Great neighbourhoods aren’t just made by affordable housing and numerical targets, writes Kylie Legge, who shares insights from a recent liveability census.

The continued decline in Australian housing affordability and focus on dwelling targets highlights the need for an overhaul in how decision-makers are approaching the complex problems at hand.

Place Score’s 2023 Australian Liveability Census and State of Place Report revealed that our most liveable neighbourhoods continue to become more expensive because they are more desirable places to live.

Typically, these neighbourhoods are higher-density, walkable, green, have good local amenities and are close to public transport.

Whilst current policies to address the country’s housing crisis focus on boosting the number of dwellings – with ‘supply’ targets seen as the priority – little attention is being paid to the quality and long-term liveability of these communities.

Crafting a ‘liveability ecosystem’

 To avoid a future crisis, a radical rethink is required. A new approach should consider the holistic needs of the communities we are delivering homes for. Decision-makers must ask – how can we craft ‘liveability ecosystems’ – neighbourhoods with a lasting legacy where all residents can thrive, and support their decisions using an evidence-based approach.

The Liveability Census reveals a growing demand for a more holistic approach to planning that reflects the community’s values regarding neighbourhood design. As we all know, people don’t think or live in silos, and we know that a great neighbourhood is made up of more than just affordable housing.

Whilst current policies to address the country’s housing crisis focus on boosting the number of dwellings – with ‘supply’ targets seen as the priority – little attention is being paid to the quality and long-term liveability of these communities.

Kylie Legge

Planning for a ‘liveability ecosystem’ asks that all involved consider the inter-dependent set of complex relationships between the social, economic, physical and cultural aspects of how and where we live.

The problem with numerical targets

Governments put a lot of pressure on planners to solve problems with big targets – like the federal government’s National Housing Accord target of one million new homes over five years.

Whilst numerical targets can be useful, they can too easily mask, or even create, more complex issues. Without deep consideration and understanding of the broader neighbourhood ecosystems in which these homes will be built, we may reach the target, but will we be laying the right foundations for healthier, safer, happier and more connected communities?

Secrets of liveable LGAs

The 2024 Australian Liveability Census reveals that Australia’s older, more established Local Government Areas (LGAs) such as Boroondara (VIC), Land Cove (NSW) and Subiaco (WA) are the most liveable according to their residents.

What these areas have in common is that they are compact, offer diverse housing typology, established canopy trees and vegetation, traditional main streets, and modal choice – all attributes highly valued by the over 26,000 participants in the research.

A ‘tabula rasa’ approach to residential development that delivers homogeneity, internalised malls and a decimated natural landscape is not providing the foundation, nor the flexibility to allow for future changes.

Kylie Legge

A ‘tabula rasa’ approach to residential development that delivers homogeneity (whether suburbia or high rises), internalised malls and a decimated natural landscape is not providing the foundation, nor the flexibility to allow for future changes – something that we see as critical for creating ‘liveability ecosystems’.

Practical actions

Decision-makers must acknowledge that every neighbourhood, precinct and LGA is a living, breathing and changing ecosystem – where all different types of land uses need to be monitored and nurtured – ensuring an equilibrium that supports the community’s quality of life.

Decision-makers need to reflect upon how they can leverage the amenity of existing neighbourhoods to support their growing populations – as well as leverage what is missing to ensure new developments fill these gaps.

For example, the principle of locating more housing near amenities such as transport hubs aligns with the principles of liveability ecosystem but like any proposed solution, such an approach needs to adjust to the specific place, its context and of course its people.

Data tools such as Victoria’s Future Homes location map show ‘where’ new homes could be located, but not how they can contribute to improved liveability for existing residents.

It’s important that decision makers have an evidence base that guides planning and investment decisions to best support the delivery of improved community outcomes.

Evidence-based decision making based on sound social research guarantees that the complex matrix of factors that contribute to the overall liveability, and ultimately long-term sustainability, of our neighbourhoods is considered.

Kylie Legge

Evidence-based decision making guarantees that the complex matrix of factors that contribute to the overall liveability, and ultimately long-term sustainability, of our neighbourhoods is considered.

Noting, this isn’t a ‘nice to have’ – lower liveability scores correlate with lower mental health and social cohesion – both essential requirements for the increased resilience we will require to face increasing social, economic and environmental challenges in the coming years and decades.

No quick fix

With the current government policies focussed on supply-based targets there is a real risk that rushed development will have a negative effect on our communities.

Within an eight-year timeframe, Australia is targeting a 10 per cent increase in housing stock across our LGAs. If the right soft and hard infrastructure isn’t in place to support such rapid development, this target has the potential to put immense strain on existing neighbourhoods, and to deliver unliveable new neighbourhoods that may be isolated on cheaper land on the outskirts of cities.

On the other hand, it’s important to note that, according to Place Score’s research, there is not one suburb in Australia with a perfect liveability score of 100 – not even close.

Communities in every neighbourhood see room for improvement. This means that liveability data can be used to not only support design and decision making but can also provide the foundation for opening transparent dialogue with communities concerned about change.

Every neighbourhood has room to improve, and any new development should be assessed in terms of its ability to contribute to the common good.

The opportunity then is for local governments to be able to identify what potential improvements are required, and ensure that any new development makes a positive contribution to what are seen as gaps, rather than adding to existing problems.

*Kylie Legge is founder and CEO of Place Score

Comment below to have your say on this story.

If you have a news story or tip-off, get in touch at editorial@governmentnews.com.au.  

Sign up to the Government News newsletter