Urban planning and population movement

Introduction

Australia has one of the world's most highly urbanised populations with the majority living in its five largest cities-Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide. The expanding size of these and other urban areas and threats to the liveability of them has prompted Australia's government to adopt strategies for urban planning and the provision of infrastructure that assists the needs of both urban and non-metropolitan development. This chapter discusses the ramifications of urban growth and diversity as well as current and future planning decisions, with examples of policy making and implementation drawn from public housing and transport concerns in Australia's two largest, respectively, cities: Sydney and Melbourne.

Reasons for urban planning

Australia's urban areas are expected to grow in population by over four million in the next twenty-five years. This has put pressure on its energy, air and water systems, the efficiency of roadways and public transport and, ultimately, the biodiversity and liveability of areas for human settlement. Such pressure and the rapid pace of growth have made it increasingly difficult for local and national governments to provide basic infrastructure and services. The resulting inequity in access to, and management of, these resources has further resulted in social, economic and environmental problems. The most serious of these problems, many of which overlap in areas of development and social equity, include:

• Social exclusion: poverty, chronic unemployment, welfare dependence, drug and alcohol abuse, crime, homelessness and other forms of social dysfunction;
  
  
• Environmental damage: soil erosion and toxicity, water and air pollution, accumulation of waste and the physical alteration of landscapes;
  
  
• Unsustainable patterns of development: housing which is unaffordable or unsuited to future occupation, inadequate access for education and welfare services, excessive resource consumption, overpopulation and crowding, public endangerment due to proximity of housing and public areas to industrial and hazardous waste disposal sites.

In this light, urban planning is seen as necessary for the sustainable development of these resources and the tackling of equity problems, particularly as the growth of Australia's urban areas continues.

Urban planning policies and population movement

While Australia's planning policies attempt to address most of its sustainability issues, it is similar to other western countries in that it has no policies for optimum population size or a national level of distribution. Debate continues in Australia for such policies-a debate fought over largely between those favouring a low population in the interests of preserving the natural environment and those favouring a high population in the interest of economic growth. Others argue that Australia should avoid population decline because such decline would be in the demographic of young and productive age groups. Calls for a family support policy adapting to the decline in fertility levels vie for attention with traditional concerns about the size of Australia's immigration intake. These arguments have given shape to policies for urban development that indirectly influence Australia's population patterns. The large scope of these and other policies for social, economic and environmental planning is best illustrated with examples taken of policy making and implementation in Australia's largest cities, Sydney and Melbourne.

Example 1. Sydney's Neighbourhood Improvement Program (NIP)

The NSW Department of Housing's Neighbourhood Improvement Program (NIP) has looked at area renewal policies addressing social disadvantage in Sydney's public housing estates. In NSW there are over 40 000 public housing units concentrated in large estates dating from the 1960s and 1970s. Over time these have become increasingly disadvantaged and stigmatised communities living in areas of low amenity and deteriorating housing stock with many social problems such as high unemployment, social service dependency, and crime. In recent years these problems prompted NSW and other State governments in Australia to direct a higher proportion of their housing budget to the regeneration of these housing estates. An initial $100 million was spent on such responses with the Department of Housing's NIP. This included physical, social and management programs targeting 20 estates (including roughly 10 000 dwelling units) in Airds and Macquarie Fields near Campbelltown and Waterloo in the inner city. It aimed at improving housing management and social services as well as tenant and community involvement and employment opportunities.

Example 2. Melbourne's Tram Network

Growing pressure has been put on the public transport in Melbourne with its trams and the added congestion caused to the flow of road traffic. This has led to efforts by Victoria's Department of Sustainability and Environment to address the negative effects of this congestion on tram travel times and reliability. It has outlined policies and put into practice moves to improve travel times, through measures such as separating trams and traffic and the giving of priority to trams in road management. An increase in the frequency of service and the upgrading of tram vehicles and infrastructure has also taken place with the selective extension of the network according to passenger volumes and proximity of areas of employment or services. Such extensions have been made to routes along Mont Albert to Box Hill and to Burwood East to Vermont South and Knox. Other developments have included low-flood trams, improved stops and interchange facilities and passenger information systems.