The continued decline in Australian housing affordability has highlighted the need for an overhaul in how governments, councils and planners are addressing the complex problems at hand.

It emphasises the importance of adopting an ‘ecosystem’ based mindset and approach to housing reforms over current policies and targets, which are one dimensional in their focus on ‘supply’ as the immediate solution. Focussing on the number of dwellings instead of improving liveability for all Australians is only laying the foundation for a future crisis.

Liveable neighbourhoods continue to become more expensive because they are more desirable places to live. If more of our neighbourhoods offered better amenity, then we would not be facing this problem to the level it has reached.

A new approach is needed that respects and responds to the needs of the communities we serve, creating a liveability legacy in all neighbourhoods where residents can thrive. It starts by shifting the focus from ‘solving’ a housing crisis by simply measuring housing supply, to focussing on opportunities to improve long-term liveability for communities across Australia.

The shortfalls of a numeric ‘supply solution’

The federal government’s National Housing Accord has outlined a target of one million new homes over five years, with an additional 20,000 social homes and 10,000 affordable homes to be provided under the Housing Australia Future Fund (HAFF).

Without deeper consideration and understanding of the broader communities and ecosystems in which these homes will be developed, these ambitious targets run the risk of simply being a rushed, reactive ‘supply’ response that won’t necessarily create healthier, safer, happier and more connected communities.

In fact, current government reforms and policies may even have the opposite effect on our communities. Within an eight-year timeframe, Australia is targeting a 10 percent increase in housing stock across our local government areas (LGAs). This target has the potential to put immense strain on existing neighbourhoods if the right infrastructure isn’t in place to support such rapid development, and to deliver unliveable new neighbourhoods that may be isolated on cheaper land on the outskirts of cities.

Big-picture thinking: defining a ‘liveability ecosystem’

A liveability ecosystem is not just about providing housing. Rather, it considers housing as just one ‘lever’ or metric in the broader context of safe and well-designed neighbourhoods that are green, walkable, well-maintained, and connected to amenities and public transport. Neighbourhoods where people thrive consist of these multiple, interdependent attributes, and as such should be planned for (and assessed against) all the essential metrics of liveability.

In particular, the more we understand the views and values of our communities and how they want to live, the more informed governments and decision-makers can be in adopting an ecosystem mindset that promotes a liveability legacy, as opposed to a short-term numbers game.

It’s important that governments and policy-makers have access to the right tools to help them measure where and how people want to live, as well as a community’s receptivity to change. These ‘tools’ include Planning Victoria’s ‘Future Homes’ initiative which outlines planning system initiatives and reforms for strategic growth plans in urban and regional Victoria, and Place Score’s Australian Liveability Census. 

This social research survey captures the collective views, values and desires of Australia’s diverse resident demographic, supporting evidence-based decision making that considers the overall liveability of our neighbourhoods.

While a solution-based mindset is focussed on the number of dwellings, an ecosystem-based approach considers the quality of our neighbourhoods and the quality of life for residents. To achieve the latter, it is essential to draw on more diverse data and metrics as ‘tools’ to understand both quantitative and qualitative aspects of place.

Will one million new dwellings really be a success if the people who live there are miserable and the neighbourhoods unattractive, disconnected and unwelcoming?

The role of the ‘community voice’ in creating a liveability legacy

We all agree that community views and values should guide decision-making policies. The challenge has been in obtaining rigorous and consistent social research that can act as the evidence base for prioritisation and tracking and help de-risk investment.

Place Score’s 2023 State of Place Report revealed that some of the most liveable LGAs, according to their own residents, were Lane Cove (NSW), Potts Point (NSW) and Subiaco (WA). What do these areas have in common? They are all medium density ‘walkable’ neighbourhoods with diverse housing stock, a sense of connection to the natural environment, and great local amenities and public transport.

Essentially, the best performing neighbourhoods match the characteristics people say they value. Governments and decision-makers have an opportunity to use this place-based research to help them better understand community needs and desires if they want to plan more effective housing reforms that ensure the long-term liveability of our neighbourhoods.

Place-based research also serves as a guide for governments and developers in ensuring denser neighbourhoods are still highly ‘liveable,’ whether located in suburban or outer-suburban areas. One LGA in Sydney’s northern suburbs is facing pressure to develop high-density housing stock in a traditionally low-density environment. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this is not being received positively by the current community. Utilising the liveability data from the residents of both housing typologies is helping the Council better communicate shared values and prioritise amenity that will be valued by both groups.

It’s important to remember our common goal, which is creating happier and healthier communities, and because of that, it’s logical that the community’s voice is at the centre of this discussion. Let’s not make housing just a numbers game, it’s the opportunity to shape long-term liveability solutions that positively impact us all.

There’s no ‘quick fix’

It’s no surprise that most of the country’s most liveable neighbourhoods were founded over 100 years ago – that’s a lot of incremental investment, time for trees to grow, for communities to get established. Newer neighbourhoods have generally not been able to replicate these liveable ecosystems and unfortunately, many have not even tried. It is clear that if we try to solve the problem with the same thinking that caused it, we won’t arrive at a resolution that is sustainable or viable in ensuring the long-term liveability of our neighbourhoods.

It’s a fundamental right for people to have a home to live in, but shouldn’t it also be a shared objective to ensure that home is in a liveable neighbourhood?

 

This article was written by Place Score Founder Kylie Legge and republished by Architecture & Design.