Land Use and Infrastructure

Week 6 Lecture 31/8/16 – Panel Discussion

Integrating Land Use and Infrastructure

Roger Swinbourne – AECOM

Evidence based planning

The bigger the scale of the land, the overlap and complexity in decision making. I.e. in a household, the decision to recycle is not a particularly social or economical decision, but a decision at a larger scale such as putting in an new rail line is both and economic and social decision, as well as being a sustainable decision. This obviously makes these decisions incredibly intrusive and complex.

Systems approach to planning

Consider a group of modules that work toegerth to produce a value and performance optimised master plan. Modules may be socio-cultural strategies, water/wastewater management, transportation/mobility strategies, environmental strategies, energy use/energy distribution, urban design stratgies. Its goal is to integrate the science and the art of urban planning.

Performance based planning

  • which is a “better” plan?
  • how do we measure and quantify cost and benefit of a plan?

This requires GIS analysis to score on spacial and land attributes. For example, you can assign a value to open space and access to parks. We then add to this problems and solutions around equipty and the ability to provide for a range of different types of people.

SSIM Stages of Workflow

  1. Land Plan and Urban form Alternatives Evaluation
  2. Core Systems Modelling and Benchmarking
  3. Sustainability Program Optimisation

SSIM assists in managing the complexity of urban systems and decision. It is highly tailired for each projects dsign considerations and stakeholders. It is best applied as part of an integrated master planning/civil infrastructure project. There are opportunites to integrate design, development controls and infrastructure.

It is critical to consider that this is a tool used to inform decisions and not make decisions.

Infrastructure growth and planning

Consider an extra 2million people in Sydney  bu 2040. Our energy requirement options are Business as Usual (BAU), we can demand light green regulations (NABERS, BASIX etc.), or we can start to drive efficiency by demanding “dep green” which aims to be carbon neutral by 2050. This drives further efficiency and reduces overall city wide load, and therefore impacts public transport, water needs, substation requirements etc. We can also look at alternative supply demands to meet our energy and water etc. requirements.

This carries issues with it: who carries the cost? who carries the benefits? when do these costs and benefits occur?

Existing Precint Transitions

Futures_cone-GIF.gif

 

Infrastructure Sustainability in Sydney

James Hansen – Greater Sydney Commission

Small decisions have a strong path dependancy. This shows how important “small” decisions might be to shaping a city, and it can be a very difficult and complex problem to change, and to move away from Business as Usual.

Deliverable: Prepare, through the Distric Planning process, an Annual Infrastructure Priority List in conjuction with Infrastructure NSW to support ongoing inprovement in productivity, liveability and environmental quality.

Current priorities are housing – with an emphasis on affordability.

Further References

Screen Shot 2016-06-04 at 7.34.58 PM

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s