext" target="_blank">effects of loneliness</a>. The health impact of chronic social isolation is as bad as <a href="https://heart.bmj.com/content/early/2016/03/15/heartjnl-2015-308790" target="_blank">smoking 15 cigarettes a day</a>.
Loneliness is <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/tania-de-jong/loneliness-is-the-global-epidemic-of-our-times_a_21544979/" target="_blank">a global issue</a>. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/hikikomori-worrying-mental-health-problem-traps-japanese-at-home-2018-1/?r=AU&amp;IR=T" target="_blank">Half-a-million Japanese</a> are suffering from social isolation. The UK recently appointed a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-politics-health/britain-appoints-minister-for-loneliness-amid-growing-isolation-idUSKBN1F61I6" target="_blank">minister for loneliness</a>, the first in the world. In Australia, Victorian state MP Fiona Patten is <a href="https://fionapatten.com.au/news/loneliness-needs-portfolio/" target="_blank">calling for the same</a> here. Federal MP Andrew Giles, in a recent <a href="https://www.andrewgiles.com.au/media-centre/opinion-pieces-speeches-transcripts/address-to-the-chifley-research-centre-forum-on-loneliness-and-public-policy-responses/" target="_blank">speech</a>, said:
"I’m convinced we need to consider responding to loneliness as a responsibility of government."
What do cities have to do with loneliness?
“The way we build and organise our cities can help or hinder social connection,” reads <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/137_report_social_cities_web.pdf" target="_blank">a Grattan Institute report</a>.
Think of the awkward silence in a lift full of passengers who never communicate. Now think of a playground where parents often begin chatting. It’s not that the built environment “causes” interaction, but it can certainly either enable or constrain potential interaction.
Winston Churchill once <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/building/palace/architecture/palacestructure/churchill/" target="_blank">observed</a> that we shape the buildings and then <a href="https://www.harpercollins.com/9780061957802/welcome-to-your-world/" target="_blank">the buildings shape us</a>. I have written <a href="https://www.urbandesignmentalhealth.com/journal2-lonelitopia" target="_blank">elsewhere</a> about how architects and planners, albeit unwittingly, are complicit in producing an urban landscape that contributes to an unhealthy mental landscape.
Can we think of different ways to be in the city, of a different architecture that can <a href="https://www.architectural-review.com/essays/letters-from-the-editor/editorial-could-architecture-play-a-role-in-curing-loneliness/10000071.article" target="_blank">“cure”</a> loneliness?
Taking this question as a point of departure, I recently conducted a graduate design studio at the Melbourne School of Design. The students, using design as a research methodology, came up with potential architectural and urban responses to loneliness.
Have you ever waited at a rail station, killing time without engaging with the person next to you? Diana Ong retrofitted the Ascot Vale rail station with multiple “social engagement paraphernalia” to promote conversations and activity. Michelle Curnow proposed to convert railway carriages into “sensory experience cabins” that attract people to explore the in-built gallery spaces and listen to other people’s stories while commuting. Who said commuting had to be boring?
Having a pet is one of the most effective ways to tackle loneliness, but often people don’t have enough time to care for one. Zi Ye came up with “Puppy Society”, an app that connects a pet with multiple owners. The dogs are housed in a shared facility where the owners come to pet the dog.
Denise Chan studied the Melbourne CBD laneways and found many of them are quite dead, despite being an icon of Melburnian liveliness. She reimagined the laneways revitalised with community plant gardens, book nooks and furniture to entice people to enter them and connect, say, during office lunch hours.
Are you one of those people who have a hard time eating alone? Fanhui Ding is, and she came up with a student-run restaurant for the University of Melbourne. Students get credit working on the aquaponic farms that supply the restaurant, which can be used to pay for a meal. People also get discounts for dining at the same table, encouraging students to interact over food. Given the many international students who suffer from loneliness, her concept used cooking, food and farming as therapeutic activity.
Beverley Wang looked at loneliness in the ageing population. She came up with a project called “Nurture”, for which she designed a kindergarten co-housed with a nursing home. Designing spaces for storytelling, she brought the elderly into the kindergarten as informal learning aides, giving them a sense of purpose.
There is an utterly different kind of loneliness that accompanies the loss of a loved one. Malak Moussaoui, taking note of this, designed an installation that grows flowers on itself to be inserted into cemeteries. Instead of just buying some flowers on the way, Malak’s design is meant to bring people together, introduce flower gardening as a therapeutic measure and give people spaces to mourn together. They might then meet other people who share similar stories of loss and connect.
Other students tackled more familiar cases, such as designing more social interaction spaces in high-rise apartment buildings and redesigning supermarkets to make them places for people to visit on a Sunday morning. The student work can be viewed <a href="https://www.thisstudioisopen.org/work/2018/10/25/the-anti-lonely-city-march-student-work-from-melbourne-school-of-design" target="_blank">here</a>.
Moving beyond merely analysing the problems, the research output shows that an alternative, less lonely future is indeed possible. Without claiming to solve loneliness, design can be a important tool in response to it.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104853/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Tanzil Shafique, PhD Researcher in Urban Design, University of Melbourne
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/designing-cities-to-counter-loneliness-lets-explore-the-possibilities-104853" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Designing cities to counter loneliness? Let’s explore the possibilities

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Urban experts gathered at the ninth World Urban Forum in Kuala Lumpur over the past week to discuss progress on a global commitment to sustainable urban development. UN member states adopted the New Urban Agenda 15 months ago to guide the implementation in cities of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. And health is central to the New Urban Agenda – health is its “pulse”, as the World Health Organisation puts it.
Health must be at the heart of decisions about how to equitably house, feed, mobilise and economically support growing urban populations. Health is not just a desirable outcome but a fundamental driver of sustainable development.
Sustainable development and health are linked
Many sustainable development actions also have health benefits. The New Urban Agenda recognises that decent housing and access to health care, water and sanitation are the basic building blocks of health.
To add to the challenges of achieving these goals, the world’s cities are expected to gain 2.5 billion inhabitants by 2050. This reinforces the urgent need to provide equitable access to infrastructure and to upgrade informal settlements worldwide.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205632/original/file-20180209-180836-o0co5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
 There is an urgent need to reduce inequities in access to decent housing, health care, water and sanitation worldwide. Hesam Kamalipour. Author provided.
The agenda has a focus on social inclusion and civic engagement in city planning. Such participation can improve mental well-being and empower communities to overcome urban health inequities. This is important for all urban residents, but particularly for disadvantaged communities.
The agenda proposes compact urban development which prioritises walking and cycling over private car use. Multiple health benefits flow from more physical activity and less air pollution.
Walking and cycling can also help mitigate climate change, which is predicted to contribute to an extra 250,000 deaths between 2030 and 2050 alone. Cycling, for example, can reduce an individual’s transportation carbon footprint by 58% compared to driving a car.
The natural environment is a vital health determinant, as it underpins all human life. The agenda promotes reducing cities’ environmental impact, building resilience to natural disasters, and preserving nature within cities.
Again, this has many implications for health. Greenery can reduce urban heat islands to protect against heat stress. Contact with nature improves mental health. Attractive green spaces encourage recreational physical activity.
The agenda emphasises the need to provide decent and productive work, end poverty and reduce income inequalities. This could minimise the social gradient in health – people with less income have poorer health.
Uncontrolled growth is unhealthy
Attaining these sustainability and health benefits will depend on how the New Urban Agenda is implemented. The World Urban Forum showcased many sustainable development achievements by governments and civil society. But we still have a long way to go to realise the NUA vision.
As the world urbanises and cities promote development and innovation, we must take care to balance economic growth with environmental preservation. Only then will we achieve truly sustainable health improvements.
Most countries have a bad track record of pursuing social and economic development at the expense of the natural environment. While the New Urban Agenda does recognise the need to balance environmental and health goals with economic development, it does not acknowledge the ecological limits to growth.
Currently, the top-ranked nations on the Sustainable Development Goal Index and the Human Development Index, such as Sweden and Denmark, have high ecological footprints per person. If everyone in the world lived like them, we would need more than three planets. This is clearly unsustainable.
As research by Wilkinson and Pickett shows, after a certain point, continued natural resource depletion for economic growth is not necessary to achieve good population health.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206114/original/file-20180213-44654-g0k0sd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
After a certain point, higher emissions do not increase life expectancy, as Wilkinson and Pickett demonstrated. The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, R. Wilkinson and K. Pickett
Agenda relies on inclusive, integrated planning
While the New Urban Agenda encourages consideration of health in urban policies, it does not detail the specific actions required.
Urban planning interventions must be consistent with the evidence on how to create healthy and less resource-intensive cities. A recent Australian study found that many urban policies are not evidence-based and are often not fully implemented.
Countries across the globe are looking at indicators to help monitor policy implementation. This includes spatial indicators that highlight inequities in access to infrastructure and amenities within and between cities.
It is widely recognised that implementing the New Urban Agenda will require the involvement of many sectors, including housing, transport, urban design, energy, employment and open space. National governments adopted the agenda, but city planning is often a responsibility of sub-national governments. The private sector and communities also have important contributions to make. 
In all cities, there is a need to clarify responsibilities and balance national government leadership with local government and community action. Integration between policy areas requires supportive legislative frameworks, political commitment, leadership, strong governance arrangements and personnel trained in collaboration.
Low- and middle-income countries are further behind on urban health, so have much to gain from implementing the agenda. Nevertheless, all countries, including Australia, have room for improvement. Australian cities continue to face issues with car dependence and inequities in access to public transport, jobs, services and amenities.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91009/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">All urban actors have a role to play in pursuing the New Urban Agenda’s vision of a sustainable and healthy urban future. As we hurtle towards doubling our population with rapid city growth, now is the time for action.
Melanie Lowe, Lecturer in Public Health, Australian Catholic University 
Alexei Trundle, PhD Candidate, Australian-German Climate &amp; Energy College, University of Melbourne 
André Stephan, Lecturer in Architectural Engineering, University of Melbourne 
Billie Giles-Corti, Director, Urban Futures Enabling Capability Platform and Director, Healthy Liveable Cities Group, RMIT University 
Hayley Henderson, PhD Candidate in Urban Planning, University of Melbourne 
Hesam Kamalipour, Research Fellow at Monash Art, Design and Architecture, Monash University
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/this-is-why-health-has-to-be-at-the-heart-of-the-new-urban-agenda-91009" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Why health has to be at the heart of the New Urban Agenda

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Green and public spaces must be safe, inclusive and accessible for all. In Australia, however, most young women do not feel safe in public spaces, especially after dark or when walking alone. Welcoming public spaces are also in decline in the US.
Calls to enhance the built environment for the benefit and well-being of half of humanity, the 3.5 billion people living in cities today, have never been so strong, especially since Habitat III.
Universal access to safe and inclusive public spaces is a key target of Sustainable Development Goal 11. A follow-up placemaking training event at the ninth World Urban Forum (WUF9), starting this week in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, will continue this global discussion on co-creating inclusive public spaces.
Yet improving public space requires significant investment. To ensure that city governments, private developers and citizen experts continue to make meaningful investments in creating better public parks, playgrounds, streets and sidewalks, we need to be able to assess the public value of such spaces.
So what are the ingredients of success?
For a public space to be seen as safe, comfortable and successful, a diverse range of people need to actively use it. In a workshop at the 2017 EcoCity World Summit in Melbourne, experts discussed challenges in everyday practices of developing and maintaining inclusive public spaces. The discussions led to a common understanding of what these spaces look like.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202683/original/file-20180121-110121-1i0ofzy.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
A workshop at the EcoCity World Summit in Melbourne. Author provided
Several key elements of successful public space were identified:
<ul>
<li>
Public space should not favour specific groups or promote gentrification. Sometimes, architectural design of public spaces can restrict the free use of space.
</li>
<li>
Inclusive spaces work by encouraging a diverse mix of people who feel safe and comfortable in them. This mix should be intergenerational as well as intercultural.
</li>
<li>
Inclusive spaces can thrive only when they are open, free and accessible. The space should allow some flexibility in its use to suit changing needs. When streets and plazas accommodate multiple activities, they are activated at all times, even if used differently at different times.
</li>
<li>
Inclusive spaces must respect and acknowledge the needs of all genders and recognise children as active users of space. World Vision International, for instance, engages children as change agents who inform planning decisions for better and safer spaces.
</li>
<li>
Public space is accessible when it is well integrated and connected with surrounding land uses and transport options. If we design for people rather than cars, we can create places that more people are able to access and use.
</li>
</ul>
Inclusion depends on real participation
Participatory processes are incomplete without integrating community voice, building place-based relationships, fostering a sense of belonging and encouraging open communication in communities.
To achieve long-term success, it is important to understand how citizens can contribute to creating more inclusive spaces. Any space-changing project needs to nurture community and foster a sense of belonging among neighbouring residents.
Co-designing with the local community is crucial for a space to have a long-term sustainable impact and maintain continuous engagement. In Hobart’s Macquarie Point, for example, in addition to successfully building partnerships between multiple stakeholders, the project applied a phased activation plan, to allow the community to slowly engage with the spaces.
People have different ways of voicing their opinions. These different means of expression and participation need to be recognised when designing an inclusive space. Storytelling is one powerful tool to share and listen to local histories of place. It helps create meaningful city spaces that are valuable to the whole community.
Technology promises new and innovative ways of engaging communities. Crowdsourcing is one approach to tap into the community and encourage them to share their experience in their use of public space.
Plan International’s map-based community engagement tool allowed women to chart safe and unsafe spaces in the city and comment on them. This was an effective way for women with similar experiences to come together virtually and volunteer information.
However, easy translation of data into usable information to be shared widely is equally important for any participatory exercise.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/204498/original/file-20180201-123833-1iy7ogt.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Many elements go into creating an inclusive public space. Author provided
Evaluating success of public spaces
Workshop participants found it particularly challenging to find the most effective means to measure the success of public spaces. Few appraisal tools exist to measure the quality of public space.
The project evaluation component almost always falls by the wayside as the impact of public spaces takes longer to manifest but is crucial to sustaining these spaces.
The workshop discussion highlighted the need to further explore evaluation tools that help ensure projects and initiatives have lasting outcomes.
The next steps
Public space is a critical ingredient of liveable cities. It is also recognised as important for sustainable urban development.
Getting it right requires investment in research, programming, information and advocacy.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89961/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Health, well-being and prosperity all depend on the rightful use of public space to create communities that are inclusive and connected for the benefit of everyone.
SriPallavi Nadimpalli, PhD Candidate, University of Melbourne
Iderlina Mateo-Babiano, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Melbourne 
Joyati Das, Associate, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, University of Melbourne
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/putting-the-pieces-together-to-create-safe-public-spaces-for-all-89961">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Putting the pieces together to create safe public spaces for all

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Only in a few active travel strongholds, typically in the inner city, do Australian cycling and walking rates get close to those in Europe. 
Australian city planners are seeking ways to make cities better for walking and cycling.
Walkability and cyclability are attractive and “green” urban amenities. They reduce pollution and improve health. They are also economic assets.
In developing countries, active transport is key to improving accessibility for the urban poor. In developed countries, the walkable and cyclable city can be a magnet for attracting and retaining the “creative class”.
In Australia, plans and projects are being developed to extend pedestrian malls and cycling paths, restrict car traffic, remove street parking and install more lighting.
Have these efforts paid off?
Yes and no. Recently released 2016 Census data reveal some disappointing commuting patterns in Australian cities.
Across metropolitan areas, typically plagued by sprawl and segregated land uses, cars still dominate. Car-based commuting rates have decreased by only 1-2%.
Public transport use remains relatively low. Even in Sydney, it captures only about one-quarter of commute trips.
Since 2011, Sydney, Melbourne and Darwin have made modest gains (2-4%) in public transport use. Brisbane has had an incremental decline. Public transport use is stagnant in Perth, Adelaide, Hobart and Canberra.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203650/original/file-20180128-100893-12cw2vf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Meanwhile, rates of walking and cycling remain constant and low – even in smaller centres such as Hobart, Darwin and Canberra. Even in the most “cycling-oriented” places (Darwin and Canberra), only about 3% of commuters cycle.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203651/original/file-20180128-100929-e5r516.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
City-level data tell a different story. Here, walking is more popular than at the wider metro level. This reflects the mono-centric nature of Australian cities, where most jobs are located in the CBD.
In larger cities, between a quarter and a third of the population walks to work. Similar proportions of commuters use public transport. Brisbane is an exception, with less walking, lower public transport use and much more driving than Sydney, Melbourne or Perth. Hobart and Darwin have low walking rates and are very car-dependent, which is surprising considering their small size.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203733/original/file-20180129-100899-4wj80w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Average cycling rates are low everywhere – only 2-5%. This is true in both large and small cities, tropical (Queensland and Northern Territory) and oceanic (southeastern Australia) climates, flat and hilly topographies.
However, averages are deceptive. In Melbourne’s “top cycling suburbs” (Fitzroy North and Carlton North/Princes Hill) cycling rates are as high as 15%. Similarly, in Brisbane’s “top cycling suburbs” (West End and Highgate Hill), about 8% of people cycle to work. Sydney’s cycling rates are only 5% even in its “top cycling suburbs” (Erskineville/Alexandria and Newtown/Camperdown/Darlington).
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203734/original/file-20180129-100905-1433pkw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
To compare, cities in Northern and Western Europe have average active transport rates at least twice as high as those in Australia. Over half of Copenhagen’s commute trips are via cycling or walking.
However, while Australian cities as a whole fall much behind international best practice, some suburbs are comparable. In Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne, the “top active-travel suburbs” – the CBDs and their immediate surroundings – have walking and cycling rates in the 40-50% range.
Overall, improvements in walking and cycling rates have been minimal since the 2011 Census. For most cities, this undermines urban prestige and competitiveness – not to mention the health and environmental implications. Conversely, Melbourne’s higher active travel rates might provide part of the explanation for it topping “most liveable city” lists.
Why isn’t Australia an active travel mecca?
In theory, Australian cities are ideal for walking and cycling. They have mild climates, stable and wealthy governments, as well as sporty, outdoorsy and increasingly health-conscious residents. Despite this, the data show that overall active travel (especially cycling) is still marginal.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203617/original/file-20180127-100929-8c2duh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Barriers to active travel, grouped into ‘ideas’, ‘interests’ and ‘institutions’ – a popular theoretical framework in public policy studies. Pojani &amp; Stead, 2014, Author provided
Academic research has unequivocally demonstrated that substantive changes can occur only through a combination of high-quality infrastructure, pricing policies and education programs. In Australia, as elsewhere, myriad barriers conspire against such an integrated approach.
What needs to be done?
Three main areas require intervention.
<ul>
<li>
Ideas: Active travel must become normalised as an integral part of transport planning. Footpaths, crosswalks and bicycle lanes must be standard elements of street templates and guidelines, just like telephone lines and fire hydrants.</li>
<li>
Interest: Councils must secure strong political support for walking and cycling, as well as unity and collaboration within the active travel community. Solid evidence is needed on the benefits of high-quality walking and cycling environments and on the impacts on businesses and households of removing traffic and parking lanes to accommodate footpaths, bike paths and pedestrian malls.</li>
</ul>
Persistence and consistency in messages to the public, and a non-antagonistic stance, are also important. To embrace active travel, people must feel positive about creating a more just, fun, safe and healthy world through their informed travel choices.
<ul>
<li>
Institutions: More government funding for active transport – independent of political cycles – must be provided, while at the same time allowing more local planning autonomy. The most recent United Nations’ recommendation is that 20% of transport funding go to non-motorised modes.</li>
</ul>
Australia falls short of this target, but finding out exactly how far off is a challenge. The Australian government makes no mention of active travel in its 2017-2018 infrastructure budget allocation. Each local and state government reports on it differently.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87331/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">In 2016, the combined state and territory investments in cycling infrastructure totalled only A$121.8 million. That’s a small fraction of road funding (A$20.2 billion in 2011-12). Data on walking infrastructure spending are unavailable.
Dorina Pojani, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, The University of Queensland
Elizabeth Butterworth,The University of Queensland
Jim Cooper, Senior Research Fellow, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland
Jonathan Corcoran, Professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland
Neil Sipe, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, The University of Queensland
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-cities-are-far-from-being-meccas-for-walking-and-cycling-87331" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Australian cities far from mecca's for walking and cycling

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Cities policy in Australia has historically had a clear focus on the largest state capitals, but there are signs this is changing. Recent City Deals and smart cities funding shows that five of the six City Deals now in place are regional, and 55% of Smart Cities and Suburbs Program funding also went to regional cities. On the evidence so far, regional cities appear to be in the spotlight for the Australian government’s cities policy agenda.
Big and small cities matter to Australia. They are the concentrations of population, economic output, trade, commerce, cultural and social life. They are also the sites where most of the nation’s future growth, both population and economic, is forecast to occur. Australia’s economic future is closely linked to that of its cities.
In 2015, there was much excitement when the Turnbull government first announced a cities agenda, which (after a rocky start) delivered the Smart Cities Plan.
This was followed by two City Deal announcements and in 2017 much “busy work” behind the scenes; for many watching the City Deals space it was very quiet. By early 2018, when the most recent deals were signed, things had started to move in city policy, and recognition of the important role of regional cities became quite clear.
Regional cities now in the picture
Regional cities have been largely absent in past urban policy programs and debates. Most programs have focused on big city challenges: congestion, pollution, affordable housing, public transport and urban sprawl. The advent of the Smart Cities Plan has changed this with its focus on innovative policy mechanisms that require collaborative investment to drive national economic outcomes.
Many regional cities were waiting to see how the new agenda would roll out in reality. Recent interest has highlighted the role and importance of the smaller, regional cities’ economic performance. Still, too little discussion has occurred on their role in national policy.
Australian cities come in all shapes and sizes, from 50,000 to 5 million. Big metropolitan cities (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide) as well as Australia’s smaller regional cities (Cairns to Hobart, Shepparton to Mandurah – 31 in total) are part of a growing national network of cities.
Internationally, the role of stimulating the economies of regional or second cities to lift overall national performance has been much more closely considered and acted on in the form of policy and programs. With the emerging emphasis on regional City Deals and Smart Cities funding, perhaps Australia is beginning to act on the lessons from overseas.
Regional cities benefit from funding shift
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203728/original/file-20180129-100905-1u6ev2w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
 Author provided
When we look at the City Deals announcements made and agreements reached, we see that these still involve only an elite group of six cities (see timeline of agreements). Five of the six are regional cities: Launceston, Townsville, Darwin, Hobart and Geelong.
Of course another way of looking at this is that half the City Deals involve capital cities. Either way, this is a higher proportion of investment in regional cities than programs from decades ago, such as Building Better Cities (1991-96).
The regional focus is also very evident in the first round of funding released under the Smart Suburbs and Cities Program, a pillar of the Smart Cities Plan. Initial funding in 2017 was directed to delivering innovative projects to improve the liveability, productivity and sustainability of cities and towns across Australia.
Half of the first-round grants under the program (see table below) went to regional towns and cities. Two decades earlier, they received just over a third under the Building Better Cities program.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203727/original/file-20180129-100912-19g68qd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
 ‘Other’ category indicates a project that involves both metropolitan and regional cities. Author provided
A breakdown of the 2017 funding round shows regional cities received 55% of the grant funds. The metropolitan “big five” received only 34%.
Future directions for regional cities
The City Deals policy and Smart Suburbs and Cities Program are pillars of the Smart Cities Plan. And both have had stronger regional city representation. Why?
First, European evidence is pointing to potentially stronger economic output per person where there are many cities, as opposed to only one or two big cities, driving a nation’s growth. Hence, investing in regional cities could be a reflection of the development opportunities for small cities to contribute to national economic growth – rather than focusing all policy effort on fixing big city problems like congestion. This multi-city investment might then stimulate stronger national economic growth, compared to a purely two-city investment strategy.
Second, it could be because both City Deals and the Smart Cities Plan are trials of new policy mechanisms. City Deals is a partnership requiring cross-jurisdictional and issues-based negotiations with local, state and federal government agencies for success. The Smart Cities and Suburbs Program is essentially a technology funding program based on collaboration with private enterprises to deliver local solutions on the ground.
Regional cities are ideal test beds for these policy mechanisms. They are contained entities, where engagement is clear and vertical, transaction costs are low, and learnings are transferable to other (bigger) cities. This ensures a clear role for experimenting with policy mechanisms.
But what about the longer term? Is it just convenient to work in smaller cities with proof of concepts? Will the real innovation be centralised back into the metropolitan areas? And will the nation spread the economic growth load across the nation or concentrate it among the few big cities? Only time will tell.
In 2015 Jago Dodson asked: “Could the federal government finally ‘get’ cities?” Recent progress looks promising. We are starting to see a national cities policy, rather than just a big cities policy.
Leonie Pearson, Adjunct Associate, University of Canberra
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cities-policy-goes-regional-90856" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Cities policy goes regional: Leonie Pearson

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The announcement by Transport Minister, Andrew Constance, of the preferred route for Parramatta’s light rail must be complemented by increased density along the route.
The two stages for the Parramatta light rail are well located to stimulate significant development along the routes.
The connections to the Westmead Hospital precinct, to Carlingford and the second stage through Melrose Park and across the Parramatta River to Sydney Olympic Park can stimulate significant development particularly on the north side of the river.
The Urban Taskforce believes that when transport infrastructure projects are announced there should be a related announcement about the number of new homes to be developed.
Communities often complain about the lack of infrastructure related to new development so when the government is committing to new infrastructure local communities must understand that increased development density will come with this.
Along with the proposed Metro West rail link between Parramatta and the Sydney CBD the light rail now gives a very significant public transport network for this important part of metropolitan Sydney.
Sydney’s early development linked Parramatta and Sydney Cove closely with the first toll road.
There was a Government House in both cities symbolising their equal importance.
The public transport commitments by the NSW Government two hundred years after the first public transport links between the two cities carries on the importance of this region for development.
The possible alternative through Camellia could be a boost to development in this precinct although this needs to be balanced with the potential for a station on the Metro West line.
With the Parramatta light rail now substantially determined, the NSW Government needs to decide the locations for the Metro West stations so there can be good connections between the two transport modes.
Chris Johnson is CEO of Urban Taskforce.
</body></html>

Parramatta light rail to stimulate development along the route: Urban Taskforce's Chris Johnson

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Where we live can play a big part in ageing well, largely because of the links between physical activity and wellbeing.
Research shows that two-thirds of Australians prefer to age in place. That is, we want to live independently in our homes for as long as we can. Our neighbourhoods and their design can then improve or hinder our ability to get out of the house and be physically active.
The rapid ageing of Australia’s population only adds to the importance of neighbourhood design. In 2016, 15% of Australians were aged 65 or older. That proportion is projected to double by 2056.
These trends present several social and economic challenges, particularly for the health sector. Designing neighbourhoods in ways that promote physical activity can help overcome these challenges.
Eight simple steps
The following is a short list of evidence-based steps local and state governments can take to assist older people to be physically active. These involve minor but effective changes to neighbourhood design.
<ol>
<li>Improve footpaths: Research indicates that older people have a higher risk of falls. Ensuring footpaths are level and crack-free, and free from obstructions, will encourage walking among older people – especially those with a disability. 
</li>
<li>Connected pedestrian networks: Introducing footpaths at the end of no-through-roads and across long street blocks reduces walking distances to destinations. This makes walking a more viable option. 
</li>
<li>Slowing traffic in high-pedestrian areas: Slowing traffic improves safety by reducing the risk of a collision. It also reduces the risk of death and serious injury in the event of a collision. 
</li>
<li>Age-friendly street crossings: Installing longer pedestrian crossing light sequences gives older pedestrians more time to cross, and installing refuge islands means those who walk more slowly can cross the street in two stages. 
</li>
<li>Disabled access at public transport: Although a form of motorised transport, public transport users undertake more incidental physical activity compared with car users. This is because they walk between transit stops and their origins and destinations. Improving disabled access helps make public transport a viable option for more older people. 
</li>
<li>Places to rest: Providing rest spots such as benches enables older people to break up their walk and rest when needed. 
</li>
<li>Planting trees: Planting trees creates more pleasant scenery to enjoy on a walk. It also provides shade on hot days. 
</li>
<li>Improving safety: Ensuring that streets are well-lit and reducing graffiti and signs of decay are likely to improve perceptions of safety among older people.</li>
</ol>
Why physical activity matters
Physical function – the ability to undertake everyday activities such as walking, bathing and climbing stairs – often declines as people age. The reason for this is that ageing is often accompanied by a reduction in muscle strength, flexibility and cardiorespiratory reserves.
Regular physical activity can prevent or slow the decline in physical function, even among those with existing health conditions.
Middle-to-older aged adults can reduce their risk of physical function decline by 30% with regular physical activity (at least 150 minutes per week). This includes recreational physical activity, like walking the dog, or incidental physical activity, such as walking to the shops or to visit friends.
By making minor changes as outlined above, the health and longevity of our elderly population can be extended. Such changes will help our elderly age well in place.
Jerome N Rachele, Research Fellow in Social Epidemiology, Institute for Health and Ageing, Australian Catholic University; Jim Sallis, Professorial Fellow, Institute for Health and Ageing, Australian Catholic University, and Emeritus Professor, Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California, San Diego, and Venurs Loh, PhD Candidate, Institute for Health and Ageing, Australian Catholic University
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/eight-simple-changes-to-our-neighbourhoods-can-help-us-age-well-83962" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Eight simple changes to our neighbourhoods can help us age well

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Urban greening projects in Melbourne’s west are contributing to making the region cooler, more pleasant and healthier to live in and travel through. The key to this success is the Greening the West initiative. Since 2011 this has brought together 23 organisations that, by the end of 2018, will have collectively planted more than 1 million trees in Melbourne’s west.
The program’s efforts not only offer clear health and economic benefits for the region’s residents, but are also welcome news in the face of reports that tree canopy cover in Australian cities is generally declining.
Our recent report on Greening the West has found that, while it is a great success, much more work is needed – particularly from the Victorian government.
What is Greening the West?
Urban greening provides a variety of economic, mental and physical health benefits to the public. Greening an area can increase house prices, encourage walking and cycling, and make people feel happier.
Measures of socioeconomic and health status are generally poorer in Melbourne’s west. Compounding this disadvantage, the region has less quality green space than metropolitan averages. Melbourne’s western suburbs have tree canopy coverage of only 5% to 10%, compared to between 10% and 30% in the rest of the city’s suburbs.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189906/original/file-20171012-9839-jfsglk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Comparative levels of tree canopy cover (% of total area) in Melbourne’s local government areas. Where are all the trees?, Author provided
City West Water began the Greening the West initiative in 2011. The focus was on the local government areas of Brimbank, Hobsons Bay, Maribyrnong, Melton, Moonee Valley and Wyndham. As well as local councils, the steering committee includes community groups, water utilities, state government agencies and a variety of other actors.
An urban greening success story
Planted trees have made a clear difference to Melbourne’s west, where many of the trees can be seen from roads, train lines and houses. This visible difference, and its associated benefits, will become more apparent as trees grow to maturity.
The group obtained A$5 million in funding from the federal government’s 20 Million Trees Program. Trees were then planted in parks, waterway corridors, drainage reserves and peri-urban land.
The Greening the West group supports two other important ongoing liveability projects in Melbourne’s west:
<ul>
<li>
transforming a 1.2 kilometre section of Upper Stony Creek back from a concreted channel into a green waterway
</li>
<li>
transforming 27 kilometres of the heritage-listed main outfall sewer into a linear park and bike track connecting Werribee to the CBD, known as Greening the Pipeline.
</li>
</ul>
As part of the latter project, a 100-metre pilot at Williams Landing was finished in April 2017. Melbourne Water delivered the project in partnership with Wyndham City Council, City West Water and VicRoads, with funding from the Victorian government.
A final Greening the West success is the way it has shifted priorities and cultures, with local government and other stakeholders increasingly recognising the benefits of greening.
The program shows the power of a collaborative model for solving complex urban problems. Such models could not only be rolled out for greening similar regions, like western Sydney, but are also applicable to other complex urban issues such as homelessness.
Planting and greening projects on public land are not enough
It isn’t all good news, however. We found that current efforts to achieve urban greening in Melbourne’s west are unlikely to be enough to reach desirable greening levels.
Most of these efforts are focused on greening public or semi-public land. However, in many areas, the majority of existing trees and tree canopy cover is on private land. As urban densification occurs, these tree numbers are declining.
This is why, despite urban greening efforts, canopy cover has decreased in most areas of Australia between 2013 and 2016. To protect and enhance urban greening, the Victorian government should investigate ways to strengthen policies and planning regulations. This should be done as part of Plan Melbourne’s urban greening actions.
For instance, regulations could require large-scale developers to include trees in new housing lots, parks and streets. Regulations could also be used to ensure small-scale subdividers and renovators include trees on lots.
Current Victorian planning regulations require a certain proportion of public open space in new suburbs, and for housing lots in certain zones to include 25-35% garden area. There is also some guidance on retaining existing trees on lots.
However, there are no state or citywide regulations requiring the planting of new trees and vegetation. This creates a significant risk in new developments that the lots, streets and public open space will have very low tree cover.
A small number of councils, such as Brimbank City Council, have led the way by creating local planning controls that require housing lots to have two trees in the front garden and one in the back garden. This is done through the planning permit process. But statewide or citywide regulations supported by the Victorian government are needed to ensure the protection and enhancement of urban greenery across Melbourne.
In addition, more community education and engagement are required to increase awareness of the many benefits of urban greening.
Casey Furlong is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University; Jago Dodson is professor of urban policy and director at the Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University; and Kath Phelan is research fellow at the Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-melbournes-west-was-greened-84700" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Urban Policy

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Urban Policy

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News