Opinion Editorials and Articles
The Age Editorial 1 June
MELBURNIANS have been complaining that the city’s planning processes are inadequate since the earliest days of settlement. In 1850 a critic of Robert Hoddle’s grid layout for the city objected that it ignored the physical realities of the site (Elizabeth Street apparently followed a gully prone to flooding). And the planning battle has expanded along with the city that spawned it, with disputes taking place not only between the several municipalities that make up greater Melbourne and their residents, but between local councils and planning ministers, and sometimes between councils themselves. The Committee for Melbourne, an advocacy group of which The Age is a member, is not the first organisation with an interest in urban planning to argue that the presence of too many contending voices makes it all the harder to achieve a unified vision for the metropolitan region.
In a report launched last night, the committee calls for the establishment of a citywide planning authority that would be responsible for some of the decisions now made by individual councils. The proposal has predictably annoyed the Municipal Association of Victoria, which argues – not too persuasively – that councils already have sufficient co-operation across municipal boundaries. More importantly, however, the report leaves open the crucial question of what form the new authority would take. A bureaucratic body, such as the former Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works? A Minister for Melbourne? Or a Greater Melbourne Council?
The Age believes that any planning structure that does not allow for democratic accountability would almost certainly be rejected by the great majority of Melburnians. That excludes a reborn board of works or, even worse, a Melbourne minister, which would amount to leaving all decisions to the discretion of the government of the day. There is a case, however, for the creation of an authority on the model of Brisbane City Council, a representative body that administers its entire metropolitan area.
Brisbane’s council is the most powerful and most politically influential local authority in Australia, which is why neither Victoria’s government nor its alternative government is likely to want to create its equivalent here. Successive state governments have preferred the system of many weaker councils, with the weakest of all being the Melbourne City Council, which is so often overriden by the Planning Minister. The Committee for Melbourne’s call for a single authority makes good sense, but the challenge is to devise one with democratic credibility.
The Age
JASON DOWLING
May 31, 2010
COUNCILS could lose some of their planning powers to a city-wide planning authority, under one of several proposals from an influential business think tank.
The Committee for Melbourne, of which The Age is a member, has released the first of a series of reports on planning Melbourne’s future that argues a long-term vision must address the ‘'ultimate land size and physical shape of our city’‘.
The report, to be launched tonight, calls for community debate on a new ‘'governance structure’‘ for planning, and questions the role of councils in planning.
It argues local councils, elected by local constituents, are not well positioned to deliver strategic planning policy in the best interest of the whole of Melbourne: ‘'The job of the mayor and councillors of local government councils is to service their local community, not greater Melbourne. It is impossible therefore, to expect the greater good of metropolitan Melbourne to be served by this tier of government, particularly for a city growing well beyond 5 million,’‘ the report notes.
Municipal Association of Victoria president Bill McArthur said the committee’s finding was a ‘'simplistic view, far removed from reality’‘.
‘'Councils have extensive and long-established mechanisms to collaborate across municipal boundaries,’‘ he said.
The report calls for community debate on new governance arrangements for planning. ‘'We believe that before a structure can be proposed (be it a Greater Melbourne Council, a Minister for Melbourne, a non-political authority such as the old Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, a refinement of the status quo, or a completely new system), the community must first come together to debate the problems and agree on … a new model for governance’‘.
The report includes contributions from the state planning and transport departments, as well as the Growth Areas Authority. Arguing that it is inevitable that Melbourne will continue to grow, the report calls for an agreed vision for Melbourne, including on the size of the city and suburban housing density.
The report comes as State Parliament prepares to expand Melbourne by 43,600 hectares in response to rapid population growth – the latest expansion of the urban growth ‘'boundary’‘, first set in 2003. Geographically, Melbourne is one of the world’s biggest cities, stretching 100 kilometres east to west.
The chief executive of the Committee for Melbourne, Andrew MacLeod, denied the the committee was suggesting sidelining councils on planning.
‘'No, what we are saying is there needs to be a visionary planning and implementation mechanism, but we are not going out to say what that mechanism should be,’‘ he said.
On Thursday, The Age will hold a forum as a part of its Project Melbourne series on planning Melbourne’s future. The forum, between 10 and 11.30am, will be streamed live on theage.com.au
Andrew MacLeod was appointed Chief Executive Officer in late 2009 of the Committee for Melbourne and is also a resident of Docklands.
The Committee for Melbourne (CFM) is an organisation that is 100% private sector- funded whose broad aim is to promote Melbourne across all facets and to work for the ‘social good of Melbourne to ensure Melbourne’s liveability and economic prosperity’. The CFM was behind the Docklands redevelopment initiative.
Andrew has had an extensive and diverse career to date in leadership roles in the business and public sectors, including the Australian Army, a brief stint as Political and Policy Advisor for the Victorian Government and posts with the International Committee of the Red Cross in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, as well as with the U.N. co-ordinating massive earthquake relief in Kashmir and in the Philippines assisting with typhoon relief and recovery.
Andrew possesses the ability to think outside the square and brings many interesting observations to the discussion about Docklands from both perspectives as a resident and as CEO for the CFM.
According to Andrew, the success of the Docklands is important for the future of Melbourne; the Docklands redevelopment will serve as an important experiment into residential options and planning for a new style of urban living for Melbourne into the future. Andrew adds that a brutally honest approach to Docklands is necessary to explore what so far has worked and what
hasn’t, and why.
Docklands is an easy place to live for Andrew, with access to his CBD workplace only minutes away, saving hours of travel time over the working week. It’s also a short walk to many major attractions and it is one of the few places you can live in Melbourne without owning car.
Andrew notes the absence of children in Docklands adding that families don’t traditionally choose to reside in apartments. “Given that prices generally start at $500,000 for a small two bedroom apartment, those who can afford to live in Docklands would also have the option of living in the suburbs albeit with a garden.
Visitors, students, empty nesters and committed DINKS (dual-income-no-kids) are more suited to Docklands living generally.“The demographics make it unreasonable to expect Docklands to be a ‘community’ or village like other areas of Melbourne. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. As our city grows and global workforces become more mobile, and jobs more temporary, having an urban area designed for this fluid market is not bad, just different,” says Andrew.
Attracting people to Docklands is imperative for growth and deciding how best to do this has different aspects. Primarily, defining the comparative advantage to visit Docklands over another area of Melbourne is key. Is it lifestyle, shopping, dining and attractions or to visit a part of Melbourne that is unique?
In Andrew’s opinion the successful redevelopment of Harbour Esplanade will have a critical effect on Docklands in its ability to draw visitors to Melbourne’s
own waterfront area. It needs to have grass and trees and be vibrant, no other major city in the world has grass on the waterfront.
Docklands has to also overcome the barrier of perception that accessing Docklands is difficult – many Melbournians will happily leave the car at home for a trip into the CBD but feel they have to drive here. Identifying what will challenge visitors to overcome their preconceived perceptions about Docklands is important, perhaps it will be football, major Melbourne festivals and events, a shopping and entertainment precinct, perhaps to enjoy Melbourne’s own waterfront oasis.
Andrew would also like to see the creation of a waterborne public transport system, utilising the Yarra and incorporating water, bus, tram and train networks into the MYKI system, including a Docklands to Fishermans Bend to Spotswood and back to Docklands route as well.
As Andrew said, there is no silver bullet answer for Docklands but there are many positives and great things ahead, Docklands is different to other parts of Melbourne and that doesn’t make it bad or Melbourne’s black sheep, but rather should be welcomed as ‘a newcomer to our culture, offering new opportunities, in a sense , an architectural new Australian’ as Andrew puts it.
Andrew urges Docklands based business to become involved with the Committee for Melbourne.
Via 3008docklands.com.au
The Committee for Melbourne will promote a vision for Melbourne with eight million. If they are right, where do those people go? Will we have many more Docklands? Will we see Fisherman’s Bend as a new residential heartland?
In recent debates many people have argued that Melbourne will have a larger population. These discussions have become bogged down in a debate about numbers. The truth is that the number isn’t the debate nor is the time frame. The debate is about the Vision.
The Committee for Melbourne believes that one day Melbourne will have eight million inhabitants and that Melbourne could be a better place, or a worse place, as a result of the growth – depending on how well that increased population is planned.
We estimate that the eight million mark will be passed around 2060, as 50 years ago our population was around half that of now, and fifty years from now it should be around double. Changes in population policy may bring the date forward a bit, or set it back a bit so arguing an exact date is fruitless. Regardless of the exact time, one day in our children’s life time, the eight million mark will be reached.
When it is, how will our city look?
Many issues will need to be planned and resolved if Melbourne at eight million is to maintain its status as one of the World’s Most Liveable Cities. We will need a vision for our future, much as Hoddle had a vision when he planned the CBD grid. Our vision will need to be equally as broad ranged as Hoddle’s.
One of the many questions that we face in visioning Melbourne is: Where will all these people live?
Many people have a view on Docklands, some positive and some negative, but does the Docklands development provide us some lessons in determining how we plan, and where we plan, future growth?
Take Fisherman’s Bend for example. Surely we could extend Docklands all through there?
Fisherman’s Bend, the area separating the south bank of the Yarra from Port Melbourne is, when looking only at the map, ideally placed for residential development. Tell me Web Dock would not be a great place to live, surrounded on three sides by water?
Currently it is a giant car park.
Closer to the CBD than St. Kilda, potentially more accessible than Footscray, surrounded by great suburban locations, yet Fisherman’s Bend is made up of light industrial lands.
There are reasons for this. Some industries went in back in the days when Fisherman’s Bend was to be Melbourne’s airport. Some industry is there to service the Port. Some industry is there as the Garden City area of Port Melbourne, where I did a paper round as a kid, was envisaged as a cheap dormitory area for the industrial workers. Now the prices have gone up and many of those working in Fisherman’s Bend have long commutes.
The vision of close housing and work no longer applies, due to changes in area based demographics.
However, major decisions need to be made before Fisherman’s Bend could be a great new Docklands.
Where would the Industry such as Holden go? How could we cost effectively move the different industries and employers without risking jobs and production? How would we clean up the contaminated land and who would pay for it? Where would you put the Port?
Clearly, if we take a short and a medium term vision, say five to 20 years, the cost effectiveness of a conversion of Fisherman’s Bend would not stack up. We would leave it as an industrial area and try to find other interim solutions for a growing population.
But what of the longer term vision? What of Melbourne at eight million?
When planning a major city, or the significant growth of a major city, a long term comprehensive vision is surely more likely to lead to a better city, than short term ad-hoc responses, or medium term incremental changes.
We do not argue that Fisherman’s Bend could provide the entire solution, or only solution, to a growing Melbourne. Nor does the Committee for Melbourne put forward the view that Fisherman’s Bend must become residential.
Our point is more subtle than that. Our point is that many other growth options open up, many other solutions can be found, when a long term visionary approach is taken to planning Melbourne. Short and medium term plans don’t give us exciting options for moving forward, geographically, economically, culturally and socially.
In a series of Shaping Melbourne Reports, the Committee for Melbourne this year will engage the community to look more at Density, Infrastructure , Community and Governance and will ask us all to look at the vision.
Above all our series of reports will call upon all of us Melbournians to engage in that ‘Vision thing’. If we get the vision right, we get the city right. If we don’t get the vision right then we get whatever just happens to come to pass.
Our architectural new kid on the block is incredibly easy to live in.
WHEN I left Melbourne some years ago to live overseas, Docklands was an idea, not a reality. Back then, genuinely urban living was just being tested in Melbourne. Though familiar in other higher-density cities, life in an apartment was not the norm here.
I wondered how the new development on the western edge of the city would fit into what I think of as Melbourne’s ‘'city of villages’‘.
Now I’ve returned home and have set out to test Docklands by taking an apartment there.
The verdict? Three things stand out. First, the absence of children. Most Melburnians do not bring up families in apartment blocks. There are some exceptions with public housing and a few small, inner-city art-deco-style blocks such as the one I spent some of my school years in. But when they decide to have children, Melburnians generally aspire to a house with at least some garden.
Given that prices in Docklands start from about $500,000 for a small two-bedroom apartment, those who can afford to live there would also have the option of living in the suburbs, which explains why the children are missing. Perhaps this is why there is no school in Docklands.
So who would live there? The answer seems to be visitors and students, temporary contractors, some empty nesters and some committed dinks – those who meet the dual-income-no-kids criteria.
None that I have spoken to perceive Docklands to be their permanent home. It’s no Hawthorn, Albert Park or Craigieburn.
The demographics make it unreasonable to expect Docklands to be a ‘'community’‘ or village like other areas of Melbourne. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. As our city grows and global workforces become more mobile, and jobs more temporary, having an urban area designed for this fluid market is not bad, just different.
The second issue relates to accessibility. Many people have told me that the Docklands area seems isolated. I am struggling to understand why they say this. My new home is a five-minute walk from South Melbourne’s Clarendon Street shops. There are city tram services and a direct tram to the MCG.
Docklands seems to suffer from people’s ideas of the city as it was in the past. People may see Flinders Street as a City Loop connection, but forget that on Melbourne’s western edge, Southern Cross Station offers connections through the city, as well as to the suburbs and regional areas.
Spencer Street seems to be a mental border, and its potential for integrating the city into southern suburbs, and possibly one day into Footscray, has not been well enough made.
So while we may accept the demographics of Docklands as new, and can work on the accessibility issues, a third issue raises its head.
I was surprised to find that Docklands is windy, very windy. I don’t know why – one day I will buttonhole a weatherman and ask. But the problem is not why it is windy, the problem is that it just is.
How can we make a promenade area work, with outdoor cafes and pleasant walks, when the wind threatens to cool your coffee too fast, blow your napkin into your food and make conversation difficult?
This will be an architectural challenge as, unless climate change does it for us, I have no idea how we can make the wind go away.
That Docklands is no village is not a bad thing. It is incredibly easy to live in, it makes access to a CBD workplace simple, it is but a short walk from many major attractions and it is one of the few places in Melbourne where you can live without owning a car.
It may have accessibility issues and its windy nature is a challenge, yet it will service a segment of the population well.
In the end this area is different to the rest of Melbourne. Rather than seeing it as a black sheep, or as the new kid in school who is traditionally picked on, let’s welcome it as the newcomer to our culture, offering new opportunities. It is, in a sense, an architectural ‘'new Australian’‘.
Melburnians should explore the area and absorb what it has to offer. Like the new cultures and nationalities making a home in Melbourne, Docklands offers unfamiliar things.
Explore it and embrace it, just don’t expect it to be something it isn’t.
Andrew MacLeod is chief executive of the Committee for Melbourne.
Capping off a good year Andrew MacLeod began as the new chief executive of the Committee for Melbourne on January 4, replacing Sally Capp, who becomes Victoria’s agentgeneral in London. The committee is made up of 170 members, including ANZ bank, Australia Post, BHP Billiton, the City of Melbourne and the State Government and MacLeod’s aim at the committee will be to develop ideas to maintain Melbourne’s liveability and economic prosperity.
Postgraduate students are measuring the carbon footprint of Melbourne’s Royal Botanic Gardens as part of a high-level work placement program designed to generate novel business solutions to enhance Victoria’s economy.
The Melbourne Business Practicum is a partnership between the University of Melbourne and the Committee for Melbourne, a network of leaders drawn from the city’s major companies and organisations.
Four students from the university’s business and economics faculty are taking part in the Botanic Gardens practicum and there are other projects already on the drawing board.
The idea is to have a team of postgraduate students from a variety of business disciplines come together to work on a problem during a 10-day work placement.
In the case of the Botanic Gardens, the aim is to produce an environmental accounting model that might then be applied to other gardens around the world.
Supervising the project is associate professor Brad Potter from the Graduate School of Business, who said the model would combine cutting-edge science, accounting and environmental management practise.
“The students will also be able to draw on the extensive archives at the Royal Botanic Gardens and the considerable expertise of the garden’s staff,” Professor Potter said. The Committee for Melbourne has 170 members who work together to enhance the city’s “liveability and economic prosperity”.
The practicum concept was developed by the Committee’s Higher Education Taskforce.
“A priority identified by [the taskforce] is the need for greater integration between our university and business sectors,” said David Miles, who chairs the government advisory body Innovation Australia and co-chairs the taskforce.
“The practicum also provides an opportunity for highly-skilled international students to gain greater exposure to Australian business culture, which is especially important if they are considering making Australia their permanent home.”
The next project will focus on urban development.
Students will examine the regulation, taxation, cost frameworks and other incentives associated with commercial and housing developments in Australian cities.
The team will be hosted by public policy think tank, the Grattan Institute, and their findings will be used to make recommendations on how market design can encourage commercial and housing development that matched local needs.
Agnes Banyasz, the manager of the university’s Business and Economics Careers Centre, said the practicums would enhance the work of local businesses while giving students hands-on experience.
“Corporate partners only have to provide space for the students and a commitment that the senior staff from the organisation will listen to the students’ presentation at the end of the 10 days,” she said.
The local practicum series is modelled on an international work placement program developed by the careers centre.
Ms Banyasz said almost 100 students had visited countries such as China and Singapore in the two years since the program began.
The program is run during university holidays every February and July.
For the students working on the Botanic Gardens project, plants and trees will pose the greatest challenge when it comes to measuring carbon, Professor Potter said.
“All plants have different carbon absorption characteristics and efficiencies depending on their age – a young tree is much more efficient in carbon offset than an established tree.”
By Joanna Mather, Education reporter
HIS old boss, former deputy premier John Thwaites, describes him as “a doer”, and a quick glance at the CV of the new chief executive of the Committee for Melbourne shows the description is deserved.
Andrew MacLeod will begin his new role on January 4, replacing Sally Capp, who will become Victoria’s agent-general in London.
The 43-year-old has squeezed plenty into his professional life: a lawyer, an army reservist, work with the International Committee at the Red Cross in Yugoslavia and Rwanda, work with the UN in disaster relief in Pakistan and typhoon relief in the Philippines, adviser to Mr Thwaites, business consultant and Labor Party candidate.
Mr MacLeod said yesterday his aim at the committee – which is made up of 170 members, including the ANZ Bank, Australia Post, BHP Billiton, the City of Melbourne and the State Government – was to develop ideas to maintain Melbourne’s liveability and economic prosperity.
“The challenges that continue to confront Melbourne are big,” he said. “As our population grows we have got to look at issues like what the footprint of Melbourne is, and what the population density of Melbourne is, and how we balance those off.
“Melbourne is approximately the third largest city in world by size and we are looking at doubling our population over the next 20 years or so if demographers are to be believed. now you can’t double the footprint of Melbourne.”
Mr MacLeod said the private sector had a big role in shaping the future of Melbourne – especially where jobs were located, which would affect residential developments and public transport.
It is not just professional challenges that have drawn Mr Macleod back to Melbourne – he is also looking to settle down and have a family.
“The work that I have been doing in disaster zones and horror places of the world means you don’t meet someone that you are going to settle down with, and at 43, either I came home now or I wasn’t going to come home until I was 50, and would have missed the opportunity of family and kids.”
For now, Mr MacLeod is looking forward to his new role and said he would not be afraid to consult Ms Capp.
“Sally and I were actually in the nippers together at the Point Lonsdale Surf Life Saving Club when we were kids, so we have known each other a long, long time, which has made the handover a lot easier.”
He said that while he was a member of the ALP, his position at the committee was not political, and he was keen to work with Melbourne’s Lord Mayor and former state Liberal leader Robert Doyle.
“I am looking forward to working with Robert Doyle, in many ways Robert Doyle is the Boris Johnson [London’s Tory mayor] of Melbourne.”
by Jason Dowling, City Editor
COMMITTEE for Melbourne chief executive Sally Capp has won the prize job of Victoria's Agent-General in London.
Ms Capp, 42, a former solicitor and banker, becomes the first woman to be appointed to the role, established in the 1860s.
She said last night that her focus would be on boosting trade and investment in Victoria, and she looked forward to''leveraging'' the contacts and knowledge she had built up in her business career and during her two years as head of the Committee for Melbourne.
''My role at the Committee for Melbourne has made me very aware of the Victorian Government's priorities, but more than that, the priorities of the wider community,'' Ms Capp told The Age.
''It's a very critical time in our history, because we are going through such major population growth, which crystallises many of the urban challenges we have - not the least of which is jobs.''
Ms Capp will take up her new post before the end of the year, accompanied by husband Andrew Sutherland and their two sons.
She replaces David Buckingham, who is returning to Melbourne after nearly six years as Victoria's representative in Britain.
Ms Capp said the hardest thing about leaving Melbourne would be being away from the Collingwood Football Club, of which she is a board member.
''We're really well positioned, and it's tearing at my heart strings,'' she said. ''I'll be finding the closest pub that shows the games live.''
Premier John Brumby yesterday also announced new appointments to Victoria's trade and business offices in the boom economies of India and China.
Melbourne Airport executive Geoffrey Conaghan will become Commissioner for Victoria in Bangalore, India, and Qantas manager Patrick Stringer will take charge of the state's business office in Shanghai, China.
Mr Brumby said Victoria's 12 overseas business offices had helped generate $1.4 billion of investment in the state economy in the past financial year, including the new Costco store at Docklands, the Toyota Hybrid Camry project and Acciona's $400 million wind farm at Waubra near Ballarat.
''The new commissioners will help to reap further rewards for the Victorian economy, helping to attract investment, jobs and visitors,'' he said.
Written by Paul Austin.
