Smart Cities Plan — Submissions · Smart Cities Plan Submissions 3 Overview 3 Planning and governance 3 Housing 5 Employment, access and transport 6 ... Cities Summit on 29 April

Smart Cities Plan

December 2016SUBMISSIONS

CONTENTS

Introduction 1

Next Steps 2

Smart Cities Plan Submissions 3

Overview 3

Planning and governance 3

Housing 5

Employment, access and transport 6

Liveability and sustainability 7

Smart technology 8

Smart investment 9

City Deals: process and consultation 10

Appendix A 11

When our cities thrive, we all benefit. Great cities attract talent and organisations, create jobs and opportunities, spark ideas and innovation, and support growth and economic prosperity. That is why cities are a national priority.

All Australians have a role in shaping the future of their communities. The Smart Cities agenda is about all three levels of government working collaboratively with local communities and businesses to identify what we need to do today to ensure the future success of cities.

The Smart Cities Plan was launched at the Smart Cities Summit on 29 April 2016 by the Prime Minister, the Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP, and the Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation, the Hon Angus Taylor MP. For our cities to continue to grow and thrive, it is essential for people to engage and participate in planning and policy decisions that have an impact on their lives and to start a national conversation on the future of our cities.

We received diverse feedback through submissions to the Plan from leading government agencies and local governments, industry, community members and interest groups. Contributions have helped to shape the delivery of the Smart Cities Plan and our priorities and consultation processes. Critically, key issues identified in the submissions have informed the identification of domains for action, to be agreed through Memorandums of Understanding with the states and territories to establish and implement City Deals.

The Smart Cities Summit provided a forum to discuss with government officials, business leaders and academics how to best manage the demands of growth in our cities to ensure they remain productive, accessible and liveable. In particular, there was a strong desire for the Australian Government to focus its efforts on the swift delivery of the early City Deals, before applying lessons learnt to future deals.

City Deals—our primary tool for delivery of the Smart Cities Plan—are also giving local communities and businesses a voice in shaping their cities for the future. Through City Deals, Australians are working together to create more liveable, prosperous cities through customised plans of action and targeted investment plans. In Townsville, Launceston and Western Sydney—our first three City Deals—all levels of government are coming together to listen to local feedback. We are running roundtables, meetings with community and business leaders, and other public consultation forums. The Australian Government intends to deliver City Deals with all willing states and territories.

Cities succeed and perform best when all tiers of government, the private sector and the community work together towards a collective vision. The success of the Smart Cities agenda depends on continued collaboration and active stakeholder involvement.

We encourage you to get involved in the conversation by visiting the Smart Cities website: cities.dpmc.gov.au

INTRODUCTION

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

1

The Australian Government appreciates the time and effort taken by all respondents in providing feedback on the Smart Cities Plan.

To better deliver the Smart Cities Plan and future City Deals, the Australian Government will:

• Establish a Cities Reference Group to strengthen engagement in cities policy.

• Publish a generic City Deal process to provide information on the steps for establishing a City Deal, including stakeholder consultation opportunities.

• Publish a National Cities Performance Framework to report on the performance of Australia’s cities.

• Publish the details of the regional City Deal competitive bid process to be used in the selection of City Deals outside Australia’s capital cities.

These initiatives will take place in 2017, with further details placed on the Cities website as they are finalised.

Any comments or questions regarding the consultation process or suggestions regarding the Smart Cities Plan can be emailed to: [email protected] or posted to: Cities Division, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 1 National Circuit Barton ACT 2600

NEXTSteps

2

SMART CITIES PLANSubmissions

OverviewThe Smart Cities Plan and the Australian Government’s role in shaping better Australian cities were welcomed across the 131 submissions. Respondents overwhelmingly supported the aim of coordinated and integrated policy and investment, with the three tiers of government working in partnership toward an agreed vision for more productive and liveable cities. Submissions also called for greater focus by governments on planning and governance, housing, employment, access and transport, liveability and sustainability, smart technology and smart investment.

Many submissions also emphasised the need for a transparent and rigorous process for selecting, negotiating and evaluating City Deals and other Australian Government cities policy initiatives.

Planning and governanceThe Smart Cities Plan identifies the need for evidence-based, coordinated and integrated policy, planning and investment across all levels of government. Submissions supported these objectives and welcomed the involvement of the Australian Government. Many respondents pointed to the benefits of a more integrated and coordinated approach to planning as facilitated by the Smart Cities Plan, while others saw a role for the Australian Government in driving regulatory reform to support productivity and economic growth.

The Urban Development Institute of Australia saw a strong role for the Australian Government given its ‘ability to provide funds directly, support innovative and alternative funding options, and ensure infrastructure projects are subject to rigorous selection criteria’ (sub. no: A96). There was also broad support for other levels of government working together with the Australian Government on City Deals. However, respondents were cognisant that strong commitment was required. As the Property Council of Australia notes:

‘The policies put forward in the Smart Cities Plan have the potential to fundamentally change the way our cities are planned, governed and grow, but only if governments are fully committed and held accountable for delivering their objectives.’ (sub. no: A123)

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

3

More broadly, there was strong support for partnerships, not just among the three tiers of government, but also across the community and business sectors. Such partnerships were seen as necessary to promote and sustain planning, development and delivery of key commitments in the City Deals. Relatedly, respondents also sought a more coordinated approach to funding, policy and research. This was summarised by the Australian Institute of Architects:

‘... holistic strategic planning approach is needed, combined with better coordination across tiers of government, the private sector, researchers and the wider community, for the delivery of transport, social and green infrastructure.’ (sub. no: A119)

The Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council suggested this approach presents an opportunity ‘to release new funds for infrastructure investment based on independent, transparent advice support by broad cost benefit analysis’ (sub. no: A127).

Respondents also supported the development of strategic plans, integrating land use, transport and infrastructure planning. Other submissions called for a standardised approach to urban policy and planning regulations across Australia. For example, the Planning Institute of Australia noted that ‘it is in the community’s interest that planning systems and outcomes are supported and properly funded at national, state and local levels’ (sub. no: A61).

There were also calls for the Australian Government to drive broader city regulatory reform. For example, the Property Council of Australia advocated a role for the Australian Government in facilitating the removal of planning, zoning and other regulatory barriers to development, noting that:

‘… there is a role for the Commonwealth in creating an incentives framework that drives reforms. … The model [requirements include] targets and performance metrics that have been agreed between the states and territories and the Commonwealth Government; and an entity responsible for collecting data on reforms to planning systems and their impact on housing supply or affordability…’ (sub. no: A123)

As well as incentivising change, some also felt that the Australian Government should play a greater advocacy role. For example, the Urban Taskforce highlighted the resistance by residents at the local level to developments needed to increase urban housing density near city employment and services centres. The Urban Taskforce called on the Australian Government to make the case for change in this area (sub. no: A093).

4

Housing The Smart Cities Plan emphasised the need to increase the housing supply near, or connected to, jobs and services in Australia’s Cities.

Improving housing supply and affordability is central to the productivity and liveability of Australia’s cities. Housing that is well placed, connected and serviced by infrastructure was viewed as an important influence on people’s wellbeing and on their economic and social participation. There was a consensus that unless housing supply and affordability are addressed, populations will be shifted further into the outer suburbs of cities and away from job centres, adding stress to the transport system. This problem was expected to grow, particularly in major capitals, as noted by the Sydney Business Chamber:

‘Without significant action, Sydney’s current congestion and housing affordability challenges will only get worse as the population grows. While these issues are not confined to Sydney, Sydney remains the most congested and least affordable place to buy a home in Australia and these problems must be addressed.’ (sub. no: A121)

There was general consensus that all levels of government must collaborate to address housing concerns. This would involve more strategic and longer term planning of housing in our cities, informed by infrastructure and land use planning decisions. The Council of Capital City Lord Mayors argued that a coordinated response was essential to providing affordable housing in our cities.

The Australian Government was also encouraged to consider a broader response to housing affordability as part of its Smart Cities agenda. The Community Housing Industry Association emphasised that ‘solely increasing supply will not meet the needs of lower income earners, who are also heavily impacted by the rising cost of living and increased transportation costs’ (sub. no: A130). They also noted that affordable housing needs to be in ‘the right locations—near job opportunities and transport—to avoid entrenching socio-economic divides within our cities’. Further, mandated social and affordable housing inclusions in government owned land sold to private markets was also suggested (sub. no: A130).

5

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

Employment, access and transportThe Smart Cities Plan recognises the critical role that cities play in job creation and the need for housing and infrastructure that connects people with jobs and services. The Smart Cities Plan aspires to improve accessibility through better infrastructure and transport, with the aim of creating 30 minute cities.

There was broad support for the objective of connecting people and jobs in cities. This included calls to increase housing density in places where employment growth is strong. For example, the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria notes that ‘a planning approach that includes higher density development in major activity centres is fundamental’ (sub. no: A100). William Reece also suggested improvements to facilities and services outside urban centres:

‘… I value staff working in a collaborative office environment, but recognise the value of staff being able to work close to home and childcare. Local flexible rental office space for 5–20 employees with fast internet and conferencing facilities in residential hotspots could be unobtrusive, and eliminate much commuting.’ (sub. no: A131)

The need to improve transport and infrastructure to reduce travel times and congestion so residents can readily access jobs and services also featured prominently in submissions. Ms Kelli Thomson Jones urged governments to ‘make it easier for those in regional areas to access urban areas by improving regional transport systems for both freight and passenger transport’ (sub. no: A132). In this context there was considerable support for the idea of a 30-minute city, although many considered this target ambitious, particularly for larger cities such as Sydney.

There were many ideas for how to improve city transport arrangements. For example, Action for Public Transport suggested there were ‘opportunities to better integrate transport and land use planning’ (sub. no: A133). Sandell Consulting suggested that ‘public transport timetabling should help inform strategic infrastructure decision making’ (sub. no: A134) and the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries noted the ‘potential role of new technologies such as automated and connected vehicles to help manage urban congestion and improve safety’ (sub. no: A135).

6

Liveability and sustainabilityThe Smart Cities Plan highlighted the importance of liveability and sustainability within cities through urban design and green spaces.

There were a range of views on what constituted a liveable and sustainable city and how this vision should best be realised. A number of respondents emphasised that the liveability of cities has a broad range of social, cultural and environmental aspects, from social infrastructure services and transport accessibility to environmental sustainability. The link between human health and liveability was another feature of submissions. For example, the Southern Sydney Region of Councils noted that ‘improving walking, cycling and active transport are key elements of the sustainability and liveability improvements expected alongside urban intensification’ (sub. no: A129).

Calls for more green urban spaces and green infrastructure assets, including increased tree coverage in cities and good urban landscape design, were prominent. A majority of the respondents viewed green spaces to be critical assets, particularly in high density urban areas. The Australian Institute of Landscape Architects noted the need for a greater ‘allocation of investment in living infrastructure, which can in-turn drive significant health benefits, creation of jobs, and adaptive capacity to a changing climate’ (sub. no: A91). Or, as Ms Madaline Eltherington, a community member, highlighted:

‘… we need urban green space to enjoy so please allow cities and communities to preserve the natural areas that are existing. … I love how well designed landscaping development helps an area but doesn’t destroy what we have.’ (sub. no: A128)

Other elements identified as critical to the liveability and sustainability of cities included addressing and adapting to climate change, protecting natural environments, and improving the sustainability, quality and efficiency of buildings and urban precincts. In this context, the Australian Institute of Architects emphasised:

‘… design quality should be a mandatory requirement for all project funding. … [our] cities and towns are better to live in when public buildings and public spaces are well designed.’ (sub. no: A119)

The Green Building Council of Australia also promoted the importance of sustainability, identifying that: ‘A smart city needs to be a sustainable city, and indeed ‘smart’ must be embraced as a means to catalyse and accelerate many sustainable city-building opportunities’ (sub.no: A102).

Additionally, respondents also identified opportunities for increased use of energy efficiency technologies and renewable energy, with submissions outlining the importance of supporting carbon neutral precincts and promoting the take-up of energy effective technologies.

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

7

Smart technology The Smart Cities Plan promotes the use of smart technology in cities to drive innovation and change how we live and work.

The Smart Cities Plan approach to considering new technologies to generate network efficiencies, improve transport services and stimulate new markets was supported across submissions. Regional Development Australia view smart technology and digital disruption as ‘a given factor that needs to be embraced and accepted to drive productivity and lifestyle improvement’ (sub. no: A109). The Internet of Things Alliance Australia highlighted opportunities in areas such as water management, street lighting, buildings’ energy use, bins and waste management, parking, energy, autonomous vehicles and flood management (sub. no: A85).

According to the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries, smart technology transport systems offer ‘a fundamental, long term economic and environmentally sustainable solution to improving road safety’ (sub. no: A135). The Freewheeler group also argued such systems are important for ‘helping communities be lively, connected and prosperous’ (sub. no: A53).

The Sydney Business Chamber emphasised that governments and regulators must be agile in responding to new service delivery models and emerging technologies (sub. no: A121). A number of respondents considered high speed broadband essential for improving accessibility and productivity in cities.

Leveraging open and real time data was highlighted by a number of respondents as a way to improve services and planning decisions; and to inform consumption and travel behaviour impacting infrastructure investment needs.

The Open Data Institute of Queensland cautioned that the Smart Cities Plan did ‘not give data the same importance as road, railway and energy networks’ (sub. no: A60) and argued open data should be seen as a driver of growth and efficiency, not just transparency. Other respondents welcomed opportunities to create open access data, as summarised by Claire Daniel:

‘Open data is particularly important and in many ways seen as the ‘fuel’ for the smart city. There are currently a number of open data portals in various stages of development around the country. The Australian Government may be able to play a facilitating role to encourage these initiatives.’ (sub. no: A136)

There was broad support for the use of energy efficient technologies. Citelum highlighted that technologies such as smart city lighting infrastructure can provide ‘a wide range of community applications … such as public WiFi, occupancy sensors, CCTV applications and dimming street lighting to improve cost efficiencies’ (sub. no: A28).

The importance of public-private collaboration to deliver smart technology was noted by a number of respondents. Regional Development Australia Sydney endorses the strategy for businesses and start-ups taking advantage and information and communications technology (sub. no: A42).

8

Smart investmentThe Smart Cities Plan highlighted the need for smarter investment approaches to provide long term economic returns and deliver on national objectives.

There was strong in-principle support from respondents for innovative financing to help fund transport infrastructure, with some respondents calling for broader application, including affordable housing. The Green Building Council of Australia identified that a ‘focus on strategic investment comes at a critical time when infrastructure is needed to maintain productivity and output growth to ensure a global competitive economy’ (sub. no: A102).

The National Growth Areas Alliance recommended establishing a dedicated infrastructure fund for Australia’s outer urban growth areas, which could encourage the use of value capture and other alternative sources of funding (sub. no: A42).

There was broad consensus that innovative financing mechanisms are not appropriate in all circumstances and grant funding remains a relevant option. There were also calls for more detail on how innovative financing mechanisms would be designed and implemented, with some respondents concerned they could amount to a new tax on property. For example, the Property Council of Australia noted:

‘… there is an opportunity for the Commonwealth to take a leadership role in a number of areas [including] prioritising the development of new and innovative funding mechanisms for infrastructure that do not simply represent a new property tax…’ (sub. no: A123)Organisations were supportive of the Government’s proposed Infrastructure Financing Unit, the $50 million commitment for infrastructure planning and the Government’s intention to treat infrastructure funding as an investment rather than a grant. Many organisations recommended the Government prioritise projects that deliver on a broad range of economic, social and environmental objectives.

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

9

City Deals: process and consultationThe Australian Government is committed to an evidence-based, transparent and consultative process for delivering its Smart Cities Plan and City Deals.

The Smart Cities Plan was welcomed, but respondents wanted to understand more about the role the Australian Government would play and the nature of the City Deal process. Above all, respondents called for a rigorous and consultative approach to the selection, development and evaluation of City Deals.

There were calls for the role of the Australian Government to be clearly articulated. For example, the Sydney Business Chamber sought clarity on ‘how Commonwealth Government will support improving governance arrangements to address the uncoordinated and often disparate planning and investment’ (sub. no: A121). Others wanted to know how the Australian Government intended to determine and incentivise reform without undermining the efforts, expertise and priorities of state and local governments.

The need for robust governance underpinned by evidence and rigorous analysis was a recurring theme. The Australian Sustainable Business Council articulated that ‘robust governance across all levels of government will be essential for delivering City Deals. City Deals need to be indicative of a robust process that supports the delivery of a wide range of measurable benefits for a defined region’ (sub. no: A127). Similarly, the Property Council of Australia noted ‘a true City Deal requires … clear, evidence-based planning and infrastructure strategies, supported by investment from each level of government’ (sub. no: A123).

To support robust decision making and evaluation, many respondents highlighted the importance of collecting and analysing more relevant data. Some advocated a national system for identifying and collecting data, metrics and targets to better measure, compare and monitor the performance of Australia’s cities. The Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council noted that ‘ongoing data collection will be essential in informing decision-making and measure progress’ (sub. no: A127). Similarly, the Property Council of Australia noted that ‘the success of any plan requires clear targets, performance measurement and a commitment to review and adjust policy where targets are not being achieved’ (sub. no: A123).

Greater collaboration and consultation with the community and business sectors was also required. The Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council noted that ‘effective collaboration with the private sector will be fundamental to the rapid progress of the Australian Government’s Smart Cities agenda. It is recommended that regular consultation is established with key organisations to ensure policy reform reflects local priorities and maximises opportunities early’. This should include the engagement of community and business sector experts as well as interest groups (sub. no: A127).

10

APPENDIX ANon-confidential submissions*

Organisation type

Name

Individuals

Arundell, Leon Barrett, RoyBisset, RobertCampbell, RangiCorbellini, CarlCradduck, LucyDaniel, Clairede Valence, GerardEltherington, MadalineKeel, Tom Mabb, JohnMcCormack, DenisPrice, NeilRay, JustinReece, WilliamSandell, RobinThomson Jones, KelliTychsen, GraemeVan de Vreede, MickZhou, Chris

Industry

Brisbane Airport Corporation Pty LtdBrisbane Housing Company Canberra International AirportCitelum Commend Integrated Security & Communication Systems Pty LtdFinancial Architects AsiaFreewheelerGEOCyLGTA ConsultantsMasterCard AustralasiaPlanCom Consulting Pty LtdRoyal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV)Sydney AirportXTD LimitedWestfarmers

Organisation type

Name

Local Governments

Albury City and Wodonga City Brisbane City CouncilCairns Regional CouncilCity of BendigoCity of Canterbury-BankstownCity of FremantleCity of MandurahCity of MelbourneCity of ParramattaCity of PerthCity of Port PhillipCity of StirlingCity of Sydney CouncilCity of WannerooCouncil Of Capital City Lord MayorsICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability — OceaniaIpswich City CouncilLake Macquarie City CouncilMunicipal Association of VictoriaNational Growth Areas AllianceNSW Inland ForumPenrith City CouncilRegional Development Australia HunterRegional Development Australia Peel IncRegional Development Australia SydneyRegional Development Australia TasmaniaShire of KalamundaShoalhaven City CouncilSouth West GroupSouthern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils Sydney Business ChamberWollongong City Council

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

11

Organisation type

Name

State Governments

ACT GovernmentNorthern Syd Local Health DistrictRegional Development Council WA

*This brochure does not contain details regarding respondents who have made confidential submissions.

Organisation type

Name

NGOs

10000 Friends of Greater Sydney LtdAction for Public Transport (NSW) IncAustralian Smart Communities AssociationCamden Haven Schools to SchoolsCommittee for GeelongCommonwealth Walkways AustraliaCommunity Housing Industry AssociationFuture BayswaterGreen Building Council AustraliaG21 — Geelong Region AllianceInternet of Things Alliance AustraliaLiving Cities AllianceOpen Data Institute QueenslandSustainable Living TasmaniaTamar Lake IncTwo More Trains for Singleton

Organisation type

Name

Peak Industry Body

Association of Australian Convention BureauxAustralasian Railway Association SubmissionAustralian Airports AssociationAustralian Institute of ArchitectsAustralian Institute of Landscape ArchitectsAustralian Library and Information AssociationAustralian Refrigeration AssociationAustralian Sustainable Built Environment Council Bendigo Business CouncilConsult AustraliaFederal Chamber of Automotive IndustriesInstitute of Public Works Engineering AustralasiaLarge Format Retail Association Lighting Council AustraliaOutdoor Media Association National Areas Growth AlliancePlanning Institute of AustraliaProperty Council of AustraliaShopping Centre Council of AustraliaSydney Business ChamberUrban Development Institute of AustraliaUrban TaskforceWater Services Association Australia

12

Organisation type

Name

Research and Think Tanks

Clean Air and Landscapes HubLand and Environment PlanningLink Place ConsultingMelbourne Sustainable Society InstituteThe University of Melbourne

Organisation type

Name

State Governments

ACT GovernmentNorthern Syd Local Health DistrictRegional Development Council WA

*This brochure does not contain details regarding respondents who have made confidential submissions.

Sm

art Cities P

lan—

Su

bm

ission

s

13

Smart Cities Plan

For more information visit: cities.dpmc.gov.au

December 2016SUBMISSIONS