The pandemic has changed behaviours
The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been most pronounced in Australia's largest cities. The international connectivity of Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane have made them focal points for returning travellers, with related transmission risks.
" The one constant in cities is change, and that change is accelerating. "
These direct impacts, including associated community anxiety, have affected movement patterns and social interactions. Their impact has been compounded by border closures, social distancing and other policy measures constraining growth across all cities.
Such government interventions are likely to have enduring impacts on infrastructure use in cities, with movement more localised, interaction more digital and municipal services more suburban.30
These behaviour changes present new challenges and opportunities for cities as they start their economic recovery.
1.1 Recommendation Deliver globally competitive quality of life in Fast-growing Cities by growing economies and populations, enabled by place-centric infrastructure investment and reform. Proposed sponsor: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications | ||||
When this should impact: |
| Where this should impact: |
| |
| 1.1.1 Improve cooperation between all levels of government by jointly developing a clear vision for each Fast-growing City that underpins land use, infrastructure and planning strategies. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications, local governments | |||
| Build buy-in for each city's vision through industry and community engagement. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications, local government | |||
| Embed priority quality of life outcomes for each Fast-growing City in a refreshed Smart Cities Plan. Proposed lead: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications | |||
| Benchmark performance of each city against the Australian Government's policy priorities through the National Cities Performance Framework. Proposed lead: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications | |||
| Harmonise local character and neighbourhood plans within each city's vision to: • account for local identity and assets • guide timing and scope of current and proposed projects • embed cultural considerations in planning, based on local demographics • address disparities in infrastructure provision within and across Fast-growing Cities • address community resilience, including behaviour changes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Proposed lead: Local governments Supported by: State and territory planning departments | |||
| 1.1.2 Incorporate diverse approaches and innovation in urban policy through collaboration between government, industry and academia. Proposed lead: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications | |||
| Invigorate the Cities Reference Group to provide an interface between government, academia and industry on urban policy, including: • updated terms of reference that focus on quality of life and support population and economic growth • renewed membership to ensure broad representation from all levels of government, the infrastructure sector and industry representatives. Proposed lead: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications | |||
| 1.1.3 Maximise the impact of city-shaping infrastructure delivery and operations through collaborative place-based governance models. Proposed lead: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications Supported by: State and territory planning departments, local governments | |||
| Meet community needs by improving physical and digital connectivity through place-based approaches to infrastructure planning and governance: • Support the vision for a city by developing planning strategies focused on physical and digital connectivity that link places within cities, and their satellite areas. • Connect assets to communities by defining a spectrum of appropriate governance models for places of different scale. • Prioritise industry specialisations, innovation precincts and activity centres through infrastructure distribution decisions. • Share best practice in planning and deliver place-based projects between state, territory and local governments. Proposed lead: State and territory planning agencies Supported by: State and territory infrastructure delivery agencies and local governments | |||
| Identify local priorities and support efficient place-based planning and delivery by using community-led governance groups. Proposed lead: Local governments | |||
| Effectively deliver Australian Government-funded major infrastructure by developing a spectrum of place-based governance, financial and reporting models, including: • managing the interface of federal assets and land holdings with neighbouring state, territory and local government infrastructure through asset or precinct specific models • aligning city-shaping investment with supporting reforms and infrastructure provision through City Deal models • driving targeted economic development of Fast-growing Cities by creating innovation districts and activity centres. Proposed lead: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications Supported by: Infrastructure and Project Financing Authority | |||
| 1.1.4 Ensure city-shaping infrastructure projects deliver value for money and amenity by applying place-based considerations to funding assessments. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure departments | |||
| Support a coordinated approach to developing Fast-growing Cities by requiring funding applications to demonstrate their strategic fit with the vision and priorities identified at the local, state and territory and federal level. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure departments | |||
| Ensure business case development incorporates a place-based approach when a project will create or cause material impacts on adjacent infrastructure. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure departments | |||
| 1.1.5 Provide greater residential choice by planning and delivering high-quality medium-density residential areas alongside well-sequenced infrastructure investment. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Local governments | |||
| Support amenity and infrastructure access for communities undergoing densification by developing local character plans to define expectations for the size and scale of infrastructure that will be provided. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Local governments | |||
| Encourage a diversity of housing forms by revising planning codes to embrace a diversity of housing options, including explicitly supporting medium-density development. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Local governments | |||
| Support local government decision-making by linking local character definitions to planning codes for medium-density forms. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Local governments | |||
| Explicitly consider provision of affordable housing when planning medium density residential areas. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Local governments | |||
| Effectively provide for infrastructure enhancement in brownfield communities undergoing step changes in densification by developing a transparent framework for population and activity levels, value-sharing funding mechanisms and associated infrastructure investment. Proposed lead: State and territory planning departments Supported by: Local governments | |||
Measuring progress
| Housing affordability Housing costs as percentage of gross household income (UN SDG 11.1 Safe and affordable housing)31 | ||
Affordability | Target: 12% | Timeframe: |
|
| City vision Shared vision for each Fast-growing City developed that allows performance benchmarking
| ||
Governance | Target: 100% | Timeframe: |
|
| UN Human Development Index Ranking for standard of living measures assessing quality of life32
| ||
Quality | Target: Top 3 | Timeframe: |
|
