Search

Evaluations of plan implementation are typically conceived in terms of plan conformance (the degree to which outcomes align with planning intent) or plan performance (the degree to which decision makers apply the plan). In this research, we consider the relationship between performance–conformance by evaluating the implementation of compact activity centre policy in greater Brisbane. We examine two decades of changes to local land use planning regulations using content analysis, quantifications of permitted development intensity, and comparisons of actual land use changes with planned intent, to identify evidence of the use of metropolitan scale activity centre policy. We find that the activity centre policy performed well and was used as intended across the metropolitan area. However, despite strong performance, the policy conformed poorly in terms of achieving the expected outcomes. These findings highlight the importance of understanding plan implementation from both performance and conformance perspectives. While conformance evaluations are essential to connect planning intent to physical outcomes, understanding plan performance is also necessary to explain the results of conformance evaluations and whether conformance successes or failures were due to deficiencies with the plan itself or how the plan was used by key actors charged with its implementation.

State and local governments around Australia and the world now routinely promote the idea that dense, interconnected nodes of transit-rich, mixed-use places are indispensable for sustainable and resilient urban futures. From 20-minute neighbourhoods and 15-minute cities to compact activity centres and transit-oriented developments, the drive for urban density is now a ubiquitous feature of planning policies and is considered the antidote to the range of problems that plague our cities. To deliver on these compact city visions, urban planners have long appealed to the market with calls for ever more flexible zoning and building codes (Steele 2009). However, with compact city policies now into their third decade, both the implementation and efficacy of market-driven density remain in doubt. This special issue of Urban Policy and Research contributes a range of new research that explores both the problems and prospects of market-driven density. By doing so, it suggests new approaches and lines of inquiry that can reset the compact city vision and policy.

Australian planning authorities have struggled to develop more compact cities for decades, yet empirical explanations for this policy challenge are lacking. This is critical to inform future sustainable planning efforts. In response, we correlate 20 years of change in greater Brisbane’s activity centres against factors related to land use regulations, transport accessibility, property characteristics, and socio-economic status. We find activity centre implementation is most strongly associated with property-based factors and that land use regulations have the weakest relationship. Policymakers should therefore pursue alternative strategies that do not rely on planning mechanisms geared primarily towards creating a market for development.

Since 2000, planning authorities in Australia have overseen a massive rezoning of inner-city industrial land to make way for mixed-use residential development. They claim central industrial space is obsolete in a post-industrial economy driven by knowledge, finance, and real estate. And rezoning offers opportunities to house people near jobs and services, thereby slowing urban sprawl. While industrial rezonings have contributed to the densification of Australian cities, they also open the door to real estate speculation and accelerate gentrification. This has forced many people to move outward in search of affordable shelter. Rather than fostering walkable 20-minute neighbourhoods, "ghost shops" haunt many new mixed-use residential developments. And sprawl continues unabated. Other problems stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of contemporary manufacturing. The loss of central industrial zones displaces a range of specialised manufacturers, creative producers, and small businesses. With them go the quality jobs and vital services they provide. In the process, the diversity of land uses and jobs is reduced in the very places that policymakers want it. Can urban policy make room for manufacturing and create real diversity and a mix of employment opportunities in our cities?

Advocates argue that urban manufacturing holds potential to promote locally distinctive enterprises, quality employment and more socially-inclusive forms of urban development. However, little is known how urban policy actually supports manufacturing. This paper documents the policy response to urban manufacturing in the U.S. and Australia. We determine how policy documents conceptualise manufacturing and define goals and strategy around land use, business development and workforce development. The analysis demonstrates that manufacturing policy is situated between entrenched visions of deindustrialisation and emerging notions of a renewed, advanced manufacturing sector and that most cities struggle to address the inherent challenges of this condition.

Metropolitan planning policy in Australia has focussed on creating more compact cities for the past twenty years. Yet the multi-nodal expression of Australian compact city policies has, to date, proven difficult to implement (Newton and Glackin 2014; Chhetri et al. 2013; Woodcock et al. 2011; Bunker 2014). Much of the existing research examining progress towards the compact city is based on data that is now 10 years old, thereby omitting the significant growth in infill residential development that has occurred more recently in Australian cities. In this presentation, we outline a new method to investigate longitudinal changes in population, land use, and built form in activity centres. We firstly describe the challenges involved in using common data sources and methods, before showing how the use of Google Street View, aerial imagery, and census data can be combined to overcome these challenges and provide a simple and accessible method to track changes indicative of the compact city. Preliminary findings from the application of this method to nominated activity centres in the Greater Brisbane area reveal signs of significant progress in some centres, however overall progress remains mixed. Future research that examines these results in combination with land use policy, transit accessibility, property valuations, and employment changes may highlight important implications for the planning of future compact city development.

Governments are busily rezoning our cities for high-rise apartments. The New South Wales government, for example, plans to rezone a 20-kilometre corridor in Sydney, from Sydenham to Bankstown, for urban density, in concert with a new metro rail line. Residents and community groups have reacted vociferously to the prospects of high-rise buildings in previously low-density suburbs. But there is another, overlooked dimension to the redevelopment. Much of it is on industrial land: pockets of old factories and workshops, portrayed as decrepit and in need of renewal. Our new project documents enterprises that actually use urban industrial lands. It's a story of surprising and largely hidden vibrancy at the interface between creative industries and small manufacturing. Planners and economic developers tend to assume manufacturing has left central cities and that manufacturing enterprises can simply locate to city-fringe greenfield sites. In reality, manufacturing is changing form, and often depends on - and benefits from - urban industrial lands. Despite the scale of renewal plans, no detailed knowledge exists of what will be lost, or of existing enterprises' needs.