We need to warm to higher density living

June 4, 2010

Comments 20

Australia has some of the lowest density cities in the world. We are a country full of cities that have fewer people per square kilometre than most other cities of comparable size. This matters for two main reasons.

First, it’s not particularly environmentally friendly. It increases our carbon footprint per person by increasing our use of fossil-fuel burning cars to get to anywhere from the corner store to school, to shopping centres, public transport hubs and work. Not to mention the fact that one reason behind our low density is our very large house size. Large houses are harder to heat and cool, increasing the strain we put on the environment.

Second, it matters because if Australia remains a country of low density cities, the building of the majority of new houses will have to occur on the outskirts, well away from employment centres and existing infrastructure. Affordable housing for first home buyers will be much harder to find within 20km of Central Business Districts.

I think most home-owners accept these points, but taking the next step and warming to the idea of more higher density housing in your own suburb is a much harder step to take. The “not-in-my-back-yard” attitude dominates (NIMBY).

Most equate higher density communities with massive blocks of apartments, increased levels of crime and lower living standards. Modern planning means this is no longer the case. Higher density living can be an important part of a safe and thriving local community. Yes, it does mean higher proportions of multi-dwelling units and smaller living spaces. But the advantages are environmentally friendly living and more importantly, the availability of affordable housing in our cities, close to existing infrastructure, and close to family and the communities people grew up in.

Attitudes take time to change, but I suspect they will start to adjust when we find our children and grandchildren having to live hours away because we don’t want higher density housing in our own suburb.

There's many examples of this around the world, with the YIMBY movement (Yes-in-my-back-yard). Citizens of various cities around the world wanting more affordable housing within reasonable distances of existing communities and infrastructure. Have a look at this story on San Francisco's YIMBY movement http://www.walkablestreets.com/yimby.htm

20 comments

If density is so unpopular, why is New York so cool?

Density is our destiny, and people are starting to realise that higher denities doesn't have to mean docklands style towers.

http://thomasthethinkengine.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/are-we-dense/

It can be low-rise, mixed use, well-served by PT and extremely liveable. And cool.

Commenter

Jase

Location

Spencer St

Date and time

June 07, 2010, 5:10PM
If you, Mr. Bell choose to live in a hig-hrise apartment block or a chook battery shed, that is your choice. I, however, choose to live on my quarter acre block and there is nothing you can do about it Mr. Ball. I would not dare to tell you which lifestyle you should choose. Who, on earth gives you the right to choose my lifestyle. Frankly, I am sick and tired of some 'smart Alecks' trying to impose their point of view and their ides upon everyone else. Government often fall for some 'smart Alec' ideas like yours, only to find out that people have their own minds and do as they wish. Please remember this Mr. Bell when you next come up with some brilliant idea you want to impose on everyone else.

Commenter

Phil

Location

Bacchus Marsh

Date and time

June 04, 2010, 8:20PM
When you live in a small 2 bedroom flat with your wife and children, I will then listen to you.

Commenter

dave

Date and time

June 08, 2010, 3:10PM
Humans are mammals and were meant to roam. They require breathing space. Our children need space for development.
If Nature would have wanted us to live like bees and ants it would have turned us into bees and ants.

It would be better to cut down on the number of people rather than encaging them into little cubby holes.

Commenter

Marg

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

June 09, 2010, 1:32PM
I agree with Phil from Bacchus Marsh. Our State Government has on few occasions fallen for the crazy ideas from some 'Planning Experts' who insist in imposing their lifestyle on everyone else. Subsequently the Government has published several misguided plans for our great city, expecting everyone to accept whatever they have been served by the big brother. Fortunately, Melbournians have much more sense than the Government gives them credit for and choose the lifestyle which best suit their individual and family needs. The great government plans for our future, thus become obsolite by the time they are published. Yet, they never learn. "The Planning experts" will continue to tell us that we should all accept their lifesyles and the the government will continue to publish new planning guidelines which no one intends to follow. Mr. Bell may also be publishing a new article telling us that we all should live like people in New York or Europe and the people will simply ignore them all.

Commenter

Simo

Location

Geelong

Date and time

June 09, 2010, 5:42PM
Australia has some of the lowest density cities in the world. We are a country full of cities that have fewer people per square kilometre than most other cities of comparable size. Lets keep it that way & not be the lacky to the developers.

Commenter

baz

Location

Sydney

Date and time

June 16, 2010, 7:32AM
matthew, found your thoughts interesting, but can't say I would agree hat more people are good for the environment. While it may be more efficient per person, more people WILL consume more resourse. The greatest problem to the global environment is over-population and while I agree its probably inevitable we will move to larger population I thinks its stretching credibility to say this is good for much except GDP growth.

Cheers

Commenter

jim

Location

sutherland

Date and time

June 17, 2010, 11:34AM
A few years ago, I read about a conference of town planners that concluded after 3 days of intense discussions that higher density living increases traffic congestion. Their time would have been better spent coming to this obvious fact in about 3 minutes, and using the remaining time working on the implications (e.g. increased fuel consumption per kilometer).
As an example of one implication, over thirty years ago, my wife and I moved from a unit 8km from the Sydney CBD to a house about 30km from the CBD. My traveling time between home and the CBD on public transport changed from 55 minutes to 75 minutes. The additional 20 minutes was a small price to pay for the better lifestyle, cleaner air, and lower crime rate. It also gave me time that I could use for reading, and staying up with developments in my profession. With remote access to the office now (finally) becoming more common, traveling time and fuel costs will become less relevant for commuters.
I often wonder if those who consider higher density housing to be inevitable ever travel further west that Balmain (or its equivalent in other cities) to see how most people live or whether they consider the longer term sociological costs of squeezing more people into a smaller space.

Commenter

TheMook

Location

Mollymook

Date and time

June 19, 2010, 11:20AM
Yes I agree, All information in this article now a days very needful..... Thanks for this given topic discussion........
-----------------
johnsmith
Best Savings

Commenter

johnsmith5082

Location

Newyork

Date and time

June 21, 2010, 9:12AM
Phil from Bacchus Marsh is certainly entitled to his choice, but it's not possible for everybody, or even most people, to choose the same; so what happens to the rest of us?

Yes, people need a certain amount of floor space if they're to stay happy and sane. Not as much as the recently invented McMansions, but most of us would probably like about as much floor space as the houses we grew up in. High-density can certainly provide that. It's not cheap, but it's a lot cheaper than an equivalent free-standing house.

The desire for a backyard seems to be the sticking point, but I would suggest that this is a state of mind. As an inner-city apartment dweller I may not have a *private* backyard, but I think of all of Sydney as my backyard, and I don't mind saying that it's quite nice, particularly the water feature.

Commenter

slyqualin

Location

Sydney

Date and time

June 21, 2010, 1:52PM