[LINK] Canberra 2030 Planning Could Make Better Use of Technology

[Tom Worthington]

On Saturday I attended a two and half hour Canberra 2030 planning 
workshop <http://canberra2030.org.au/news/events/article/?id=37>.

There were about sixty members of the public and ten ACT Government and 
consultant company staff present. This appears a genuine attempt by the ACT 
Government to get input from the community, however the process could 
have been more efficient and inclusive by better use of technology.

The Process

Handed out where "The Cities We Need" (Jane-Frances Kelly, June 2010) 
<http://www.grattan.edu.au/pub_page/report_the_cities_we_need.html> , 
"Canberra 2030: Outcomes report, Round One Workshops" (September 2010) 
<http://www.canberra2030.org.au/files/view/?id=123>.

The facilitator from Elton Consulting <http://www.elton.com.au/>, 
started by saying this was a smaller workshop than "Round one". Some 
issues identified were: Transport, Education and Jobs. Also a 1,000 
household telephone survey was conducted.

Some issues with the first discussion were: Regionalism, Density, 
Employment and Transport. A web site recommended to me by one of the 
participants is <http://www.humantransit.org/>.

Population

My suggestion, which I did not get the opportunity to express, is that the density of Canberra can be increased, so as to improve 
the economic and environmental sustainability of the city. One model for this would be the City West development between 
Civic and ANU <http://blog.tomw.net.au/2007/04/canberra-rebuilt.html>.

Canberra could easily support 1 million people, about three times the current population 
density, less than of Melbourne and about the same as the ideal size suggested for the city of Xiamen: 
<http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content%7Econtent=a924634077%7Edb=all%7Ejumptype=rss>. 

Transport

My table noted that Canberra was pre-planned with reserved transport 
corridors between the town centres and so the addition of some form of 
rapid public transport would be relatively simple and inexpensive 
compared to the construction of more roads.

The discussion got sidetracked (pun intended) onto options of buses 
versus light rail. Canberra's last budget had funding for the current 
bus fleet to be upgraded with an electronic passenger information 
system. Canberra was also to get a smart card ticket system this year. But the ACT Government needs to demonstrate it can implement these relatively simple reforms before proposing grand transport schemes.

Land Planning

The second detailed discussion over transport and housing became side 
tracked over a discussion of planning for the new proposed Canberra 
urban settlement of "Kowen" and proposed industrial development "Eastern 
Broadacre planning project" to the east of the current city (as shown on
"Territory Plan Map ACT Urban Areas and Kowen" map, October 2010) 
<http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/topics/significant_projects/planning_studies/eastern_broadacre_planning_project>.

The Kowen and Broadacre plans caused some concerns from those at the 
table who had heard of it as it indicated two planning consultation 
processes taking place in parallel. The facilitators explained that 
these processes were at two different levels.

Unfortunately after generally well run small group discussion with 
feedback from representatives, the event degenerated into individuals 
making set piece speeches. This was a waste of time and illustrated the 
problems with this form of public consultation. At such an event only 
one person can speak at a time, as a result all those who would like to 
be heard cannot.

Next Event

The next event is 28 October 2010 at the Canberra Playhouse at the 
Canberra Theatre Centre, 7pm 
<http://canberra2030.org.au/news/mediareleases/article/?id=43>.

The final report will be presented to the government by 19 November and 
then issued publicly later. I suggest this plan be changed and the 
consultant's report be released publicly at the same time it is provided 
to government. This will remove the suspicion that government will 
attempt to suppress aspects of the report it does not like.

LIMITATIONS OF THE CONSULTATION PROCESS

The facilitator from Elton Consulting mentioned a 1,000 telephone survey 
was conducted. This brought out for me some problems with the 
methodology used. The telephone survey would exclude a large segment of 
Canberra households (including mine) which do not have a fixed line 
telephone. Similarly the workshops can only accommodate a very small 
subset of Canberra citizens. Canberra 2030 has a web site which attempts 
to solicit input, but does so very poorly.

A second major failing with the Canberra 2030 exercise is the lack of 
historical perspective. The ACT Government funded a Canberra 2020 study 
in 1993, the results of which are not mentioned in the 2030 exercise. I took part in the 202 study: <http://www.tomw.net.au/1993/cnbfut.html>.

The workshop process used was a conventional consultation process and 
was competently run. However, this method of collecting public input is 
expensive and excludes most of the population of Canberra. These 
techniques can now be enhanced with computer mediated communication. It 
is possible to collect input from the community and present it at a live 
event in a much more efficient and inclusive way than was done for the 
Canberra 2030 process.

Canberra is one of the world's leading centres for the development and 
use of computer mediated communication in public consultation. It is 
unfortunate that the ACT Government has not taken advantage of this 
expertise to consult citizens.

More on this at: 
<http://blog.tomw.net.au/2010/10/canberra-2030-planning-workshop.html>.


-- 
Tom Worthington FACS CP HLM, TomW Communications Pty Ltd. t: 0419496150
PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617, Australia  http://www.tomw.net.au
Adjunct Senior Lecturer, School of Computer Science, The
Australian National University http://cs.anu.edu.au/courses/COMP7310/


-- 
  Tom Worthington FACS HLM
  PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617, Australia
  http://www.tomw.net.au