PEOPLE in the suburbs of cities need to understand current proposals being considered by politicians and bureaucrats for the future of their neighbourhoods, an urban policy forum held in the Redlands was told last week.
The speakers warned that governments were failing to involve people meaningfully in discussions about issues such housing density.
The forum raised concerns that the push for higher density suburbs might not be the solution to current population pressures.
Urban researcher Prof Brendan Gleeson defended the record of suburban expansion, but recognised there may be a need for new direction now.
Federal MP Bruce Bilson said there was not enough effort by governments to involve people in the changes that were needed in cities.
“You can’t convince people that something is good for them by telling them – they won’t believe it,” he said.
The forum also those messages such as the continued portrayal of politicians in hard hats were confusing people in communities such as the Redlands about the real life issues facing them.
Both Griffith University urban policy researcher Professor Brendan Gleeson and Bruce Bilson, Federal Shadow Sustainable Cities Minister said people did not understand what was being planned for their communities.
“There is too much of an image of politicians in hard hats,” Prof Gleeson said.
“We are having an urban conversation that people can’t relate to.
“We are not bringing the debate back to local communities where we all experience the city and everyday life,” he said.
Prof Gleeson said there was a need to talk with communities about the choices they have before them.
“There is a disconnect between how people live and rely on their own community and their lives and the way in which we are managing our cities as construction sites,” Prof Gleeson said.
Mr Bilson said the future of cities affected everyone’s lives and evoked great passion.
“And too often it’s been a battleground that people feel governments are doing things to them and it is not something that has been sought or that is necessarily welcome.” he said.
Both Prof Gleeson and Mr Bilson were speaking at a breakfast organised by Federal Member for Bowman, Andrew Laming on Friday at the Pacific Resort in Cleveland.
Brendan Gleeson, who is Professor of Urban Policy, Griffith School of Environment believes that while continued suburban expansion may no longer be a solution to growth pressures, the higher density argument may not be the solution either.
He said until recently it was considered by planning commentators that high density was always good and that population growth on the fringe of cities was bad.
Prof Gleeson said while there were compelling reasons why the model of relentless expansion of the fringe of our cities could not continue, he did not agree that the suburbs were bad.
“The suburban expansion model served us very well as the nation for long time.
“I really oppose people who say that it (suburban estates) was somehow a bad thing to have done and suburbs are bad places. That is a foolish argument in my view.”
“We are a suburban people. We have long been, for a century, predominately living in the suburbs and we continue to live in suburbs and there is no sign of that changing.
“There is plenty of evidence that the suburban model was a good for one for very long time.
“We were able to house ourselves very acceptably and create great communities over a long time.”
But he said the suburban model may be running its course in the bigger cities.
“Maybe we can look at it in regional centres, but the relentless unstoppable expansion of our cities is problematical.
“But do we need to rush to the other extreme and embrace densification? I don’t think so, I think we have to have some real concerns about that as a project,” Prof Gleeson said.
Prof Gleeson said ddensity hadn’t always been an issue.
“It has preoccupied everyone’s minds for a couple of decades, but planning has been around for a lot longer than that,” he said.
“It wasn’t something that preoccupied planning in its whole history.”
He said in the 1980s propositions put forward by researchers internationally and in Australia focussed on higher density because it was seen as a lever for reducing energy consumption and generating better communities.
He said the research was well intentioned and was responsive to the sustainability pressures on cities
“But in reality that it doesn’t always turn out higher density is good, and lower density is bad.”
He said there was a need to take into account the energy use everyday compared to what goes into the construction and operation.
Prof Gleeson said most often authoritative studies show that often very high density leads to quite bad outcomes in turns of energy consumption per capita.
“By contrast the traditional detached dwelling can turn out, in certain circumstances, to be a better deal.
“What tends to come out best is well designed medium density.”
Mr Bilson believes that governments and industry when dealing with challenges of population growth, energy use and city plan, fail to engage the community.
He said it didn’t matter about the facilities or ideas that being offered by planning authorities is people didn’t understand what was happening and why.
“You can’t convince people that something is good for them by telling them - they won’t believe it.
“Not enough effort goes into winning the argument,” Mr Bilson said.
Email a friend
Favourites
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Reddit
Newsvine
LinkedIn
Kwoff
Twitter