Australian Urban and Regional Development - Essay Example

Background information The Canberra is found in the Australian Capital Territory. Its land area is approximately 2400km2. Its location from Sydney is 306km, from Melbourne its 655km and from Tokyo its 8,062 km. it is the seat of the Australian federal government with an outstanding national research facility and education. National institutions like high court of Australia are found in it. Over 53% of its total area is composed of reserves and nature parks. The city possesses the highest rate of workforce participation and the second least unemployment rate in the country (McGlynn G et. al. 1991). Among the most urbanized countries Australia is one of them. Securing of social, environmental and economic wellbeing of Australia is dependent on its cities. These cities are not only home to a massive of Australians andcenters for economic activity but are also a gateway to significant economic and cultural contribution. In the increasingly urbanized world, the cities play a pivotal role in making Australia competitive worldwide. The government of Australia has committed itself in making its cities lead the world in livability, sustainability and productivity. Just like all the other cities on the global platform, Australia’s are also faced by a number of long-term challenges. Among the challenges are: housing affordability, accelerated globalization process, resource limitations and technological change. The cities offer a vast social and economic opportunity apart from serving as concentrated centers of both people and their actions. Planning and management of cities by governments needs to address these challenges while exploiting opportunities. It leads to improved quality of life and in securing the productivity of the nation in the future. Among the many roles of the Australian government is that of planning for and delivery of an urban Australia, which is more productive, sustainable and livable. The development and management of cities no matter their location in the nation affect the national prosperity and welfare of all Australians. Three quarters of Australians population live in the eighteen major cities. With the livable cities in the world being in Australia, the cities are still faced by a several long term challenges: provision of affordable and accessible housing, creation of safe community spaces, meeting needs for a both growing and aging population (Rickaby, 1987). Maintenance of the status of being among the best cities in the world is dependent on the cities are developed to accommodate future growth. The Australian population expects their cities to provide them with a vast social and economic opportunity but with a conservation of treasured environmental and cultural resources. The delivery is expected to be from all levels of governance.The adoption of diverse lifestyle choices, and less carbon dependent ways of living is required. It will encompass enabling the human capital to fully participate in the society through education and trainings, facilitation of adequate supply of appropriate housing, and re-thinking of the cities and communities planning. Introduction The future sustainability of Australian cities is dependent on urban planning. The continued growth in population of Australia’s cities offers an increasing pressure on infrastructure like; public transport and roadway, energy, water systems, air and energy within the urban environments. The urban planning is undertaken at all levels of Government in Australia. The Federal Government is playing an increased role in the setting up the policy. This is an overall response in developing climate adaptation and mitigation strategies. The local government is also engaging in community to make decisions on urban planning designs hence promoting social cohesion. Over the years, Australians have developed a respect for urban heritage places. Community groups have fought hard in stopping developers from destroying them. Issues affecting the efficiency of Australian cities The urban energy utilization is estimated to grow essentially if the government does not increase its intervention. Greenhouse gas Emissions by both commercial and urban residential amounts to twenty percent, and that of domestic transport stands at fourteen point five percent as of 2003 (National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee, 2003). Approximately half of Australia’s total greenhouse emissions and two thirds of emissions from energy are generated in urban areas. (Pears, 1995) The government has not yet understood the desire of integrating residential development, employment location and transport systems across capital cities. The government is seeking to transfer a proportion of outer urban development into established areas. Unfortunately, state government has limited the land supply in outer urban development into established areas. None has required an increased average residential density there. Recently, most of Australian state governments developed land use policies with an attempt of altering the urban form in gaining greater efficiency. These strategic plans encounter same commitment of more compact cities. They achieve these through higher density, development in activity centers and improved public transport. Implementation problems are also shared with a focus on reluctance in requiring compliance with compact city policies. An example is the Victorian government strategy, Melbourne 2030, which seeks the concentration of almost seventy percent of planned new dwellings by 2030 within existing urban boundaries (Banister D, 1992). It is through increasing proportion of dwelling in about one hundred mixed use activity center from twenty four to forty one percent of new development. Raising of the public transport trips from nine to twenty percent is part of the strategy. Another plan is by Queensland government. It seeks to accommodate forty to fifty percent of planned five hundred and seventy five thousand new dwellings by 2016. Australian National Urban Policy The Australian National Urban Policy is vital to the future of the Australian nation. The reasons include: Cities play an essential role in development of the future prosperity and economy of a country. An optimistic future for the cities is essential for the future of regional areas hence, the way the cities are planned and built affects efficiency functionality as the regional generators of economic growth. Productivity, sustainability and livability of Australia is faced by a vast number of challenges that need urgent addressing. A majority of the population lives in the cities therefore the nature of how and where people live have a reflective effect on the welfare of individuals, communities and their participation and contribution in society. The aging of the population, affects the quantity of people in the workforce through a decline in numbers. The result of this decline is an eroded taxation base and labour depletion in relation to the total population. Maximizing of the workforce participation is essential. A target on immigration policies should be done carefully to ensure the workforce is highly skilled. The aging of the population, raises the cost of the health system. The diversity of the community also sets pressure on the housing and lifestyle wants and needs through changing them (Rickaby, 1987). The cities are also becoming vulnerable as they get exposed to natural disasters as global warming, and climate change. A need for cities adaption is raised. The operation of the cities on a global economy reflects to competition for both commerce and skilled labour. Achievement of maximum amenity and livable in the urban cities will attract visitors either for business, leisure or both. These challenges bear complexity that requires a national approach. The Australian Government is a key player in the future of urban systems. It must present a frontline in innovation, adaptation and resilience. Decisions made by the government, individuals of businesses do carry an essential impact on the cities. Knowing the effects of the decisions we make is of importance as it helps us set clear aspirations and directions guiding actions and interventions. The Sustainable Population Strategy and other national policy initiatives In supporting a sustainable Australia, the government needs to strive in striking a balance to meet the future challenges. In 2011, the government came up with three initiatives for the building of a sustainable Australia. They include National Urban Policy, Regional Policy agenda and supporting of the population strategy. Population growth of Australia is expected to be concentrated in major cities (Banister, 1992). The National Urban Policy supplements the Australian Government’s Sustainable Population Strategy. It is an essential constitute of a Sustainable Australia framework applying principles to the urban setting. In union, the National Urban Policy and the Sustainable Population Strategy shall offer an evidence-based approach on how Australian Government contributes in meeting current and future challenges. Goals of the National Urban Policy The major goal is on productivity where it aims as harnessing Australia’s people and industry productivity. It is arrived at through better management of labour, creativity, land, infrastructure and knowledge. On sustainability, it is aimed at advancing Australia’s natural and built environment though better resource and risk management. It shall also enhance the livability of the cities through promotion of better urban design, planning and affordable access to recreational, community and cultural facilities. The City of Canberra The Canberra was founded in the year 1913, the search for a new national capital as early as 1902 presented a very high priority on the visual quality of landscape setting of the future city (Headon, 2003) The main issues surrounding the city of Canberra are among others; a large population, a need for more employment opportunities within the town center, need for greater weight on residents’ view and social impact by the governments and planning bodies and transport links. Canberra is required to play its strengths and opportunities and avoiding the mistakes committed by other cities to achieve a vigorous regional development. The city of Canberra bears a particular planning history, which is totally different from all the other Australian cities. It was a product of a master plan from a design competition commissioned by new federal government. It is this process that enabled Australian people to seek a national capital, which will express the symbol of unity of the states forming the commonwealth. The new capital was of great importance resulting to the federal senate committee, responsible for choosing the site and commissioning of an international design competition, feeling the city should mirror the ambition and optimism of the nation in its infancy (Headon, 2003). The landscape was of a crucial part in the new national identity through extensive plantings by Charles Weston alongside the development of the garden suburbs by Sulman and the eventual adoption of the Griffins’ plan that was gazette in 1925.it was as a result of competition for the design of Canberra which provided an opportunity for contestants, Graffin included, to conceive a new city based on the emerging concepts. They explored relationship that existed between built and natural form. Graffin laid the city utilizing the beauty of the naturally existing landscape (Banister, 1992). He did predict a need for urban planning to enable flexibility of satisfying the growth and changing needs over time. The landscape vernacular and framework of the city was established within the first thirty years with the majority of urban development taking place after World War 2. The unique urban planning legacy presents certain obstacles in balancing the demands of the ongoing development in Canberra. National Capital Authority (NCA), a body mandated to administer parts of Canberra’s natural and built environments, embarked a series of reviews to scale the values the community bestows to Canberra’s landscapes and the planning of the city (Buxton and Tieman, 2004). The city is found to be suffering from an administrative, policy crisis surrounding planning, and land administration. Scholars believe that only ACT self-government can provide the desired force to eradicate the problem of unbalanced access to policy-makers. On the matter of land administration in the ACT, due process of efficient dispensation appears to be shaky. It resulted to failure in giving due weight to residents desires. There were specific concerns concerning the buildings that line Barry Drive and Torrens Street. Some critics thought they were the ugliest building ever to be erected in Australia. A problem on the concerns of the social impact on aspects of planning by NCDC decisions was noted. It is thought that with the prevailing failures, Canberra will grow at an increasing rate to outdo the features that still make it an attractive city to its dwellers. The panoramas at hand require planning to enhance and sustain its qualities (Rickaby, 1987). The planning of Canberra fall short of recognizing the uniqueness of it as the national capital. The planning of Canberra is utilitarian rather than community-focused. This is because of presenting their town centers as service centers rather than centers for community. It has different zones (shopping, office, tourist, residential) with an almost pre-determined design encompassing set components. A lot of the planning is designed ‘around the car’. Examples include the absence of cafes on the lake in Belconnen (Newton et. al., 2001). The few kebab joints available face the car-parks instead of the lake. Visitors to these joints eat while looking at the cars. At the town center for Weston Creek, Coolamon Court consists a mall and some side street cafes, shops and a post office. All these either fronted or surrounded by car parks. Some community buildings stand in a row in isolation next to but separate from the shopping centre. The design encourages or can be seen to be one that was meant for residents to go conduct their transactions and leave. A proposal to expose the potential of the Canberra through opening it up to the iconic lake won one of Australia’s most prestigious urban design awards. Greater weight is placed on Urban Design the recent coming together of the federal government, community organizations, peak industry bodies, local government and state and territories. It was achieved through the adoption of ‘creating places for people – An Urban DesignProtocol for Australian Cities’ A recent research report realized on the fourth day of march 2013, ranked Canberra second after Adelaide city on the best livability city in Australia. The residents of Canberra hold a thought of their city being clean and safe though with less than desirable weather and unaffordable housing. They also reported that their city was well maintained and unpolluted hence a safe place for both people and their property (Banister, 1992). The report ranked the city as the best for being a home to a diverse range of persons who get along well, with an above average for outdoor recreation, good schools and attractive natural environment. Roles and responsibilities Role of the Australian Government The planning and co-ordination of the government’s activities bears a direct and indirect impact on the cities. The entire process of how the government works with the state and territory governments in funding infrastructure to the structure of the cities investment in health and education services affects the city.The constitution of Australia provides for the state and territory governments the sole responsibility of planning and managing of cities. A strong support has existed allowing the government to increase its involvement and leadership in the cities. The government’s future actions shape for better outcomes is outlined in the National Urban Policy State, Territory and Local Governments These are also among the key players in the shaping and management of the cities. They provide most of the facilities and services for the maintenance of the community’s welfare. Their investments in infrastructure and in regulating other utilities like power and water (Rickaby, 1987).They are jointly commissioned with the responsibility of planning for urban growth and planning for land use planning. The deliveries of the best services are achieved through utilization of the closest level of government. Industry and the Community It represents the private sector, which is a powerful shaper of cities. The multiple individual decisions made bear an enormous influence on the economic, social and environmental status. It does provide important infrastructure in the cities that used to be the domain of the government. Successful interaction with the community and industry results to successful planning and operations of the cities. Reference Australian Urban and Regional Development Review1994, Australian Cities and Regions: A National Approach, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Banister D 1992, Energy Use, Transport and Settlement Patterns, in Sustainable Development and Urban Form (ed. M Breheny), Pion, London. Buxton M and Tieman G 2004, Urban Consolidation in Melbourne 1988–2003: Policy and Practice, RMIT Publishing, Melbourne. http://www.smh.com.au/national/adelaide-best-city-to-live-in-poll-reveals-20130304 Lewis M 1999, Suburban Backlash: The Battle for the Worlds Most Liveable City, Blooming Books, Hawthorn, Victoria. McGlynn G, Newman P and Kenworthy J 1991, Towards Better Cities:  Reorganization and Transport Energy Scenarios, Report prepared for Australias Commission for the Future. McLoughlin J 1991, Urban Consolidation and Urban Sprawl:  A Question of Density, Urban Policy and Research, 9(3). National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee 2003, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1988 to 1994, Canberra. Newton P et. al. 2001, Australia State of the Environment 2001:  Human Settlements Theme Report,CSIRO on behalf of the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Pears A 1995, Non-Transport Energy Issues for Urban Villages. A Report for the Urban Villages Project,Government of Victoria Urban Villages Project, Melbourne. Rickaby P 1987, Six Settlement Patterns Compared. Environment and Planning B,14. Takehito TakanoRoutledge, Oct 9, 2003Healthy Cities and Urban Policy Research Read More