A definition of social planning is the relationship between the land use, development and the social service system and the effect that relationship has on community behavioural patterns as well as on their attitudes, beliefs and values.

Based on this definition alone, it can be said that every aspect of planning and development has social implications and can affect the liveability of the environment. In other words planning must always consider people. Whether the land use or development is residential, industry and business, retail and commercial, open space and recreation, heritage and conservation, tourism land use, mixed use areas, infrastructure provision, traffic and transport, there are potential social effects. They may be positive or negative and caused by changes-direct and indirect-to the physical environment in the short and longer term.

If we are to plan as though people mattered there is a need to adopt more sophisticated consultative and strategic planning techniques. This is discussed below along with the example of one aspect of planning which is critical to the development of more liveable cities, the provision of housing choice.

Adoption of More Sophisticated Strategic Planning and Consultative Techniques

Strategic planning

If we are to build more supportive communities and gain a better understanding of liveability from a people perspective, that is, to gain a better understanding of changing community values and the likely social outcomes, then there must be a greater shift to outcomes-oriented, integrated strategic planning, not issues-based planning. If this is the case, then our consultative and evaluation processes must become more sophisticated and be on-going. We must monitor the change processes, for example:

• demographic characteristics: change in population size and characteristics
• employment: direct and indirect employment created by a change in land use and facilitation of a particular type of development e.g. industrial activity, tourism and recreational opportunities, etc.
• recreation development: changes in the land use affecting recreational opportunities, the access and use of public places, the public use of private space, for example, shopping centres; and changes in the communities' level of use and satisfaction with recreational opportunities
• access: change in movement patterns and conditions on local roads and on the overall network
• provision of community infrastructure, linkages and patterns: changes in the location, extent and nature of community infrastructure including, educational facilities, health, children's services, etc. for example, government cutbacks, school closures and students attending schools in unfamiliar environments have left neighbourhoods without a social focus or identity; reduced availability of public transport in some areas has isolated the young and lower income groups from a range of facilities and services
• lifestyle and values: likely conflicts surrounding particular land uses and development
  
• quality of the environment: change in the physical conditions‚value of the flora and fauna, air quality, visual and aesthetic values that affect the actual and perceived quality of the environment and/or residential amenity; change in the community's level of satisfaction with the environment
• heritage resources: loss or enhancement of cultural resources of heritage value to the community
• housing, property and land values: housing availability and diversity in terms of affordability and design to meet a range of consumer group preferences and needs
• personal safety and security: design of safe and accessible environments streets, parks, ovals, malls, beaches, shopping complexes, etc. for all to use.

• population forecasting,
• economic impact assessment,
• facilities provision standards,
• environmental quality standards,
• forecasting retail, office and industrial land requirements,
• monitoring of outcomes of projects and structure planning.

Consultation
There is often a lack of genuine consideration for people in the planning process. Moreover, there is currently a lot of cynicism among community members about the sincerity and usefulness of consultation.

While many planners, developers and designers say they have consulted with the community, we need to ask a number of questions: How meaningful and useful are the consultative processes being used? How representative are the views of the commmunity who participate in the consultative process(es) established? What are the real objectives of the consultative processes established? Are the consultative processes or research techniques appropriate? Does the community really get a say; is it a two way process? Do we really understand what the community is saying? Do we know how to translate community attitudes and needs into the planning and developmental processes to achieve better outcomes? Consultation can be an expensive exercise. If it is to be effective and if people really matter, these questions need to be asked.

I believe there is a lack of community or consumer research‚using qualitative and quantitative research techniques‚which is representative of our communities and which enables locations or living environments to be examined, over time, in a more holistic way in the context of housing, infrastructure and support services as well as environmental quality.

Optimisation of community partnership(s)
The community must also have some ownership of the planning process. A series of community forums and workshops will not be adequate if seeking ownership. Apart from the structured research processes, networking mechanisms also need to be put in place.

I believe partnerships with the community can also be developed through more structured surveys. Customer satisfaction surveys are now an integral part of Council activity in Victoria. They could also be used in the identification of community values and priority setting as well as in the development of the Municipal Strategic Statements currently being prepared by Victorian Councils. As long as they are designed well they can become part of a benchmarking/monitoring research program for a range of Council services including project outcomes. They can achieve a great deal more than the establishment of the level of community satisfaction with various services and their attributes. They can also assist in not only achieving an integrated management program at an operational level but also a clear direction in strategic planning via customer feedback from the community.

Municipal Strategic Statements
Many Victorian Councils are currently carrying out specialist studies in sustainable development, business and economic development, housing, leisure and recreation, transport, urban character, land use, tourism, urban design, etc. as part of the development of their corporate plans and strategies. However, the challenge is in the integration of these studies as part of the Municipal Strategic Statements (MSS'S). The formulation of these Statements is part of the planning reform process. The Statements are supposed to :

• provide the context and direction for land use and development,
• provide the rationale for provisions,
• involve the community in the development,
• enable planning schemes to facilitate development.

• strategic planning including the full range of physical, environmental, social and cultural issues and needs,
• co-ordination between agencies and spheres of government to ensure related programs, capital expenditures and regulatory processes are effectively linked, and focussed on the key issues and priority needs identified in strategic planning,
• effective corporate planning and management by local government to drive both the planning and implementation measures.

Housing Choice

Recently I was involved in the conduct of two pieces of qualitative research which clearly indicated that while the consumer may be purchasing a house, the choice in housing form or style and/or overall residential development in a neighbourhood is not necessarily meeting the design requirements, needs or preferences identified by consumers. If this is the case, then we are not planning as though people mattered to meet our most basic need, shelter.

The two key projects I wish to refer to are:

• Housing Choice Research Project Pilot Study-Depth interviews with recent home buyers prepared for the Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association (VPELA) by Juliet Lithgow, and sponsored by the Department of Infrastructure, Office of Planning and Heritage (September 1996).

• Review of Victorian Code for Residential Development Subdivision & Single Dwellings-Consumer Satisfaction with Residential Development prepared on behalf of VPELA by Barbara Mahon, Mahon & Mahon, Greenaway & Katz and Julie Savage, Savage Milner and for the Advisory Committee - Review of Vic Code 1 (December 1996).

In brief, the interviews followed the following lines of enquiry:

• previous situation and reasons for moving,
• preferred residential location and housing type,
• the search process,
• decision making rationale,
• level of satisfaction with housing choice,
• housing aspirations,
• household characteristics.

• some feedback from the consumer on what design elements and criteria should guide the planning of a new residential area, and
• some understanding of acceptability-from the consumer's perspective-of cost implications.

Are the existing residential developments designed to produce safe, stimulating and sustainable neighbourhoods?

Some five focus groups were convened. The participants of the groups included:

• residents from three estates, representative primarily of planning under Vic Code 1 and from two growth corridors: Grantham Green in Sunshine, Westgrove in Werribee and Timbarra in Berwick;
• residents from a 'traditional' estate, not planned under Vic Code 1, Blossom Park in Mill Park, (this group functioned as a control group for the three previous groups);
• suppliers who, for the purpose of the project, were defined as developers and council officers representative of the four residential groups.

Changing demographic characteristics Household structures and in turn the housing market is changing and becoming more diverse and is comprised of many consumer groups or household types of different cultures, values and lifestyles. Over the next decade:

• the income unit of two adults with dependent children will continue to decline,
• single person households and couples without dependent children will increase among those persons aged over 35 years,
• women in paid employment will increase,
• the population aged over sixty five years is projected to increase significantly,
• older single person female households will be more dominant as females outlive males,
• couples separating and repartnering will continue and lead to more households of one parent and dependent children,
• the broad ethnic mix of households will be maintained,
• technology will continue to advance and lead to more people working from home.

These changing characteristics and smaller household sizes mean the availability of the traditional, detached 'family type' housing will no longer suffice. A greater diversity and choice in housing forms and lot sizes as well as flexibility and affordability will be required to suit different households and needs. Residential estates will need to provide flexibility to accommodate changing needs as residents advance through their life cycle (p 4).1 It can therefore be said that incentives for good design-including energy conservation and liveability-are essential if we are to build more supportive communities.

However, the key findings of the research indicated:

• consumers have been constrained in location and/or housing choice when considering purchasing a home,
• all life cycle groups live in medium density housing,
• specific design considerations are required to satisfy a broader range of consumer groups,
• there is potential to expand the medium density housing market,
• there is a need to provide greater diversity in neighbourhoods to enhance consumer choice and sense of community,
• there is a need to invlove the consumer in on‚going research and education.

(1)Improve housing design preferences to satisfy a broader range of consumer groups Affordability and improving housing design preferences are important considerations in expanding housing choice for all consumer groups. It is also significant that nearly all design improvements involve the notion of privacy and space, people's need for and control over space both internal and external. While households are becoming smaller, space is still very important. To summarise:

• design aspects which optimise feelings of space and privacy such as open plan living areas, attractive outlook and high ceilings;
• create a variety in living space configurations (that is, an extra bedroom, aliving area, an outdoor area and a lock-up garage or workshop for men);
• use rooms as craft room, office, study and storeroom;
• develop larger kitchens and separate dining room and second sometimes more formal lounge room (particularly for those households at middle stage of life cycle);
• include second wash basin in the bathroom for working couples;
• develop single storey, no steps and flat terrain for the older respondents;
• develop double storey and separation of living and sleeping spaces for those with children.

• design aspects which optimise feelings of space and privacy such as open plan living areas, attractive outlook and high ceilings, spacious outdoor areas and views;
• site smaller groups of units to ensure privacy in private areas;
• design units separate piece of land with private entrance and small garden;
• no Bodies Corporate (that is, preference for separate titles)
• include two or three bedrooms as well as craft room, store room, study, space for visiting grandchildren;
• two bathrooms (for older couple);
• ability to have pets without impinging on other units.

• Chinese prefer a separate kitchen because of their cooking style
• Those of Italian, Greek and Lebanese background prefer large kitchens for family backgrounds
• Those of Indian background want a bathroom with more space and a better colour scheme for bathing and meditation

(2)Target a larger market for medium density housing The market for medium density housing is larger than is currently being catered for. The consumers' perceptions and awareness of medium density housing highlight some of the needs and desires of home buyers which are currently not being met by the market place. There are too many comments about not being able to locate suitable medium density housing that meets people?s expectations. A better match between expectations and housing type would see a better matched market. Many singles and couples would have chosen medium density but could not find suitable options in their price, location and housing preferences criteria. Many older residents are also staying in the family home instead of moving to more suitable medium density housing options.

(3)Expand the empty nesters and/or older persons market - a growth market for medium density housing The empty nesters and older singles are a good consumer group to target and one that reported having difficulty in locating suitable housing choices in their preferred locations. This group prefers a house on a smaller lot or unit in a block of six or less within close proximity to range of services: shops, doctors and health care, friends and relatives, hospitals and public transport.

Special attention needs to be paid to creating the sense of space and privacy desired by the older home buyers and specific aspects such as level ground, single storey and gender issues such as the feeling of being couped up without a workshop to tinker in(that are dissuading males and couples to relocate) in attracting this market.

(4)Provide diversity in neighbourhoods, enhance consumer choice and sense of community There is a general feeling of dissatisfaction with choice and the need to offer a range of lot sizes and housing forms to accommodate a range of household types or consumer groups. There is also some dissatisfaction with the range of facilities and services provided to accommodate the changing needs of the population.

A sense of community results from the creation of safe, accessible and participatory environments involving a broad cross‚section of people. While these features are inter-related, it is noteworthy that physical planning and the design of residential neighbourhoods can contribute to liveablity and a better social environment. Consumers believe such can be enhanced by:

• increased density and variety in lots sizes and diversity in housing forms,
• creation of village atmosphere in neighbourhoods,
• better design and use of community spaces,
• accessibility to parklands by linked pedestrian walkways and adequate lighting, and
• provision of an adequate range of facilities and services to meet the changing life cycle of consumers.

Based on the research projects I have been involved in to date, I believe residential subdivisions should:

• have a diversity of lot sizes that meet the spatial needs of different household structures and ages as the community evolves,
• encourage the self-sustainability of the community over the changing life cycle of consumers by including the provision of the needs of all consumer groups in terms of transport, children's services, education, recreational and other community support needs, and
• better integrate new residential estates with existing community facilities and movement networks.

If we are to plan as though people mattered then we need to involve the consumer in the research and planning processes. To underline my point I also refer to the words of Rob White in his recent paper published in Urban Policy and Research Vol 14 No 1 1996: No-Go in the Fortress City: Young People, Inequality and Space: A good living environment for the majority who make up 'the community'is not one which is based on principles and practices of social exclusion (p42). He dwells on the rights of young people, how 'public space' is defined, how activity is regulated in the dearth of 'public space' and how we are adopting too many technical security measures in places where young people 'hang out.' He questions how we are going to deal with the potentially divisive outcomes derived from certain forms of social regulation. We have to ask: Is this aspect of development contributing to liveability? I suggest not.

Return to speakers list