Alright, after some chat about decentralisation last night, How Canberra Became The Worst City for Transport in Australia Due to Urban Planner Driven Decentralisation, a thread.
To begin with, this is Canberra - a city ~40kms long and ~25kms wide, pop ~474,000 or so.
Canberra is (as most people know) an incredible example of intentional urban sprawl. This happened chiefly because Peter Harrison, the NCDC chief planner in the 60s, really hated cities, apartment and terraces.
This led him to be a champion of car dependent suburbia, and led to one of the most insane plans for car based sprawl anywhere in the world, the Y-Plan, where Canberra would keep creating self-contain urban villages out to 100s of kms away.
Now the exact rationale for the Y-Plan among Canberra urbanists is something of a topic of debate. The original consultation had only one objective - reducing congestion via some really primitive 1960s traffic modelling.
But it's also true that over time, the Y-Plan acquired this folk rationale of also being about this idea that we could segregate our city into these "urban villages" that people wouldn't need to leave - work and play in the same local area.
This was only possible because the NCDC had both virtually unlimited money, no democratic accountability and complete power to reallocate employment by ordering government departments to move. Try this anywhere else, and reality and economic gravity would intervene to stop it.
And of course, as soon as the NCDC was dissolved with self-government in the 1989, it stopped. Employers moved to where they always wanted to be - in civic in the centre of Canberra. East Gunners has been waiting for a major government employer that will never come for 30 yrs.
But a lot of government departments were successfully scattered, notably the Department of Social Services in Tuggeranong, on the extreme southern periphery of Canberra.
What happened of course is that the urban village model broke down. People moved jobs. Households formed between couples where they had different jobs in different districts. Which means, in Canberra, commuting from Gungahlin to Tuggeranong is pretty common.
A 45 minute plus commute in a city of less than 500,000 people is insane. It's a similar commute as working in Melbourne City and living in Croydon, except Canberra is an order of magnitude smaller than Melbourne.
This is reflected in the commute times data from Grattan. Canberra's median commute distance is actually around the same as Sydney, and its median commute time is longer than Adelaide, a city almost twice our size.
The challenges of decentralised employment centres for city as labour markets was put forcefully by Alain Bertaud in Order without Design. Dispersion means that transport challenges are just much harder to ensure effective labour markets.
The scale of this failure cannot be overstated. Canberra is the only major Australian city built for the car. The only city planned for it. We had huge amounts of resources for transport planning and infrastructure. And for our size, we ended up the worst of the pack.
CBDs exist for a reason. They maximise urban agglomeration effects, knowledge spillovers and increase productivity, but they also minimise commuting times for potential workers. The centre is the centre. This minimises transport infrastructure requirements via radial networks.
By contrast, in Canberra we have spent huge sums of money creating an elaborate system of orbital freeways designed to not get people from the edge to the centre, but from edge to edge (because of decentralisation). This is expensive for a city of under 500k people.
Going forward, dealing with the legacy of the Y-Plan will be a big challenge, to keep congestion and commuting costs low. Increased density in inner ring suburbs is a major step, but chances are we're going to be spending many more billions on transport as a result.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a thread about how heritage listing this building would be catastrophic to the sustainability, walkability, and prosperity of our city. Well, the Heritage Council has provisionally registered it, and folks its really bad. #Canberra#CBR#Urbanism 🧵
Here’s a link to the Heritage Council’s reasons. There are 8 grounds for Heritage listing places in Canberra, and the Heritage Council found that this building only satisfied 1- ‘Importance to the course or pattern of the ACT’s cultural or natural history’ yoursayconversations.act.gov.au/former-commonw…
The Heritage Council was unsatisfied that the building was aesthetically or architecturally significant. It also isn’t satisfied that the building will contribute to an understanding of the ACT’s cultural history, or of any importance to a community or cultural group or so on
So there’s a nomination to heritage list 187 London Circuit - a vacant 3 story building built in 1967.If successful this will damage Canberra’s livability, sustainability, walkability, affordability, and prosperity. A🧵 to explain why. #CBR
This site is zoned for CZ1 (core zone), with a known redevelopment intention to RL617 (the tallest buildings in civic can go) - it’s the highest density of use zone permissible in the inner north or south. Here it is on the left.
And that's a good thing, because it’s one of the most centrally located sites in Canberra. It’s right next to the legislative assembly bus stops at the nexus of the ACT bus network, a 3 minute walk away from Canberra Centre, across the road from the Legislative Assembly.
The @TheAtlantic has been doing some excellent work on NIMBYISM and it's costs over the past few months, and the latest piece from @AnnieLowrey is an absolute banger. #CBR#Urbanism
I can tell you that everything in this article is equally applicable to Canberra as it is to San Fran. In both, our planning debate skews very old, very wealthy and very white. And in both they have a large degree of power over what gets built.
And in both, "The flip side of so few participating so much is that everyone else participates so little. Who can blame them?" I have been called brave for turning up to community meetings as the only young renter in the room. I've met so many that went once and then never again
Alright, I'm at the @InnerSouthACT public forum on the new planning bill. If you're a sane person that doesn't spend their evenings attending community forums about urban planning, feel free to follow along. #CBR@GreaterCanberra
First up is Richard Johnston, the head of the Kingston Barton Resident group talking about his impression of the planning bill. The first substantive theme is about the concentration of powers in the Chief Planner.
This is a fairly common thread of concern among community groups and others that have had a look at the planning bill, on both ends of the NIMBY-YIMBY spectrum. The Chief Planner can only be fired for cause and has greater powers under the new bill.