MyPlace Green Square Community Survey 2020 Final Report

Abstract

The study was undertaken by researchers at UNSW Sydney, with the assistance and support of the City of Sydney Council.The aim of this research was to develop a survey tool for on-going assessment of social interactions and social cohesion at a large-scale urban renewal site that could be used to:➢ Measure the nature of social cohesion and social interaction and identify opportunities and barriers residents face in contributing to social cohesion and community development.➢ Understand the wellbeing of residents and workers, including their satisfaction with and attachment to the area, their local area preferences and desires, and their plans for the future.The results of the survey were presented to staff across the City of Sydney Council. It is expected that the survey findings will be used to inform Council's investments and activities across a range of areas, including community development, civic engagement, communications, placemaking, land use planning, open space and public domain planning, and local business development. The implications for practice presented here are preliminary and it is expected that City staff will further analyse and apply the survey findings to inform their work going forward. The City intends for the survey to be undertaken on a recurring basis over coming years, to monitor changes to the social fabric over time as the urban renewal area develops.Implications for community development: Green Square is an area with a large proportion of new residents (72% of survey respondents have lived in the area for 5 years or less), but that majority (70%) plan to remain resident in the area for a number of years. People feel more strongly connected to community at the larger scales of Sydney and Australia than at the local level of the suburb and street, but there is a desire to build more local connections, with the majority (68%) of residents wanting to have more interaction with others who live and work in the area.Private renters and younger people in particular desire more local social connection. Importantly, connection to community at the building scale is higher than at the suburb or street level, and the building scale was the only scale at which sense of community increased between 2017 and 2020. This suggests that community development at the building level is promising, but also that there is room to further develop community connections at the local suburb level. Interventions to encourage social interaction will be needed that engage residents who demonstrated a desire for greater involvement in social interactions but are constrained because of a lack of time and/or knowledge about the opportunities available to them, and a lack of confidence when dealing with strangers.Implications for civic engagement Around a third (32%) of residents felt they understood their rights around planning and urban development in the local area, slightly higher than in 2017 (27%). A smaller percentage (17%) felt they had made a civic contribution by working with others to improve the area. One in five felt that their thoughts about local issuescould be heard by people who make a difference (22%) and that there was strong local leadership in the area (18%), demonstrating a slight improvement from 2017 (when the figures were 20% and 15% respectively). There is potential for improved engagement amongst residents in the area as demonstrated by their willingness to be engaged in political discussions, with more residents having participated in other research (25%) and signed petitions (35%). There was also a substantial increase in the proportion of people who had joined a protest or demonstration from 8% in 2017 to 17% in 2020. The survey also revealed that relationships between language spoken at home and civic engagement are complex. People who speak a language other than English at home are less likely to be involved in communicating with a local politician or participated in the running of a strata or community title scheme. However, participation in research and council planning processes were equal or higher amongst people who speak a language other than English at home. There were also differences between people who speak a Chinese language and other language at home, with participation in online discussions, attendance at community events and sending letters to the media being higher amongst Chinese speaking residents than those speaking another language at home. In comparison, participation in a protest or demonstration was higher for those speaking English and another language at home compared to Chinese-speaking residents. These observed differences are based on small sample sizes and should therefore be treated with caution. However, they suggest that different strategies may be needed to encourage civic engagement of people who speak a language other than English at home and that different strategies may be more effective for different language groups.Implications for communications: Aside from time constraints, difficulty in finding information about social activities (26%) was the second most common limitation given by residents to socialising with others in the area. Barriers to participate in community activities were more pronounced among people speaking languages other than English at home. However, there are some interesting differences when comparing people speaking a Chinese language at home and people speaking another language at home, notably that people speaking a Chinese language are more likely to say that they are not confident with strangers, not interested in getting involved and have difficulty accessing facilities or venues, but are less likely to say that they do not feel welcome than people speaking another language at home.Residents would like to receive information about social activities through social media (63%), e-mails (56%), noticeboards in public places and their buildings (52%) and websites (36%). The City can provide such information through City-specific social media and through partnering with other social media platforms known to be actively used in the area, as well as collaborating with building managers. These approaches were effective in promoting the survey to residents. However, preferences for information differ greatly by age and language spoken at home. People aged over 50 were much less likely to want to receive information via social media (36%). However, e-mailed community newsletters were a more popular option amongst people over 50 (56%). People speaking a Chinese language at home are more likely to want to receive information via social media, noticeboards in public places or their building, websites, at the local community centre or library and in local newspapers and businesses and less likely to want to receive this information via word of mouth than both people speaking English and those speaking other languages at home. These results indicate that a variety of communication methods will be needed to reach all groups. However social media, e-mailed community newsletters and websites are important sources of information.Implications for placemaking: The majority of residents (90%) agreed that the area is a good place to live. This proportion has changed little since the 2014 and 2017 surveys and did not change before and after the introduction of the Covid-19 restrictions. This suggests that a high level of satisfaction with the area. However, people felt more strongly connected to Australia, Sydney and the inner city and surrounds than to their local area, street or building. Respondents to the 2020 survey were less connected to the communities at different scales than in 2017, with the exception of the building scale. As there is a relationship between length of residence and community attachment, this likely reflects the high proportion of residents who have lived in the area for less than six years, but nevertheless suggests that there is potential for further community development at the local scale.Implications for land use planning: The things people most commonly said they disliked about the area related to the danger of overdevelopment and the impacts of construction on the area and its overall density. Many people were also concerned about heavy traffic (48%) and parking (31%). However, while improvements to traffic management and public transport were the most important improvements residents wanted to see in 2017 (mentioned by 49% and 50% of resident respectively), in 2020 they remained important (mentioned by 43% and 43% of residents respectively) but were no longer the most commonly mentioned improvement. This likely reflects the gradual maturity of Green Square as a neighbourhood, where most hard infrastructure is now in place. More than half (58%) of residents travel to work or study using public transport and almost half (47%) of people said they moved to the area because of the proximity to public transport, demonstrating the important role that public transport plays in the attractiveness of the area.Notably, improvements that residents wanted to see in the area differed between age groups with younger people more likely to desire a greater variety of cafes, restaurants and bars, evening activities and public transport that connects to more parts of the city, while older people were more likely to desire landscaping in streets and parks a greater variety of retail shops and improved traffic management.Implications for open space and public domain planning: Parks and public spaces are significant locations for social interaction in Green Square and heavily used by residents. After cafes and restaurants, local (79%) and regional (66%) parks were the most commonly used local facilities. This could influence local land use planning and infrastructure development in Green Square and in future urban renewal areas, as it indicates that parks are important in facilitating local social interaction. However, there remains an important role for more formal community facilities, especially for particular groups, demonstrated by the higher proportion of unemployed people making use of community centres (19%) compared to the population as a whole (10%).Implications for local business: The most common places where people socialise with others in Green Square is cafes, restaurants and/or pubs (52%) and incidental interaction also commonly occurs in these places (52%). Cafes and restaurants are also the most commonly used services and facilities (94% of residents). Such businesses are therefore playing an important social role in the area, and two-thirds of residents (65%) said that they would like to see a wider variety of cafes, restaurants and bars in the area in the future. This suggests that the ideal of mixed-use development encouraging greater social interaction is supported by the findings in this case and has implications for development application planners who are making decisions about new businesses in the area.