Patterns of Urban Consolidation in Melbourne: Planning Policy and the Growth of Medium Density Housing

Exploring the effect of compact development policy to urban quality of life in Bandung, Indonesia

“…Recent development of the discourse of compact urban form has shifted into a more livable city than just pursuing an efficient physical urban system. For example, instead of pursuing a compact urban form, cities in Australia have shifted into an urban consolidation policy (Buxton & Tieman, 2005). Although the concept is similar in practices, urban consolidation policy emphasises on the limiting the urban growth and providing basic services and infrastructures at the minimum cost.…”

Urban Growth, Liveability and Quality Urban Design: Questions about the efficacy of urban planning systems in Auckland, New Zealand

“…This point is also made by the Victoria State government's own 2007 audit of Melbourne 2030, that found a lack of specific urban planning tools to direct development into the designated 'activity centres' (Woodcock et al, 2011). On this issue, Buxton and Tieman (2005) suggest that the 'urban consolidation of Melbourne 2030 will be undermined where there is policy confusion involving some signals which seek urban consolidation and other signals which allow urban dispersal' (Buxton and Tieman, 2005, p.155). These assessments are related to a perceived failure on the part of the relevant urban planning systems to comprehensively direct new development towards areas within walking distances of designated activity centres.…”

“…There is now sufficient evidence to demonstrate that these policies are being successful in terms of increasing the number and proportion of higher density, multi-unit housing options in Australian and New Zealand cities (Bunker et al, 2002;Buxton and Tieman, 2005;Randolph, 2006;CHRANZ, 2011). Indeed, in Australian cities this change is seen by Randolph as 'a revolution' where 'little over a generation ago living in flats (apartments) was a minority pastime ' (2006, p. 473).…”

“…These assessments are related to a perceived failure on the part of the relevant urban planning systems to comprehensively direct new development towards areas within walking distances of designated activity centres. In part, shortcomings also result from a failure to provide the infrastructure on which transit-oriented development depends, especially on the urban peripheries (Buxton & Tieman, 2005;Jain and Courvisanon, 2008). To add to these issues, more recent iterations of urban growth management strategies have raised expectations further.…”

Stuck in a Cul-de-Sac? Suburban History and Urban Sustainability in Australia

“…In Australia, these technical questions are often focused upon the benefits and costs of urban consolidation (e.g. Newman, 1999;Birkeland, 2002;Fay et al, 2002;Moriarty, 2002;Troy et al, 2003;Mitchell & Wadley, 2004;O'Connor & Healy, 2004;Searle, 2004;Troy & Holloway, 2004;Wulff et al, 2004;Bunker et al, 2005;Buxton & Tieman, 2005). Debate on this issue has done much to divide Australian urban scholars, planners and urban residents (Lewis, 1999) into opposing camps defined by their attitudes to suburban patterns of development.…”