<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/crystal-legacy-18412">Crystal Legacy</a>, RMIT University and <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/daniela-minicucci-120520">Daniela Minicucci</a>, RMIT University.
Australia does not have a national cities policy. But in committing funding to transport infrastructure, the federal government is significantly shaping Australian cities. Local government and community-based groups are left vying to have their say from within local communities.
<h2>
	Who is dictating urban policy?</h2>
<a href="http://strategies.planning.nsw.gov.au/MetropolitanStrategyforSydney.aspx">New South Wales</a> and <a href="http://www.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au/Plan-Melbourne">Victoria</a> each released metropolitan strategies in 2013. Both strategies contained big-ticket transport infrastructure projects.
Currently, however, federal government policy is shaping Australian cities over and above these metropolitan strategies. As the player with the deepest pockets, the Commonwealth has immense sway over urban policy.
The <a href="http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/infrastructure/pab/files/Our_Cities_National_Urban_Policy_Paper_2011.pdf">urban policy and planning priorities</a> set out by the previous federal government have changed considerably with the dissolution of the <a href="http://www.planning.org.au/news/major-cities-unit-closed">Major Cities Unit</a>. The unit was responsible for coordinated capital city planning and infrastructure advice across governments.
The election in 2013 of a new federal government, committed to funding road infrastructure over urban rail, helped elevate state-level commitments to build the <a href="http://www.linkingmelbourne.vic.gov.au/east-west-link/project-overview">East West Link</a> in Melbourne and <a href="http://www.westconnex.com.au/about/index">WestConnex</a> in Sydney above large urban rail projects.
Community groups and local government are campaigning against these road projects. These campaigns have exposed a disconnect between a federal government that holds most of the power over the public purse, the states that bear responsibility for infrastructure delivery and metropolitan planning, and the public’s expectation that they will have a say on transport decisions.
<h2>
	Not just another NIMBY campaign</h2>
Understanding the significance of transport investments, not least the use of public funds to finance <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/media/2014-03-14/interview-jon-faine-abc-774-melbourne">one piece of infrastructure above another</a>, community-based groups have been spurred into action.
In Victoria, the debate between proponents of the 4.5 kilometre cross-city East West freeway tunnel and community groups urging greater investment in public transport starkly illustrates the divide between government investment in infrastructure and local expectations of urban policy.
Community groups and other active citizens are mounting a strong case in hearings before <a href="http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning/panelsandcommittees/current/east-west-link-eastern-section-project-assessment-committee">the panel</a> advising the Victorian government on the East West Link. These proceedings are providing a prominent platform for debate on city-defining transport projects.
Beyond the walls of the hearing, though, community groups are also seeking to influence the debate on metropolitan transport.
Many campaigns have wielded the power of social media to air concerns and disseminate information. Other groups have organised public meetings and panel discussions to share expertise and guide thinking on alternative transport options.
<h2>
	Policy has electoral consequences</h2>
Victorians are engaging with transport issues and connecting the dots to urban policy. This is evident in savvy policy-focused campaigns, community-based gatherings to express solidarity and the proliferation of solution-seeking debates in social media.
Such efforts are creating dynamic spaces for groups to challenge a project shrouded by political rhetoric and evasion. Most importantly, community efforts are widening the debate over Victoria’s transport possibilities.
Set on shaping the urban policy debate, some recently formed community-based groups, alongside other long-standing advocates for public transport, have created platforms for Victorians to engage politically with decisions on the state’s direction.
The former Brumby Labor government’s <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/labors-loss-is-explained-by-the-rail-politic-20101129-18dwp">public transport policy failure</a> is widely regarded as a decisive factor in its defeat in 2010. Community campaigns could indeed influence the Victorian election in November.
There may also be implications at the national level. Policies on cities, productivity and infrastructure are expected to feature in the next federal election.
<h2>
	Public demands a say</h2>
While the federal government holds money for big infrastructure and states set the urban policy agenda, community groups are finding ways to interject. In Victoria, this includes the recent creation of the <a href="http://www.futuremelbournenetwork.org/">Future Melbourne Network</a>.
It is increasingly hard to deny citizens involvement in the urban and transport governance of Australian cities. For months, dozens of community groups have fervently organised their offensives.
As the East West Link panel hearing enters its <a href="http://www.linkingmelbourne.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/5465/Version-4-of-East-West-Link-Timetable-180314-2.pdf">sixth week</a> and community groups and individuals present their case, they aim to reclaim a place for the public in discussions that determine urban policy and transport priorities.
Many Victorians have taken up the cause to change the course of transport decision-making. Some are more compelled than ever to have a dialogue on projects that will shape the future of the city. Will state and federal leaders tune in to the public conversation?<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/24634/count.gif" width="1">
Crystal Legacy receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is affiliated with the Future Melbourne Network.
Daniela Minicucci does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/without-a-national-cities-policy-who-joins-all-the-planning-dots-24634">original article</a>.
Lead image credit: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonyabbott/13840969114/in/photostream/" target="_blank">flickr</a>
</body></html>

theconversation

Without a national cities policy, who joins all the planning dots?

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/chris-hale-93655">Chris Hale</a>, University of Melbourne.
It’s hard to get past the feeling that we are stuck in 1970s thinking when it comes to planning infrastructure such as airports.
The Federal government has <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/media/2014-04-15/western-sydney-airport-deliver-jobs-and-infrastructure">finally announced Badgerys Creek</a> in Sydney’s south-west as the city’s second airport, with an intention to go to tender - but without vital details on the role of the airport or its passenger prospects.
Earlier this week, the <a href="http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/9617-coalition-government-commits-to-melbourne-airport-rail-link-in-state-budget">Victorian government announced</a> in vague fashion an intent to push ahead with delivery of a Melbourne airport rail link - costs, benefits, delivery timing and network integration issues all uncertain.
These two different examples from Sydney and Melbourne provide indicators of out-of-date Australian thinking on major infrastructure, reflecting a mindset around car and jet travel.
<h2>
	Melbourne - stuck on cars?</h2>
Melbourne’s airport rail link has been <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/docs/131109_bmelbourne-airport-rail-link.pdf">a long time coming</a>. We recognise its necessity. But the way it will be integrated into the existing transit network is critical. And Melbourne planners appear trapped in a 1970s assumption that people will travel by car to-and-from its airport.
A rail link serving a simplistic point-to-point or A-to-B travel pattern (from Melbourne’s Southern Cross station to Tullamarine airport) will garner a certain amount of ridership, but benefits will be limited for travellers living in the Melbourne’s north or west, who will need to travel into the CBD to access Southern Cross.
Those travelling from Melbourne’s eastern suburbs and the southeast will have to change trains - unless there are planned options for a direct connection.
There are plenty of international examples showing the correct way to develop airport links. In Osaka or Tokyo there are at least three different “airport express services” per airport, each addressing different residential catchments, substantially utilising pre-existing rail corridors.
In Melbourne’s case this could be achieved if multiple services converged on the airport. Let’s plan for eventual airport-bound services from Dandenong, Frankston, and from the yet-to-be-built Doncaster rail corridor.
Equally, passengers from the west and north could be offered convenient interchange points at the inner west suburbs of Footscray and Sunshine, or Arden-Macauley to the north, respectively.
These ideas don’t necessarily cost much more from an infrastructure perspective, but they do require a “network” mentality that doesn’t hold sway in Melbourne at this time. Realistically, rail is an afterthought in Melbourne.
<h2>
	Sydney - the world has moved on from jet travel</h2>
The Sydney airport saga is also intriguing for its outdated ideas. Sydney “can’t do without” a second, 24 hour airport, we are told, to relieve current congestion and plan for future population needs. Prime minister Tony Abbott <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/media/2014-04-16/western-sydney-infrastructure-plan-more-jobs-better-roads">announced a A$3 billion road package</a> (albeit hijacked by the dramatic resignation of NSW premier Barry O'Farrell) to accompany the announcement.
But Japan’s Kansai airport serves a population of some 25 million. Greater Tokyo, with nearly 35 million residents, gets by just fine with two airports. London has three airports - but it services a mega-region of Southeast England with a population of more than 20 million.
The federal government seems to have ruled out the idea of executing a detailed airport study - and infrastructure minister Warren Truss has repeatedly refused to table specific figures on a Western Sydney airport’s passenger numbers.
So far, there is little detail on what the new airport’s mix of freight and domestic travel will be, or how it will service international air routes.
The Badgerys Creek announcement effectively says “enough” to the idea of high speed rail connections between Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra.
Yet investigations into the future of high speed rail in Australia have consistently demonstrated that HSR would capture a huge chunk of travel between Sydney and Melbourne, or between those cities and Canberra.
This would mean one airport is enough for Sydney (leaving aside where that airport is located). Inter-city east coast travel would largely shift to fast rail, while that single Sydney airport could focus more on international connections.
The Sydney thinking is trapped in the 1970s - when jet travel was the grand new thing. But since then, the world has moved on. And high speed rail travel is now the preferred option for journeys within countries.
<h2>
	Breaking from past assumptions</h2>
Committing to new infrastructure is dangerous when the concept is not thought-through or not up-to-date, or when political motivations are the driver.
We are facing the challenges of the 21st century, not the late 20th century - so its time to break with the simplistic obsessions around roads and planes that prevailed a generation ago.
Better infrastructure demands we table better ideas.<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/25667/count.gif" width="1">
Chris Hale is an infrastructure consultant and contractor.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/trains-planes-and-automobiles-how-our-cities-get-the-mix-wrong-25667">original article</a>.
Lead image credit: <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzheng/102033888" target="_blank">flickr</a>, CC BY-SA 2.0
</body></html>

Trains, planes and automobiles: how our cities get the mix wrong

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/chris-hale-93655">Chris Hale</a>, University of Melbourne
As prime minister Tony Abbott completes a whistle-stop tour of Asia, Australia’s “place in Asia” is an ongoing discussion.
Abbott hailed the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/07/tony-abbott-free-trade-deal-shared-values-japan-australia">“shared values”</a> that enabled Australia’s free trade deal with Japan and now heads to China for crucial trade talks.
But the Australian mainstream sees itself as fundamentally separate from our Asian neighbours across most economic and cultural dimensions.
This mindset is challenging enough in trade and person-to-person ties. Transport infrastructure and city planning just don’t feature sensibly in discussion between Australia and its developed Asian neighbours.
Abbott has invited the Koreans to invest in yet more roads, but we have continuously spurned a long-held Japanese interest in Australian high speed rail opportunities.
Two problematic and emblematic cultural preconceptions hold Australia back from fully engaging with our region in the field of urban planning and infrastructure.
The first is the idea that Asia is “too different” to be relevant to our experience. The second is the even more problematic idea that we have nothing to learn from Asia (while they should presumably listen intently to us).
This intellectual blockage is possibly caused by an Australian infrastructure inferiority complex arising from decades of lost opportunities - rather than some weakness of planning policy or cities in developed Asia.
It also originates from insufficient distinction between developing Asia and developed Asia (incorporating Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore).
Let’s be real here - Australian cities are planned appallingly and have some of the most unsustainable living patterns and transport outcomes of all the world’s developed cities.
<figure class="align-centre"><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/singapore_mrt_station_flickr_shankars_cc_by_sa_20.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Singapore MRT Station, Source: Flickr, Shakar S."><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/singapore_mrt_station_flickr_shankars_cc_by_sa_20.jpg?itok=Gn4Suqsg" title="Singapore MRT Station, Source: Flickr, Shakar S." width="580"></a>
	<figcaption>A Singapore MRT Station. Source: <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.flickr.com/photos/shankaronline/7395444528" target="_blank">Flickr</a>.
	</figcaption></figure>Places like Melbourne have done okay recently with downtown urban design and renewal. But at a broader scale, we have failed to develop mass transit systems capable of meeting commuter demands.
This hurts our cities and it hurts our trade opportunities in the infrastructure, planning and city design sphere.
Sydney has recently decided on a light rail corridor where a metro was needed. Melbourne struggles to launch any coherent response to rampant ridership growth on trams and trains.
Brisbane remains in cloud cuckoo land with its bus obsession - when only strategic rail-based interventions can shape its future growth.
Australian cities have spent the past 30 years riding the complacency of a car culture based on local vehicle manufacturing.
Major road projects formed the core of cynical pork barrel politics, draining the vast bulk of our infrastructure dollar.
Australians need to take a serious look at what major Asian cities - such as Tokyo - have achieved in infrastructure and urban policy over recent decades.
Tokyo coped with a massive influx of internal Japanese economic migrants during the second half of the 20th century. It did so through radical investment in metro rail, combined with judicious attention to zoning, parklands and community assets, which has led to the dominance of rail as majority mode of travel.
Other cities such as Singapore and Hong Kong have heavily oriented city planning to rail, with new metro stations opening yearly to bring distinct benefits of convenience and livability.
Japan’s high speed rail has also played a core role in that country’s economic and scientific development. Recently the Chinese have invested in a great and growing system of fast inter-city connections.
By contrast, successive Australian governments at all levels have turned their backs on transit as a tool for policy, economic development, and urban structure.
Infrastructure Australia was clearly due for an overhaul, but as a country we can’t afford a replacement that exists only to rubber stamp destructive road pork.
Tony Abbott has said he wants to be the ‘infrastructure prime-minister’ but his reported obsession with the virtues of the private vehicle over public transport can only be understood as an outdated and defeatist ideology.
This thought process has no place in influencing contemporary infrastructure policy.
We should look carefully at the emphasis Asia has placed on high-speed inter-city rail. These systems are now the backbone of advanced economies around the world, while only Americans and Australians remain unconvinced.
By censoring our discussion, we miss out on a fuller appreciation of 21st century infrastructure thinking and urbanism. Some great planning ideas and examples are available right on our doorstep.
Perhaps its time for a little less lecturing, and a little more learning.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/25328/count.gif" width="1">Chris Hale receives funding from the Carlton Connect Initiative of the University of Melbourne. This also includes funding from: City of Moreland, City of Darebin, and City of Yarra, Grimshaw architects, and MGS architects. Over many years, Chris has been the recipient of meaningful in-kind support from the MTR Corporation of Hong Kong - in the form of data availability, strategic briefings, and access to senior staff time.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/time-for-australia-to-consider-asian-lessons-on-city-infrastructure-25328">original article</a>.
Original images removed and replaced by Creative Commons images. Lead image credit: <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.flickr.com/photos/photocapy/1490960350" target="_blank">Flickr</a>, CC BY-SA 2.0
</body></html>

Time for Australia to consider Asian lessons on city infrastructure

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/chris-hale-93655">Chris Hale</a>, University of Melbourne
The recent productivity commission <a href="http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/infrastructure/draft">report</a> into public infrastructure left the most important policy question unasked, namely: if there were better ways for planning and building transport infrastructure, would anyone actually be interested?
Australians have become addicted to the political theatre that surrounds transport and planning. By contrast, successful jurisdictions overseas have placed infrastructure into a condition of mundane, plodding progress.
To do this, they’ve taken infrastructure planning and financing out of the hands of politicians by-and-large, and have never looked back.
<h2>
	Lessons from Germany</h2>
There are two major paths to infrastructure, transport and planning success. One is the “technocratic” route embodied in Germany. The other is the “checks and balances” pathway exemplified in the United States.
German politicians tend to be highly educated. As such, they have long recognised that transport infrastructure is a specialised field, largely beyond the reach of detailed understanding for anyone without high levels of training and skill.
It’s not exactly clear when the German-speaking countries (or Scandinavia for that matter) turned onto their current pathway of transport success. But the “problems” of car dependency were being recognised as early as the mid 1960s.
Rather than building roads and parking only, the Germans switched to a heavily engineered but essentially “balanced” transport approach. Rail and integrated public transport were to play a key role in urban and regional travel.
The Germans began to see car dependency and transport as “scientific” challenges that were mostly solvable through the application of observational method. They invested in research, training and technical capacity - across the gamut of engineering, design, policy, economics and operations.
Transport plans were handed over during the 1970s and 1980s to this new group of transport scientists, who were also tasked with tricky issues such as project financing and optimised ticket pricing.
Much of the high-quality transit infrastructure we see today in German cities is not a “legacy” – but was built largely during the last 10-20 years. The technocratic approach has also been adopted in places like Japan and Singapore.
<h2>
	Keeping the politics out of it</h2>
The United States presents a less clear-cut version of transport success, but they have made one major advance. The Americans simply get the best out of their limited financial resources with a system of checks and balances that regulates the role of politics in transport decisions.
The US emphasises competitive grants, along with openness and transparency around infrastructure funding requests. Government officials are held to a much more stringent set of guidelines (legally speaking) for their conduct in the expenditure of public funds.
The results in advanced locations like the San Francisco Bay Area have included a marked separation of politicians from hands-on involvement in pet projects. Politicians tend to set the headline figure for annual funding, which is then mobilised by a fundamentally more technocratic and accountable bureaucracy.
The recent move by Denis Napthine in Victoria to “re-shape” the long-planned and well supported central city metro corridor with the stroke of his own inexpert pen would be simply unthinkable in the US.
So would Victorian opposition leader Daniel Andrew’s less-than-half-baked move to spend billions on road-rail grade separations without so much as a preliminary study.
The Germans would know that projects such as Melbourne’s metro tunnel need to be planned properly – through the classic “comparison of alternatives” for routes, tunnel alignments, and station locations.
They would expect two or three alternative corridors to be tabled, and then have their benefits and costs, and their pros and cons clearly listed.
Once that crucial information has been tabled openly, we can let politicians make the final call on major projects - but we can also judge the intelligence of their decisions.
The fact that Victoria has come so far into such a large project without any clear comparison of route alternatives suggests a fundamental breakdown in the planning and pre-engineering process.
The fact that state and federal politicians play so fast and loose with public money suggests we need to radically refine our legal frameworks. We need a substantive separation between infrastructure decisions and politics.
I often raise these options, but people generally respond that due process and technical skill just sounds too “boring”. But perhaps that’s the point.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/24420/count.gif" width="1">
Chris Hale receives　research funding from: The University of Melbourne (Carlton Connect Initiative); City of Darebin; City of Yarra;　City of Moreland；MGS architectects。He has undertaken consulting activity over the past 12 months with: AECOM India;　City of Whittlesea; Public Transport Victoria; and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The views expressed here are entirely his own.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/infrastructure-needs-science-so-who-put-the-politicians-in-charge-24420">original article</a>.
Lead image credit: <a href="http://www.regionalraillink.vic.gov.au/news/images?result_92818_result_page=3" target="_blank">regionalraillink.vic.gov.au</a>
</body></html>

Infrastructure needs science, so who put the politicians in charge?

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/michiel-bliemer-14639">Michiel Bliemer</a>, University of Sydney
This week, Australian motoring groups decided to <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/motoring-groups-say-user-charges-could-be-fairer-for-motorists-than-the-excise/story-fn59niix-1226863692842">back road user charges</a>, arguing that it would be a fairer system.
At the same time, the groups said the change to user charges would secure sufficient funding for new infrastructure and provide incentives for drivers to avoid driving during peak hours.
This is an unprecedented move for motor lobby groups in Australia.
And it’s a win for Australians. Charging road users would mean payment based on distance travelled and the time driven, and the additional revenue would facilitate the removal of fixed fees like registration expenses and the fuel excise tax.
For many years car drivers have complained about the increasingly congested roads in Australian metropolitan areas, and have asked governments to do something about it. Governments have responded by building new road infrastructure and introducing new public transport services.
But governments clearly do not have sufficient funds for all required investments, so they do not make the necessary investments in public transport, and they propose toll roads to let motorists (partly) pay for the investments.
In the past, motoring groups have argued car drivers do not want to pay more for what they consider already high costs for driving a car.
This creates an impasse, and essentially we get what we pay for, which is heavily congested roads. The proposals put forward by the motoring groups follow recommendations for further user pay roads in the Productivity Commission’s <a href="http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/infrastructure/draft">draft infrastructure report</a>, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-13/infrastructure-rethink-could-save-1-billion-annually/5317002">quashed by prime minister Tony Abbott</a>.
The aim of the new proposals is to ensure sufficient funds are available for investments in roads and bridges, and develop a mechanism that provides incentives to drivers that result in less congestion. It is important to note that the motoring groups do not say the average car driver needs to pay more. Instead, they argue that they should not pay less and they should pay differently.
<h2>
	Doing the maths</h2>
A quick calculation (based on average prices and average fuel consumption) shows the average car driver in Australia pays between A$700 and $800 a year in fuel excise tax, which is currently $0.38 per litre (plus 10% GST). Car owners in NSW pay around $300 per year in registration fees and between $200 and $300 in toll payments (although this varies widely).
A fixed registration fee seems unfair to people who drive very little. And toll roads only in certain locations seem unfair to people who happen to live in the area. But are Australians paying a lot? It depends on the point of reference.
Compared to the USA, where the fuel excise tax is about US$0.14 per litre, and where the annual registration fee is around US$46, Australians do seem to be worse off. But compared to many European countries we actually pay very little. For example, the annual registration fee in the Netherlands is around €600, and the fuel excise tax is €0.78 per litre (plus 21% GST). However, toll roads hardly exist in the Netherlands. The average number of kilometres driven by Dutch people is similar to Australia, and net incomes are lower.
So compared to car drivers in the Netherlands, Australians pay very little. Looking at the difference between transport systems in the USA and in Europe, it is clear where the extra money goes, namely to public transport. While the USA is a car-oriented country, European countries typically have strong public transport networks.
So why should car drivers pay for public transport? The answer is actually quite simple. If public transport was much more expensive (or did not exist at all), many more travellers would be driving their cars on the roads, causing massive gridlocks.
But current revenues aren’t enough to cover investments in infrastructure. The maintenance of existing roads is already very expensive, costing between $200 to $300 per person in NSW, around $300 to $400 per car. Expanding infrastructure is extremely costly. The WestConnex project in Sydney, for example, is <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://engage.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/document/show/955">expected to cost around $10 billion</a>, or around $2000 per car in NSW. And revenues from fuel excise tax are actually going down since cars are becoming more fuel efficient. This is one of the reasons why motoring groups worry about future investment.
<h2>
	A fairer approach</h2>
A <a href="http://www.infrastructure.org.au/DisplayFile.aspx?FileID=1066">report prepared for the motoring groups by Deloitte</a> suggests a user charge based on weight of the vehicle, distance travelled, and based on location and time in which a rural car driver outside rush hours would pay much less per kilometre than a city driver in the peak hours. This can be done in a revenue-neutral fashion such that the average car driver does not pay more.
In fact, it can be introduced in such a way that the majority of people would pay less than what they currently pay by removing the fixed annual registration fees and making all costs based on usage of the road system, so people who drive less will pay less. Brendan Lyon, the chief executive of Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, is right to say this is a fairer way.
Its use in other countries has shown that offering car drivers incentives to avoid user charges is an effective and efficient way to combat congestion. An important underlying assumption here is that car drivers have alternatives to choose from. These alternatives are, for example, departing outside peak hours, taking public transport, working from home and car-pooling.
Surveys in NSW have <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/business/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/198694/TOPS-2014-Q1-March_Media_final.pdf">shown that people in general are in favour of user pays</a>. This means we need to consciously think about our mobility, where we work, and where we live.
It means that the government should offer viable public transport alternatives. It also requires a conversation with companies to offer more flexible working hours and provide facilities to work from home. The time seems ripe for a change. Simply investing in road infrastructure, letting more cars into congested downtown areas, and waiting until cities become completely gridlocked is not an option.
Motorist groups are now advocating what economists have been recommending for years: remove fixed annual costs and introduce a pricing system with avoidable costs to make travelling more efficient.
The ball is now with the politicians.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/24873/count.gif" width="1">
Michiel Bliemer receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/making-road-users-pay-could-clear-infrastructure-gridlock-24873">original article</a>.
Lead image credit: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7951502@N08/5539035209/" target="_blank">flickr</a>, CC BY-SA 2.0
</body></html>

Making road users pay could clear infrastructure gridlock

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/john-rayner-118488">John Rayner</a>, University of Melbourne
As the demand for greener and cooler cities increases, new “green infrastructure” technologies, such as green roofs and walls, are coming to the fore. But what are they?
Put simply, green roofs and walls are landscaped building surfaces. Australia has been relatively slow on the uptake of this movement, with much of the available expertise, systems and materials based in the northern hemisphere.
Last month saw the release of <a href="http://www.growinggreenguide.org/">Growing Green Guide</a>: a free guide to green roofs, walls and facades in Victoria – a collaborative local and state government project, which I contributed to.
And this weekend at the <a href="http://melbflowershow.com.au/">Melbourne International Flower and Garden Show</a> there will be a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.683709495010102.1073741855.230588870322169&amp;type=1">pop-up garden display</a> by the <a href="http://www.land-environment.unimelb.edu.au/">Melbourne School of Land and Environment</a> demonstrating many of the ideas and techniques behind green infrastructure.
But for those who are not in Melboure and/ or won’t be able to give over their weekend to the delights of Australia’s urban horticulture industry, here’s a snapshot and some important design factors.
<h2>
	The impact of green infrastructure</h2>
Green roofs, as mentioned already, are a landscape constructed on a roof and include a range of different types. They can be a small, container beds two metres deep supporting trees and shrubs, or lightweight configurations of only a few centimetres in depth and more than a hectare in size covered in succulent and herbaceous vegetation.
Green walls fall into two very different types. Living walls support plants through irrigated, vertical containers or felt-based structures fixed to a wall surface. Green facades use climbing plants to provide green coverage over a wall, either directly on the building surface or more commonly using a steel trellis or cable system, with plants grown in-ground or in containers that are supported across the building facade.
The evidence of benefits associated with green roofs and walls is increasing as research efforts (from the <a href="http://www.hrt.msu.edu/greenroof/">US</a>, <a href="http://www.thegreenroofcentre.co.uk/">UK</a> and <a href="https://land-environment.unimelb.edu.au/research/research-groups/green-infrastructure-research-group/">Australia</a>) expand across the globe. Green roofs have <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778810001453">been shown</a> in a number of studies to reduce building energy budgets, slightly reducing winter heating costs but providing more significant reductions to summer cooling.
A <a href="http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/city_planning/zoning__environment/files/pdf/chapter4_2_6.pdf">modelling study</a> in Toronto on the implementation of green roofs across low-rise, flat roofs greater than 350 square-metres concluded that ambient air temperatures across the city could be reduced by up to 2C.
The benefits of retaining stormwater on green roofs are <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204605000496">well established</a> and tend to form the basis of many city <a href="http://myplantconnection.com/green-roofs-legislation.php">green roofs tax</a> or incentive schemes, particularly in North America.
Green roofs act like a sponge on a roof, absorbing and storing rainfall and allowing re-use form plants, in turn reducing urban water run-off. <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/jeq/abstracts/34/3/1036">One study</a> involving a green roof with a 60mm deep substrate (soil substitute) showed rainfall retention of almost 83%.
Green roofs and walls have been shown to increase property values, partly because people like to view them, but more because they provide more recreational and amenity uses. In one <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12076-010-0046-4">New York study</a> rentals were shown to be 16% higher in buildings with green roofs compared to those without.
The <a href="http://www.greenroofs.org/index.php/resources/2012-green-roof-industry-survey">dramatic growth</a> in green roofs and walls across the US over recent years, despite generally poor economic conditions, suggests demand for these installations will continue.
<h2>
	Why not try this at home?</h2>
Naturally, green roofs and walls need to be planned and designed properly to ensure they are successful. The most significant issue to consider is weight loading. A roof or wall must have the structural capacity for the mass of a green roof, wall or facade installation – both at construction and over time.
Not all plants will succeed on the sometimes hostile and elevated environment of a roof or wall; and vegetation growth is strongly limited by the depth, available volume, air, water, nutrition and environmental conditions present at the site.
Low growing succulents, such as <a href="http://www.lowes.com/creative-ideas/images/2012_05/sedum-laconicum-northeast-4.jpg">sedums</a>, and drought-tolerant perennials including many Australian plants, are widely used because of these constraints.
Waterproofing is another key issue and most structures will require additional specialised treatments to ensure the integrity of the structure is not compromised by the installation. Excess water will need to be drained away, particularly from green roofs.
Most modern systems, such as those produced by German green-roof company <a href="http://www.zinco-greenroof.com/EN/greenroof_systems/index.php">Zinco</a>, incorporate lightweight plastic drainage cells to provide this outcome.
While the <a href="http://www.growinggreenguide.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/growing_green_guide_ebook_130214.pdf">Growing Green Guide</a> was written to increase local understanding and skills amongst architectural and design professionals in Melbourne, it is also relevant to a wider Australian audience.
Who knows? Australia might even have its own version of New York’s aerial greenway <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Line_(New_York_City">High Line</a> one day.
Are you an academic or researcher working in urban design? Contact the <a href="mailto:paul.dalgarno@theconversation.edu.au">Arts + Culture editor</a>.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/23911/count.gif" width="1">
John Rayner receives funding from the Australian and Victorian Governments, the City of Melbourne and Melbourne Water and is affiliated with Green Roofs Australasia. He helped to write the 'Growing Green Guide' and is involved in the green infrastrucure display at the Melbourne International Flower and Garden Show.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/green-roofs-and-walls-a-growth-area-in-urban-design-23911">article</a> to see the original images. Lead image credit from original The Conversation article.
</body></html>

Green roofs and walls - a growth area in urban design

<html><body>
<h2>
	By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/fleur-watson-116651" style="font-size: 12px;">Fleur Watson</a>, RMIT University
</h2>
There are layers of mythology around what architects actually do in conceptualising and making architecture. These misconceptions are fed by popular architectural stereotypes of 20th-century culture, such as Ayn Rand’s young individualistic protagonist <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRXcaWVr_uI">Howard Roark</a> in his 1943 novel The Fountainhead to the widely misquoted, utopian visions of Swiss architect <a href="http://www.moma.org/collection/artist.php?artist_id=3426">Le Corbusier</a>, to the famously difficult genius of American <a href="http://www.franklloydwright.org/about/FLLWBio">Frank Lloyd Wright</a>.
In <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/melbournenow/projects/528">Sampling The City</a>, an exhibition I curated as part of <a href="https://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/melbournenow">Melbourne Now</a> at the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV), the challenge was to convey the diversity of the design process: what architects do, the way they do it and why architectural thinking is useful to our collective communities.
Within an Australian context, the architect is often considered as a luxury service, responding to a client’s demands to express wealth and influence. Beyond the bespoke residential market, the architect struggles to get past the rationalisations of the project home industry and contribute meaningfully to affordable housing.
In the public realm the architect is often at the back of a public project such as a community centre, school or public pool, jostling for design quality within an ever increasing “value-add” mentality of key performance indicators and budget rationalisation.
Now in the context of a four-part exhibit, one room of Sampling The City is dedicated to an “architectural incubator”; a studio environment that provides an insight into the process of six, young Melbourne practices at various stages of their career: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_Fahey">Cassandra Complex</a>, <a href="http://muirmendes.com/">Muir Mendes</a>, <a href="http://www.studiobird.com.au/">Studiobird</a>, <a href="http://marchstudio.com.au/">March Studio</a>, <a href="http://www.makearchitecture.com.au/">Make Architecture</a> and <a href="http://www.rolandsnooks.com/">Studio Roland Snooks</a>.
Within this space, each practice has created a wall installation in response to one of five themes – architecture and representation, craftsmanship and materiality, stitching the city, art engaged practice or advanced architecture.
The six installations comprise of a series of images, drawings, models and material compositions with the intent to provide an insight into the thinking behind a set of diverse architectural ideas and emerging positions. So let’s look at the process of three in more detail.
For Make Architecture’s Melissa Bright, the exhibition provided an opportunity for the exploration of various built and unbuilt projects in their practice. The architects were inspired by American artist <a href="http://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/focus_ruscha/">Ed </a><a href="http://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/focus_ruscha/">Ruscha</a>’s famous photographic study of <a href="http://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/focus_ruscha/images/sunsetstrip.jpg">Every Building on the Sunset Strip</a> (1966), and made a series of study marquettes (see below) to locate the projects within their urban and suburban context.
Beautifully detailed brick, timber and roof tile textural models demonstrate a variety of material testing and reference a vital part of Make Architecture’s studio process when designing a building. As Bright explains:
<blockquote>
	When responding to a project, we start to zoom in and typically draw on the materials and details in the existing house to inform our design response. We search for ways to reinterpret and to respond to these materials in a contemporary way. For MAKE, inspiration comes from dealing with small-scale street identity and a commitment to livable suburbs that engender feelings of place and community.
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-centre zoomable"><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42733/area14mp/h2ht4y7s-1393566092.jpg"><img alt="" src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42733/width668/h2ht4y7s-1393566092.jpg"></a> <figcaption>MAKE Architecture, Sampling The City, Incubator Installations. Photographer Peter Bennetts
	</figcaption></figure>Matthew Bird’s practice, Studiobird, focuses on material explorations at the intersection of architecture and art practice, working alongside collaborators such as Melbourne contemporary dance studio <a href="http://www.balletlab.com/">BalletLab</a>. For the Incubator room, Bird and BalletLab’s artistic director <a href="http://www.balletlab.com/phillip-adams">Phillip Adams</a> conceived Future Wagon (2013) – a vision for a nomadic home of tomorrow.
The project speculates upon our future inhabitants roaming street address and value of material décor: where will we live and what will our homes look like? The outcome is constructed from do-it-yourself materials and references stagecoaches of the Wild West, gypsy caravans, <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Dynamaxion_1933.jpg">Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion car</a>, to homemade billy-carts and shopping trolleys of the homeless.
<figure class="align-centre zoomable"><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42744/area14mp/6qnq4zbb-1393567786.jpg"><img alt="" src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42744/width668/6qnq4zbb-1393567786.jpg"></a> <figcaption>Studiobird, Sampling The City, Incubator Installations. Photographer Peter Bennetts
	</figcaption></figure>Bird’s process differs significantly from that of Make Architecture. Rather than working from a brief or response to a site, Bird builds a repository of project related trigger words and images typically sourced from Google images.
Part of this process is to ask his clients and collaborators to add images to the repository that form the basis for an ongoing conceptual conversation that starts to build a vision for the project. Bird eschews the term innovation in design suggesting it recalls equations driving ideas rather than a creative process:
<blockquote>
	I pursue “new” by asking seemingly illogical “what-if” questions, combining disparate disciplines, elaborative paradoxes and arrive at charged spatial constructs that I hope offer a profound experiences for clients and audiences.
</blockquote>
Roland Snooks is an architect at the forefront of the intersection of “advanced architecture” - architecture that uses computational processes and digital fabrication such as 3D printing as its driving force. His work combines algorithmic design experiments and advanced fabrication technologies such as robotic production. Working across the principles of complex self-organising behaviours found in biological, social and material systems, Snooks’ architecture explores advanced aesthetic and compositional relations.
In Sampling The City, Snooks presents a series of prototypes fabricated by experimental robotic techniques. The forms cut from high-density foam are able to become formwork for pouring concrete into exotic but structurally optimised building elements.
<figure class="align-centre zoomable"><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42738/area14mp/g6p2ms5q-1393566903.jpg"><img alt="" src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42738/width668/g6p2ms5q-1393566903.jpg"></a> <figcaption>Muir Mendes (detail), Sampling The City, Incubator Installations. Photographer Peter Bennetts
	</figcaption></figure>The intention was to demonstrate the role of experimentation in construction and the influence it has on design. Snooks describes his design process as:
<blockquote>
	start[ing] either from a continuing line of research or it can evolve out of the client’s brief … our work can be seen as part of an international group that is exploring processes of formation from complex systems.
</blockquote>
Through their installations, these practices convey very different perspectives on the making of architecture, revealing their position through the unfolding of a set of ideas that, in turn, drive the architectural process.
They convey the diversity and richness of architectural culture in Melbourne and the contribution of architectural practice to the cultural economy of the city.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/melbournenow/projects/528">Sampling The City, Melbourne Now</a>, runs at the National Gallery of Victoria until March 23.
Fleur Watson does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/23182/count.gif" width="1">This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/what-architects-do-and-how-they-do-it-at-melbourne-now-23182">original article</a>.
</body></html>

What architects do and how they do it, at Melbourne Now

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/david-nichols-2013" style="font-size: 12px;">David Nichols</a>, University of Melbourne
Sixty-six years ago, the esteemed town planner Frank Heath took a bite out of his home town of Melbourne – from a safe distance. The Melbourne Herald was interviewing Heath in London. Quite possibly causing straphangers to choke on their pipe smoke in red rattlers across the city, he told the paper:
<blockquote>
	Australia is 10 to 15 years behind modern thought in town development and building … We are not thinking in a big enough way – we are only heaping up difficulties for the future. Melbourne is a very dull-looking city.
</blockquote>
Then the clincher:
<blockquote>
	Why are there no roof cafes, no open street cafes in Melbourne?
</blockquote>
Earlier this month, the Victorian State Government published a <a href="http://www.arts.vic.gov.au/Projects_Initiatives/Cultural_Infrastructure_projects/Melbourne_Arts_Precinct_Blueprint#.UvwRlkKSw1E">blueprint</a> for Melbourne’s Southbank Arts Precinct, then Danish architecture firm Gehl <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/docklands-faces-overhaul-as-gehl-report-urges-major-changes-20140212-32iet">proposed</a> major changes to the Melbourne Docklands. Both recommend “activating the street”. But how do you go about bringing a street to life in such a prescriptive fashion?
<h2>
	80s and 90s street life</h2>
Heath was a modernist, with all that entailed – belief in progress, technology and labour-saving devices. He lived till 1980; he might have just seen the very beginnings of Australia’s entry into the era of a genuine planning-based revival of the vital street.
Suddenly, pot plants, trees, chairs and tables were on the footpaths, perhaps, and even street entertainment – all the things that, for most of the 20th century, had been seen as impediments to what streets were actually meant for: ease of speedy traffic, on wheels and/ or feet.
The change (back) was inspired in large part by the legend of European (particularly, Mediterranean) street life and the writings of New York architectural writer <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/25/books/25cnd-jacobs?pagewanted=all">Jane Jacobs</a>, who celebrated the safe and satisfying life lived in public on the mixed-use city street.
<figure class="align-centre zoomable"><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42338/area14mp/2p5kyxkv-1393218395.jpg"><img alt="" src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42338/width668/2p5kyxkv-1393218395.jpg"></a> <figcaption>Parisien street life. zoetnet
	</figcaption></figure>Streets live, die and return to life in remarkable ways. When Nicole Thibault opened her crafty second-hand shop Scrabble in the early 1990s on Ann Street in Brisbane’s West End, there was only one other business among the empty shopfronts: a gentleman’s club, The Red Garter.
In Ann Street she was, she says:
<blockquote>
	a Lone Ranger … for at least a year then a few other shops followed suit. Silver Rocket, Kleptomania, and Blonde Venus, Bent Books, were the main ones.
</blockquote>
By the time Thibault sold her business and left, Ann Street had become desirable retail again, and the area had revived. It was still noisy and dirty, but instead of a place to drive through it was a destination.
<h2>
	The task of human-funnelling</h2>
The question is whether such stories are just component parts of an organic, demographic ebb and flow, or whether successful – that is, vibrant and attractive – streets can be made or remade.
Drop into any major planned housing precinct – Springfield near Brisbane or Craigieburn in Melbourne’s north – and you’ll find the main shopping strip is designed to a human-scaled template, to encourage interaction, rest stops among street plantings, coffee breaks and quiet contemplation (or, at least, window shopping).
Whether such blatant stabs at human-funnelling can ever really work is surely down to luck, happy accidents and geography – the last two basically no more than two more different kinds of luck.
Yet it is often the fervent wish of retailers, city burghers and citizens that their main street, be it in a central business district or a prominent suburb, be brought to life in a manner that seems to fly the flag for a new wave not only of prosperity in itself but also diversity, variety, quirkiness even … and maybe ultimately just interestingness.
The main shopping street presents a thorny problem because it is by definition a public space that needs people all the time – and a constantly renewing river of people – but it also needs certain areas to be marked out and set aside for certain functions.
Antisocial behavior has to be policed, and indeed social behavior – stopping to chat – can in many instances be problematic, because it disturbs the flow, however delightfully.
The perpetrators/ creators of shopping malls streamlined the customer delivery process perfectly, only to be told that customers had changed: now, they were looking for a simile of a bohemian village or a low-rise shopping experience.
<figure class="align-centre zoomable"><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42325/area14mp/bmbyjkjn-1393216117.jpg"><img alt="" src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/42325/width668/bmbyjkjn-1393216117.jpg"></a>
	<figcaption>Sydney Road Street Party, Brunswick. Alastair Taylor
	</figcaption></figure><h2>
	Elevated by the city</h2>
When I visited Queensland’s <a href="http://www.greaterspringfield.com.au/index.php">Springfield</a> in 2011, the main shopping street ended in a billboard promising a lot more than the large mound of earth it was built to mask. Streets tend to work best when they go somewhere, even though most of the people using them won’t actually go where the street’s going.
Instead, users thrive on the passing show of automobile traffic and the spectacle of each other. They’ll often, in fact, regard the automobiles with contempt: I have spent a lot of time on major shopping streets of both Sydney and Melbourne (I’m thinking King Street, Newtown and Sydney Road, Brunswick/ Coburg), each the beginning of a major highway heading to the other major city of Australia. I’ve noticed there is a cavalier, and proprietorial, attitude among users of both.
People will blithely wander into traffic to get to the other side of the road, and the attitude seems to be (this was certainly how I felt when I used to do it) that the road isn’t for those cars passing through. It’s for the everyday local user, and sheer will throws up a forcefield to prevent any harm from the sometimes crawling, sometimes unpredictable stop-start, local traffic.
Perhaps that, then, is the secret to an effective street: the sense (not necessary an illusion) that one is part of something bigger, that while on the one hand one is merely participating in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fl%C3%A2neur">flaneurie</a> (the act of strolling), one is also part of the larger city organism, not just camping out in a backwater cul-de-sac.
Surely the key to designing a vibrant street is incorporation into major developments or impressive backdrops. But an “impressive backdrop” is not just physical.
Streets can also be designed around cultural (ethnic or otherwise) hotspots or any other reason to make us think we’re not just Pavlov’s dogging it to capitalism’s sonorous bell, but also experiencing – in peripheral vision, in cross-cultural, cross-class encounters, and in atmosphere – something elevating and even educational.
David Nichols does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/23181/count.gif" width="1">
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/street-life-how-do-you-revive-a-dull-urban-area-23181">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Street life: how do you revive a dull urban area?

<html><body>
By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/yolande-strengers-15350">Yolande Strengers</a>, RMIT University
<blockquote>
	Imagine this: Total Electric Living… where electricity does absolutely everything: heats, air conditions, cooks, preserves food, lights, entertains, encourages hobbies, makes it the easiest way ever for you and your family to be happier, healthier, to live fuller lives.
</blockquote>
Sound familiar? It should: while it dates back to the 1950s, that quote from a Westinghouse ad for the “Total Electric Home” is strikingly similar to today’s ads for new “smart homes”.
Today, US home automation company <a href="http://www.alldigital-av.com/#!home-automation/cjgg">Control4</a> invites us to:
<blockquote>
	Imagine a house that remembers to lock itself at 10pm. Shades that close as the sun hits. A home theater setup that takes care of lights, sound and picture with one touch. With Control4, everything works together the way you want it to. Life is just better with a little more control.
</blockquote>
Both visions promise homes that take care of themselves, and those that live in them, with us barely needing to lift a finger.
But there is one critical difference. The 21st century smart home also promises to deliver substantial energy savings through automated appliances and smart heating and cooling systems. Sound too good to be true? You may be onto something.
Smart home technologies are now being advocated not only by home automation companies, but by governments and energy providers as well. While there are energy efficiency gains to be had, it is important to pay attention to the new ways of life these technologies promote, and what this might mean for future energy consumption.
<h2>
	Lessons from the past</h2>
History provides many reasons to be cautious about dream home aspirations. For a start, utopian visions of our future lives and homes rarely come to pass as intended. They are like the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow: tantalisingly close, but never within our reach.
Nonetheless, the continual promotion of new ways to live are always productive in one way or another, just not necessarily in the ways they were intended.
The industrial revolution of the home and the proliferation of labour-saving devices like vacuum cleaners, irons and washing machines, was intended to free women from the daily drudgery of housework. And in many ways it did.
But as Ruth Schwartz-Cowan succintly points out, it also served to increase expectations of cleanliness, creating “<a href="http://books.google.com.au/books/about/More_Work_for_Mother?id=_6iAsTStE9MC&amp;redir_esc=y">more work for mother</a>”.
As mother has worked harder, our dependency on the various appliances we now consider essential for modern day living has grown, along with the energy needed to power them.
<h2>
	Old expectations for a new future</h2>
It is possible to speculate on how “smart” cleaning, entertaining, security, heating and cooling technologies might ratchet up our expectations for these services, potentially undermining some energy efficiency benefits.
This is often the explicit aim of home automation companies, which promise to <a href="http://sony.ielectronics.com/es-home-theater">“elevate your standards”</a> (Sony) and whose websites depict luxury and decadence on a Dubai-style scale. The smart lifesyle has one defining feature: it is all powered by electricity - albeit greener and more efficient electricity.
Remote controlled security lighting, for example, replaces the friendly neighbour or housesitter who keeps an eye on the place while you’re away. Similarly, automated climate-controlled heating and cooling systems can replace other ways of keeping warm or cooling down, like wearing more or less clothes, building climate-sensitive housing, or taking a cold shower.
This preoccupation with energy-dependent ways of life dates back to at least the 1930s. Westinghouse’s display-style ‘Home of Tomorrow’ celebrated its achievement of an electrical load equivalent to that of 30 average homes, “ready to do the work of 864 servants with the flip of a switch”.
What has changed between then and now is that, where the dream homes of the past glorified their high energy consumption, the smart homes of today promote their efficiency credentials. However, both are thoroughly subscribed to an energy-intensive lifestyle.
<h2>
	Reimagining the dream home</h2>
There is nothing wrong with imagining different ways to live. Indeed there has never been a moment in human civilisation when we have not. There is something captivating and thrilling about a future that to many people, will never be affordable or available. That’s what makes it so desirable.
<figure><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="260" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/VvTyfJhyHbc?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" width="440"></iframe><figcaption>The 1960s American Home of Tomorrow, posted on Youtube by independent archive film agency Thekinolibrary
	</figcaption></figure>However, what is troubling with these dream home visions, past and present, is their dependence on energy, or on electrically-enabled ways of life.
What we rarely see in the past or present are utopian aspirations for a way of life where homes are cooled without the need for mechanical heating and cooling, where security systems aren’t needed, or where cleaning doesn’t require new electrically-powered gadgets and devices.
When home automation companies invite us to imagine warming up our spa before we even get home, we might laugh, get excited, be appalled, or all three. But whatever our reaction, we should be concerned - not because the smart home of the future is destined to either fail or succeed, but because it might unfold in ways we weren’t intending.
It might rope us into new forms of work for mother, father and the rest of the family. And it might increase our expectations for energy-intensive lifestyles.
We do need new utopian visions for dream homes, but we can do better than ones that only involve automation and energy efficiency.
We can imagine homes with new ways of entertaining, securing, cleaning, cooking, heating and cooling. We can imagine homes that don’t need very much energy at all.
This article is based on content from Yolande Strengers' recent book, <a href="http://us.macmillan.com/smartenergytechnologiesineverydaylife/YolandeStrengers">Smart Energy Technologies in Everyday Life: Smart Utopia?</a>
Yolande Strengers receives research funding from Australian energy providers and the Consumer Advocacy Panel
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/21169/count.gif" width="1">
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/dream-homes-of-the-future-still-stuck-in-the-past-21169">original article</a>.
Lead image credit: James Vaughan on <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/4175963774/" target="_blank">Flickr</a>, reproduced under <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-SA 2.0</a>
</body></html>

Dream homes of the future still stuck in the past

<html><body>
<h1 class="rtejustify">
	By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-shaw-39629" style="font-size: 12px;">Kate Shaw</a>, University of Melbourne
</h1>
Australia is the world capital for property speculation. Australians play property like Monopoly: buying, selling, demolishing, rebuilding, extending, renovating, always with the promise of appreciation on resale. The contribution to GDP of real estate transactions alone is the highest in the world, and <a href="http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/07/australias-huge-property-market-gets-bigger/">three times higher</a> than that in the US.
Around one in seven Australian taxpayers owns one or more investment properties, aided by generous tax concessions. Australia has one of the highest levels of household debt in the OECD due to borrowings for property purchases.
This amounts to what is effectively an infinite demand for property in Australia, exacerbated by a growing global investor market. The resulting competition at sale is the main reason for Australia’s rapidly declining housing affordability. While some (but by no means all) of this activity is creating new dwellings for rent, the rents are increasing too.
<h2 class="rtejustify">
	Renters last</h2>
Renters are the losers in the property game. Not only do they struggle with high rents but tenant protection in Australia is among the weakest in the developed world. This is not coincidental: Australia’s 1.8 million and counting property investors support and are supported by tenancy legislation heavily weighted in favour of landlords. This produces a fundamental lack of security in rental housing.
Australia stands in stark contrast to North American and European countries, which have a range of much stronger tenant protections including rent control and security. As these are nuanced and vary from state to state in all these countries, as well as in Australia, broad comparisons are difficult to make. But a few key points can draw the picture.
In Victoria, rents can be increased every six months with no limit on the amount (though a tenant can appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal if the amount exceeds similar properties in the same area). In Germany, which is around average for tenant protection in Europe, rent increases are capped at 20% every three years. Landlords who overcharge can be fined.
In Victoria, 60 days is the standard amount of notice required for a tenant to vacate. In Germany the notice requirements vary according to how long the tenant has lived there: three months is the minimum for someone who has lived in the property for less than five years. Six months notice is required for a tenancy between five and eight years; nine months for longer than eight years. Elderly long term tenants are protected: a landlord has to make a very strong case for their eviction, and is required to pay compensation and/or assist with their relocation.
In Victoria, tenants can be evicted so a property can be sold with vacant possession, which may or may not bring a bit more on the sale price. If the place is bought by another investor the property returns to the rental market some months after the original tenants had to find a new home. In Germany this is illegal: tenanted properties are sold with their tenant in place.
This strong legislation is possible partly because of the role of large landholding institutions in Germany that treat their housing assets as long-term secure investments that provide a steady return. The resulting long leases mean tenants can consider their rented property their home and fit it out accordingly. The tenancy protections supporting this arrangement act as a disincentive to speculators, which in turn reduces demand for investment properties and therefore competition at sale.
<h2 class="rtejustify">
	When people prefer to rent</h2>
The historical and cultural contexts in Australia and Europe are profoundly different of course, but it is useful to reflect on the institutional and legal practices that enable renting one’s home to be the norm.
In contrast to Australia, where land and housing are treated as commodities, the combination of large landholders and strong tenant protections in Europe creates a self-reinforcing cycle that maintains house prices and rents at relatively stable and affordable levels. The resulting security means Europe doesn’t have anything like the stigma against renters that can be found in Australia.
Australia is changing, however. The prohibitive cost of housing for purchase, desire to delay or avoid the burden of housing debt, and simultaneous growth of a footloose, casualised workforce – whether by circumstance or choice – is creating generations of people who prefer to rent.
As cultural attitudes change, the institutions should follow. The potential role of Australian superannuation funds in investing in housing has been avoided for too long: for decades trillions of dollars of workers’ hard-earned have been distributed over a range of investments without alleviating Australia’s crisis of housing affordability.
The super funds are finally reconsidering this position, and so too should Australia’s legal practices adapt. Legislative changes should be made to facilitate significant super fund investment in secure and affordable rental housing, followed by strengthened tenancy protections.
If these changes were coupled with reduction of the tax incentives to small property investors, the market would shift dramatically. But this would require Australian voters to curb their enthusiasm for the property game. What are the chances of that?
Kate Shaw does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/20538/count.gif" width="1">
This article was originally published at <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/renting-for-life-housing-shift-requires-rethink-of-renters-rights-20538">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Renting for life? Housing shift requires rethink of renters' rights

The residential transformation of St Kilda Road is set to continue into with more new apartment plans for the sought-after boulevard.

Wing Tai Asia has lodged plans for a major residential tower at 464-466 St Kilda Road, replacing the former VACC House with an 18-storey mixed-use development designed around a retained heritage podium and a sculpted contemporary tower.

The proposal, prepared under Victoria’s Significant Residential Development with Affordable Housing pathway, would deliver 325 apartments and ground-floor retail across the prominent 4,653 sqm boulevard site in Melbourne’s St Kilda Road North Precinct.

The project centres on the adaptive reuse of the site’s heritage-listed VACC Building, an eight-storey office designed by Bernard Evans that has occupied the address for decades. Planning documents state the development would involve “carefully dismantling and conserving off-site the original metal fabric of the podium visible from St Kilda Road,” before reinstating it as the defining frontage of the new scheme.

Above the restored podium, Wing Tai is proposing a curvilinear residential tower. The scheme includes 172 one-bedroom apartments, 63 two-bedroom apartments, 66 three-bedroom apartments, and 24 four-bedroom apartments, alongside two ground-floor food and beverage tenancies fronting St Kilda Road.

The tower has been designed with substantial articulation and variable setbacks to minimise perceived bulk and maintain view corridors along the boulevard. Urbis, which prepared the planning report, said the design “has been significantly articulated through a curvilinear design” with “an interplay with materials, façade expression and depth” to create visual separation and visual interest.

The proposal also includes 254 basement car spaces, landscaped pedestrian links connecting St Kilda Road and Queens Lane, and a biophilic landscape strategy featuring canopy trees, raised planters, cascading greenery and a glass oculus pool overlooking the eastern frontage.

Planning documents confirm the $270.1 million development will contribute 3 per cent of project costs to the Social Housing Growth Fund as part of the application process.

Wing Tai acquired the St Kilda Road property in 2018 alongside Abacus Property Group for $95.38 million, before later consolidating ownership of the site. The property previously served as the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce headquarters for around 60 years.

The transformation of the St Kilda Rd boulevard is already beginning to materialise, with a number of high-profile projects recently completed, launched, or approaching launch as developers continue to back the long-term appeal of the precinct.

Among the most notable recent completions is Louise by Samuel Property Group, just off the strip on Queens Lane, the same pocket Hirsch &amp; Faigen recently launched The Queensbury. Mirvac is too on the same street with The Albertine, which is approaching completion.

Dexus recently secured approval for its slice of St Kilda Road, while Gurner also has approved plans for the precinct.

Joel Robinson

Wing Tai unveils 325-apartment St Kilda Road tower on former VACC House site

Malaysian developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/s-p-setia">SP Setia</a> is the latest to jump into St Leonards booming Transport Oriented Development precinct.

The developer, which has previously delivered Sapphire by the Gardens apartment development in Melbourne, identified the Atchison Street site in 2023. It filed a Scoping Report around 12 months ago, and now has revealed the designs for the new&nbsp;40-storey mixed-use tower.

The State Significant Development Application covers <a href="https://next-portal.urban.com.au/projects/14650/summary">20-22 Atchison Street</a>, a 1,374 sqm site positioned between St Leonards Station and the new Crows Nest Metro station.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">COX Architecture</a>, the project would deliver 181 apartments, above a four-storey commercial podium, five basement levels, and new public domain works along Mitchell Street. The apartment mix comprises 35 one-bedroom apartments, 39 one-bedroom-plus-study apartments, 85 two-bedroom apartments, and 22 three-bedroom residences.

The proposal has been lodged as a shop-top housing development under the NSW Government’s TOD planning pathway, which allows increased density around key transport infrastructure. The site sits within the recently rezoned Crows Nest Accelerated TOD Precinct.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b799673d-48e2-46b0-801a-0e33a9330100" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20site.png?VersionId=dPh0UfwfaHpbFL1R7H1cbZNbIW0CHbCC" />

SP Setia acquired the Atchison Street site as part of its continued expansion into the Australian apartment market. In comments made to City &amp; Country (The Edge Malaysia) in 2023, SP Setia President and CEO Datuk Choong Kai Wai described the acquisition as “a strategic move” aligned with the group’s post-pandemic market recovery strategy.

“Our target for this exceptional development is local and overseas buyers, including first-home buyers, downsizers and investors,” Choong said.

The tower has been designed as a slender vertical form rising from a mixed-use podium, with COX Architecture positioning the development as a response to the evolving St Leonards and Crows Nest skyline.

“The purpose of the project is to facilitate the delivery of high-quality housing at a strategically located site and deliver a built tower outcome that is consistent with the desired future character of St Leonards and aligns with the TOD controls,” the design report stated.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b1a85eee-76f7-436c-a6da-73ba827b9b13" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20entry.png?VersionId=dA9jHGPMcm.dDbwk4QfxqWiY5bfh3UVt" />

The podium would incorporate retail uses fronting Atchison Street, commercial tenancies, landscaped communal areas, and pedestrian improvements along Mitchell Street. Vehicle access and loading would be consolidated via Atchison Lane.

Residents would have access to more than 665 sqm of communal indoor and outdoor spaces, while the development proposes 96 parking spaces across five basement levels.

The proposal also includes a commitment for 10 per cent of residential floor space to be allocated toward affordable housing through a monetary contribution.

COX said the tower form responds directly to the emerging high-density character of the precinct while seeking to maximise solar access, cross ventilation, and outlook from apartments.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2163f85c-f63b-4be3-aafa-f8763976cec5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Article%20Feature%20Image%20%28Grid%29_5.png?VersionId=WiAmtIKJ6.ZQ41EtYEQ1fol7AeorKBlL" />

“The building is orientated towards north,” the Apartment Design Guide compliance report noted, adding that the tower’s slim form was driven by the constrained inner-urban site dimensions.

The design also incorporates landscaped setbacks and communal open space at podium level, intended to soften the interface with surrounding streets and improve pedestrian amenity.

The project adds to a growing wave of redevelopment proposals reshaping St Leonards and Crows Nest following the opening of the Sydney Metro City line and the NSW Government’s push for higher-density housing around major transport nodes.

Last week Stockland filed plans just down the road. They want to build a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/601-pacific-highway-st-leonards-nsw-2065">52-storey tower on Pacific Highway</a>.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-stockland-plans-52-storey-538-apartment-st-leonards-tower">First look: Stockland plans 52-storey, 538-apartment St Leonards tower&nbsp;</a>

First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/urban-property-group">Urban Property Group</a> has revealed plans for a new mixed-use tower at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham, advancing a proposal that would reshape the southern gateway to Newcastle’s city centre with one of the city’s tallest residential buildings.

The State Significant Development proposal, now on exhibition, seeks approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/bowline-10-dangar-street-wickham-nsw-2293">43-storey tower</a> immediately adjacent to the Newcastle Interchange. The project would deliver around 200 apartments, including 42 affordable housing dwellings, alongside 99 co-living units, a 171-room hotel, retail space, and new public domain integrated through the site.

The scheme marks a significant escalation of plans previously approved for the site. Urban Property Group took over the prominent 2,904 sqm parcel, where excavation and demolition had already commenced under an earlier consent for a 14-storey mixed-use development.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="58a96dd9-407f-4d20-86b4-94e4bfeef74b" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20podium.png?VersionId=LGlf08pdFGAZDzvx_CXC4XakHNZRuEE0" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/sjb-architects">SJB</a>, the tower has been conceived as a landmark transit-oriented development anchored to the Newcastle Interchange precinct. The proposal includes 245 build-to-sell apartments across a mix of one, two, and three-bedroom residences, as well as two penthouses. Fifteen apartments and one operational unit are earmarked for NDIS housing. The co-living component would add a further 99 units, while the podium would accommodate retail uses and hotel facilities.

SJB said the site presents “a valuable opportunity to anchor the precinct by setting the standard for design, active ground planes and character at the key southern gateway.”

The architecture responds directly to the site’s position beside major transport infrastructure and within one of Newcastle’s fastest-evolving urban renewal precincts. The tower form sits above a sculpted podium designed to frame new public spaces, including a through-site pedestrian link connecting Station Street to Hannell Street, landscaped plazas, and activated retail edges.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a7bd6ff0-f7db-4ce8-a6dc-ea56e72c6149" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20lanne.png?VersionId=xzf39VADyhj7zBQY2I9fx9vI62u2tuSb" />

The design report describes the project as part of the broader transition of Wickham into “a vibrant, high-quality mixed-use urban precinct” that leverages proximity to the station, open space, and regional connectivity.

A detailed public art strategy has also been prepared for the development. The strategy positions the project as “a transit-oriented development of state significance at the gateway to Newcastle’s city centre” and outlines a series of integrated artworks responding to Newcastle’s industrial and transport heritage.

Creative Road’s curatorial framework for the project, titled Unveil, draws on “stratified surfaces, carved volumes, and light-filled apertures” while referencing Newcastle’s transformation from an industrial city into a contemporary education and technology hub.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="77a882bb-14b1-4d28-99ff-9438e39508c0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20site.png?VersionId=cevgo_vN0eKPK78P8YcEu3mKPLkpFqE7" />

The proposal is being advanced through the NSW Housing Delivery Authority pathway after being declared State Significant Development in June 2025. The accompanying scoping report states the development aims to “maximise the site’s proximity to the Newcastle Interchange by delivering transit-oriented development” while increasing housing supply and affordable housing provision within the Newcastle LGA.

Urban Property Group’s plans align with the long-term strategic vision established under the Wickham Master Plan, which identified the interchange precinct as suitable for substantial uplift in height and density. The current proposal would significantly intensify that vision, positioning the tower among the tallest developments proposed for Newcastle.

The site sits immediately north of the Newcastle Interchange, bounded by Dangar Street, Hannell Street, and Charles Street. It is surrounded by a rapidly growing cluster of residential towers and mixed-use projects that have emerged following the completion of the light rail and transport interchange.

First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s latest tower at Wickham interchange

Bottega House has completed settlement of a landmark riverfront site in Macquarie Street, St Lucia, representing its first major Brisbane development.&nbsp;

Positioned on the banks of the Brisbane River, the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/180-macquarie-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">premium site at 180 Macquarie Street</a> features uninterrupted river frontage in one of Brisbane’s most tightly held residential precincts.&nbsp;

The proposed development, currently under assessment with Brisbane City Council, has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/plus-studio">Plus Studio</a> with interiors by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/interior-designers/mim-design">Mim Design</a> and will deliver a boutique collection of premium residences positioned specifically for owner occupiers and downsizers.&nbsp;

The residences are set to redefine luxury apartment living in the area, with a focus on architectural quality, refined finishes, landscape integration and elevated amenities including curated wellness facilities, resort-style pools and recreation spaces rarely seen in the local market.&nbsp;

Exclusive sales for the project will be led by Keenan &amp; Byrne, ahead of an anticipated launch later this year.&nbsp;

Bottega House Managing Director Nick Malloch said the project reflects the group’s ambition to deliver a highly curated residential offering within one of Brisbane’s most tightly held precincts.&nbsp;

“This is an incredibly rare riverfront opportunity and one we have approached with a long-term perspective,” Malloch said.&nbsp;

“Our vision from the outset was to create a boutique collection of residences that feel more like private homes than traditional apartments, with generous proportions, refined finishes and exceptional amenity throughout."

Malloch says there is a&nbsp;lack of premium owner-occupier stock of this quality in the market, particularly for downsizers wanting space, privacy and a true lifestyle offering without compromise.&nbsp;

"Demand is expected to be strong given the scarcity of premium riverfront opportunities of this nature within Brisbane’s inner-west."&nbsp;

Bottega House secures landmark riverfront site in St Lucia 

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-6" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" dir="auto">
<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-2" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" dir="auto">
The arrival of the first piling rig officially marks the commencement of construction at SIERA’s new beachside apartment development, Exhale, in Northcliffe.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/exhale-surfers-paradise-8-enderley-avenue-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">Exhale</a>, a glass-encased tower featuring 54 large-scale apartments at 8 Enderley Avenue, is SIERA’s third Gold Coast development. It follows the recently completed PIPIS Bilinga beachfront project, which achieved suburb-record prices, and the soon-to-be-completed Chevron Island development, Tapestry.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359603]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/siera">SIERA</a> Founder and Managing Director Brent Thompson said the arrival of the piling rig represented a significant milestone for the development, which is scheduled for completion in late 2028.

Over the next month, around 260 piles are expected to be installed as work progresses on the basement structure. The building is anticipated to rise above ground level early next year, before unveiling its sculptural glass curtain wall, developed in collaboration with specialist façade engineers.

“The façade was designed to maximise panoramic coastal views while creating a distinctive architectural identity,” Thompson said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=355935]

Designed by BDA Architecture, Exhale will comprise just 54 two- and three-bedroom residences across 26 levels, a level of low-density living rarely delivered in this beachside pocket between Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach.

The project has been conceived as a resident-only building, with no short-stay accommodation permitted. SIERA says the model is intended to appeal to long-term owner-occupiers rather than transient holiday demand.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=361052]

Residences have been designed with large-format layouts and expansive glazing, with most apartments featuring more than 30 metres of glass frontage to maximise natural light and ocean views.

The amenity offering spans two levels and centres on wellness and lifestyle, including a heated magnesium pool, sauna, yoga and Pilates studio, gymnasium, private dining facilities, cinema lounge, and dedicated surfcraft storage.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359607]

More than half of the apartments have already sold. SIERA has also opened a sales gallery for Exhale at its Chevron Island commercial premises, near its Tapestry tower and the site of its second Chevron Island apartment development, which is slated to launch in early 2027.
</section>
</section>

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=112661]

The Conversation

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News