a group of about twenty AILA members toured the nearly completed Boggo Road Urban Village at Dutton Park with Project Designers Stephen White and Dominic Powell (Tract) with the intention being to gain an understanding of the design challenges arising from the conversion of a historical gaol precinct into a contempory transport–orientated research and commercial hub.This development is being project-managed by the Department of Public Works, on behalf of the Queensland Government.
The Boggo Road Urban Village will be a unique, mixed-use area including residential, retail, commercial, environmental research and recreational facilities. Its aim is to connect people to the future, the past, our city and each other.
The AILA National Office has been informed of a range of stories on the implementation of the Commonwealth’s Stimulus Package for infrastructure as well as the school’s program.
We would like to gather together some of the feedback, positives and the other, on the roles of landscape architects in the processes as well as on the value of landscape being considered - and any and all other related matters or issues.
All this will be fed into our thinking for future national and state based advocacy.
The following is the AILA’s response which was also sent through to Minister Garrett with a request for an appointment to discuss the issues.
BEMP: Principles for Planning Sustainable Communities
The following is a response to the recent publication “Principles for Planning Sustainable Communities – Consultation Draft”, which was presented for audience discussion at the Built Environment Meets Parliament (BEMP) event held in Canberra on 12th August 2009.
As the document appears to have been presented (via this event) to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts as a supposedly representative, industry-based consultative position on an issue of such national significance, The Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA) feels it is important to offer an alternative viewpoint for the Department’s consideration.
It is the AILA’s view that the BEMP: Principles for Planning Sustainable Communities could have been so much more - both in the manner in which it has been developed, as well as in the content it purports to convey as representative of the collected views of key stakeholder groups within the built environment, including design professionals.
To assist, key issues of concern have been detailed on the following pages:
LIMITED REPRESENTATIVE STATUS OF THE BEMP EVENT
The BEMP it is an event-based coalition of paying subscribers set up to lobby parliament at a particular time of the year on issues relating to the built environment.
As such it is not to be confused as being an organizational entity with the status or authority to devise and promote policy on behalf of either industry or built environment design professionals as a whole.
The absence of any clear consultative process for the development of the BEMP: Principles for Planning Sustainable Communities further undermines the credibility of the stated ‘industry-representative’ nature of the views expressed therein. This is a lost opportunity, resulting in a flawed document.
CONSULTATIVE PROCESS OF DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT
The document, despite being labelled ‘Consultation Draft”, does not appear to have been produced with reference to a clear consultative process. It does not specify either the consultation framework within which it was developed, nor avenues for key built environment stakeholder groups to engage in review or analysis of what has been proposed.
Stakeholder engagement is a fundamental principle of any planning process, and indeed is even quoted as a “Model Planning Framework Principle” itself (“Principle 3 - Maximise civic engagement – strategic planning must advance community participation and civic engagement”, page 8. ) – yet it appears that this entire document has been generated without the most basic methodology of stakeholder consultation.
SYSTEMS THINKING METHODOLOGY
The lack of an underpinning consultation strategy in developing this document is immediately apparent in the limitations of its structural approach and content.
While there is emerging national and international consensus amongst built environment design professionals on the need for broader-scale, big-picture systems thinking when developing planning strategies for sustainable communities of the future, the BEMP: Principles for Planning Sustainable Communities unfortunately reflects none of this current awareness.
The ‘targeted performance indicators’ outlined in the BEMP document (pg. 13) propose a range of sustainability parameters - albeit extremely limited and poorly defined - which collectively determine sustainable communities for ‘urban areas’, classifying them under headings as either ‘environmental’, ‘social’, ‘economic’ or ‘governance’ issues.
The structure of the proposed strategic framework appears to infer that by simply ‘measuring’ individual indicators, performance benchmarks & targets can be established against which progress towards ‘sustainability’ can subsequently simply be ‘added up’.
If only planning sustainable communities was that simple.
Unfortunately, however, the challenges involved operate across much broader spatial scales, and encompass far more dynamically complex expressions of built form:
“Human settlement in Australia occurs in small, large and also in sprawling interconnected communities. Individual communities may be in decline. They may be about to expand and join-up in a spate of rapid growth (as may happen on our eastern coastal strip). The size of a community may be inversely related to the size of its relative ecological footprint, or the damage caused to inhabitants – depending on its prevailing form of livelihood, sensitivity of environmental features, the specific impact of climate change there, and other sustainability parameters.
It is thus a narrow view to consider that the challenges of sustainable settlement in Australia relate only to so-called urban development.”
What the BEMP proposed framework does not accommodate is the complex reality of how sustainability influences interact with each other across a range of landscape scales and settlement types.
For example, how decision-making concerning energy, waste, water, transport, green infrastructure, public space & residential communities both impacts upon and is influenced by environmental, social, economic and governance conditions at site, neighbourhood, metropolitan, regional and national levels.
It also does not acknowledge that a collaboratively-based, integrative process designed to understand and creatively manage the dynamic nature of these interrelationships is crucial to developing meaningful, long term sustainability solutions for future communities.
The framework as set out in the BEMP document lacks any mechanism to examine the linkages and connections across different settlement scales between sustainability parameters.
Even more critically the document fails to acknowledge the role of design, technology and innovation in addressing the urgent challenges of retrofitting existing human settlements as well as creating sustainable communities of the future.
A ‘PRINCIPLED’ APPROACH TO SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES?
The stated objective of the BEMP: Principles for Planning Sustainable Communities is “to provide a model, principles-based framework about the shape and form that strategic plans for cities and our communities should take.” (pg. 4).
The term ‘principle’ is commonly defined as an important underlying assumption; a proposition which forms the basis of reasoning or action; a fundamental tenet or truth, etc.
As such, this document could reasonably be expected to articulate the critical values and aspirations which should underpin decision-making on the shape and form of sustainable communities of the future.
Unfortunately the BEMP document assiduously avoids this central issue, choosing to focus virtually exclusively on process and governance issues. As a result, its potential applicability and relevance to broader sustainability outcomes is immeasurably diminished.
It is AILA’s considered position that,at the most fundamental level, a principles-based framework for sustainable communities should rigorously address the essential reality that human settlements are complex, evolving social-ecological systems which are dependent on the health of their associated natural environments for ongoing sustainability.
There are many examples of values-based approaches to planning which respect this basic interdependence and seek to build on its value for future generations – the Melbourne ‘Principles for Sustainable Cities’ provides an excellent Australian model, for example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne_Principles).
The BEMP strategy would have been greatly assisted by referring to such approaches as part of a genuinely collaborative engagement process with the wide range of key stakeholders interested in promoting the development of truly sustainable outcomes within the context of the Australian built environment.
The AILA National Conference in Melbourne will be using the Australian Landscape Principles as the basis for the discussions on the future of professional practice. The Australian Landscape Principles have been developed as a strategic response to this issue, based on respect for the inherent and measurable values of landscape when developing planning, design and management strategies for climate change adaptation in our natural and built environments.
At least one practice will be interrogating their own practice for their presentation at the conference and discussing the issues of ethics in their decision making and in their project work.
The question for all members: Have you conducted such an assessment recently? Have you any thoughts on conducting this kind of in-house study? or any other comments on the future of the profession and the use of the Landscape Principles ?
I was recently talking about landscape architects and Heritage with Philip Palmer, one of our WA members, who has recently taken up a job with the National Trust WA.
Nationally we are wanting to identify those AILA members who are working in areas of heritage or cultural landscapes.
Are you in a practice that occasionally or most of the time specialises in this work, or are you working in these areas from within a government department or agency or a non-government organisation (national trust)? If so please make contact.
The AILA national council is considering what national actions should be initiated to position the profession and the AILA in these areas of work, locally and nationally and ultimately internationally.
Philip would also like to build up links and network with other Australian landscape architects on this topic.
We would very much also like to consider doing some profile work on the types of work being undertaken by Australian landscape architects in heritage and cultural landscapes; the work could be within Australia or international.
A debate quietly surfaced last week in the Australian media following a media release from the Australian Institute of Architects (now AIA not RAIA as before in case you had not noticed).
Their comment seemed to be based on a re-badging of their previous Urban Design policy and a public announcement of its presence along with a statement attacking everyone about urban sprawl.
Unfortunately, given the tone of the statements, the AIA became the subject of the debate rather than the important topic they were attempting to raise (about urban sprawl that is, not their recycled policy).
The AILA has offered comment at times to various governments on the topic of the continual urban sprawl and the desire to seek improved design solutions for our urban environments.
The AILA is working for the longer term to have some National Landscape Principles taken up by all local governments within their urban design strategies and protocols.
This project on landscape principles will be the subject of consultations later this year and into next year as part of AILA’s Commonwealth funded Climate Change project.
Meanwhile we welcome comments from members on the topic of urban sprawl - or on any topic relating to urban design and landscape architects. also check the AILA news pages for other news
Queensland University of Technology has been presented with an exciting student project in the Gulf of Carpentatria.
The Project called “Linking Karumba: Creating Sustainable Connections” involves a multi- disciplinary group of 16 senior students, Q.U.T Teaching staff and the residents of Karumba.
This September for 10 days, the group will immerse themselves in the nature and culture of Karumba and create planning options that link the two separate parts of the township.
Karumba is located at the mouth of the Norman River in the Gulf of Carpentaria in Queensland.
The attached image shows the landscape that surrounds the township.
A recent call to landscape architects to give input to a journal about urban agriculture heightened the opportunity and responsibility we have to help feed a future low consumerism, highly urban world. Is there any one out there interested to being part of this.
I have a touch of permaculture in my veins and am keen to see the Victorian State Government’s program of “Food for all” be successful.
A discussion chaired by Paul Thompson AILA, part of AILA Victoria’s ‘Cultivate’ series of talks. (This AILA forum Thursday 15 May 2008 at RMIT)
Registrants were invited to contribute beforehand by sending emails with questions, ideas, concerns and statements.
The evening began with an introduction from Paul Thompson.
This was followed by discussions using the emails to stimulate discussion between the 102 participants composed of landscape architects, students and allied professionals. The evening finished with broad spirited contributions from the floor.
It is suggested that you view the notes on the talk which have been uploaded to the AILA web site.
The art of Landscape Architecture has influenced the culture significantly in the past 40 years. It is now time to work closer with science to create site responsive landscapes for people and nature.
This is the beginning of a continuing conversation.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
Also reference: Paul’s online article published in LAonline Autumn 2008.
The Australian Garden. Selecting plants for a botanic garden.
Review Netspeed as an ISP and web host, the many serious problems and the disappointing service
The AILA National Office can report that we have successfully transferred the web site away from Netspeed. Many complaints about Netspeed.
We had many many problems with Netspeed over many months - this led to requests and complaints to Netspeed, to any Netspeed staff we could find - but little response from Netspeed , most of time nil response or too little too late - so we gave up on complaining to Netspeed - held a review of Netspeed in comparison to other providers - and moved away from Netspeed!
We have moved the web hosting due to the disappointing and frustrating service being provided by Netspeed over an extended period of time.
yes we were very very disappointed, and even very very amazed, with the Netspeed service.
We tried everything and were very patient over an extended time - months!
But in the end we gave up on Netspeed! both as a web host and as the Internet Service Provider.
The final Review
there were four major issues in the end.
FYI: A REVIEW of Netspeed
The first was that we paid extra to be business customers - but the responses to problems was slow and often did not happen at all - this was the Netspeed priority service!
Second was that over the last few months the site would regularly disappear overnight. this then a special call for Netspeed to make it active again. in the end this magic Netspeed fault was happening almost every night. you can see how the lack of confidence in Netspeed developed!
third was the placement on the Netspeed server of a piece of software - Google-Urchin. this little gem tracked the visitor usage. Without our permission or knowledge, it appeared in all of the AILA main pages on the Netspeed server and was being detected as a virus. We did not ask Netspeed for the software. We definitely did not appreciate the code being placed within all our pages. Netspeed never explained what it was doing there, despite requests. It took a whole weekend for us to remove the code from all the thousands of pages on the AILA web site.
and Fourth (yes there’s more), Netspeed moved the AILA site to a new server, but Netspeed failed to update the server side code that ran such things as the AILA pay page. This at a time when it was in high demand with members making payments and booking for events. One week later Netspeed replied to our many urgent requests - but they had failed to get the pages working!
We gave up on Netspeed!
and finally Netspeed then responded to our many requests to shut things down in the same Netspeed manner. That is there was no Netspeed response from urgent requests sent to Netspeed staff! (still have not received a response from our ten communications).
It was such a fun four weeks extracting our services from the Netspeed services!
