Posted 16/7/08
The poet T S Eliot wrote “Twixt the conception and the creation falls the shadow”. The observation is apt in relation to Melbourne 2030. Released in 2002, Melbourne 2030 (‘the Plan’) has fermented much public debate and some vocal opposition. At the end of the first five years since its release, the questions must be asked, as the Plan requires: has progress been made, and what is there to show for it in terms of sustainable and appropriate development on the ground?
As part of the first five-yearly review of Melbourne 2030 we, as
a group of four independent experts (the Audit Expert Group or AEG), were asked
by the Minister for Planning to provide advice on strategic and implementation priorities
for the next five years. This includes identifying where there is a need to refine
policy and implementation initiatives to enhance Melbourne’s liveability.
Melbourne 2030’s underlying aims are to establish a more sustainable, equitable,
prosperous and accessible city for current and future generations.
One of the principal ways of doing this is through urban consolidation, or reducing urban sprawl. Inherent in the Plan are measures to maximise the use of existing infrastructure, increase the efficiency of the transport system, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, expand housing choice, maintain neighbourhood amenity, balance the locations of jobs and housing, and preserve green space and agricultural opportunities surrounding the city.
We are convinced that the fundamental principles of Melbourne 2030 are more relevant than ever. This is because of the challenges posed by climate change, traffic congestion, the faster than expected growth of Melbourne’s population, and the fact that Melbourne is still an extremely spread-out city.
Compared to five years ago, there is now an even greater urgency to implement the many initiatives of Melbourne 2030 if Melbourne’s development is to be sustainable and the city is to remain liveable.
While we discovered strong support from many stakeholders for the
fundamental principles of Melbourne 2030, we also heard considerable
criticism of the Plan and its implementation. We found this a little surprising
since, in our view, there is nothing revolutionary about Melbourne 2030: it is basically
a restatement of planning approaches that have enjoyed general acceptance, in Victoria
and internationally, for the past 40 years.
The concerns expressed relate to several issues. Melbourne 2030 is seen by many as a plan imposed from above, with a resultant lack of community ownership. Others view it as a symbol of changes that have the potential to destroy the character of their neighbourhoods. Some tensions are evident between State Government, the proponent of the policy, and local government, which has a crucial role in its implementation.
Other criticisms relate to the lack of dedicated funding mechanisms and apparent failure of ‘whole of Victorian Government’ commitment to the Plan. We have concluded that some of the negative views have a degree of validity, and we have suggested ways in which these matters can be addressed. Other criticisms we consider to be overstated or misguided (what we describe in the report as ‘myths’).
We found there to be sound evidence of progress towards implementation of many of Melbourne 2030’s initiatives. However, this progress relates mainly to more planning and investigation. While we recognise that detailed planning is a necessary prelude to actual ‘bricks and mortar’ and new infrastructure provision, the Plan’s ultimate contribution to a more sustainable Melbourne will not be measured by the completion of more plans.
Our view is that there are three essential issues that can and must be resolved for Melbourne 2030 to be successfully implemented:
The first is clarity of responsibility – who has overall responsibility for the Plan’s implementation? Effective and full implementation of the Plan requires allocation of responsibility for coordinating its implementation and clear understanding and commitment to the Plan by the ‘whole of Victorian Government’ at the most senior levels.
The second is the need for adequate resources to be allocated to implement the Plan. Without adequate funding and expertise those charged with the responsibility of implementing the Plan and constructing the infrastructure it requires will be seriously impeded.
The third is the creation of broad-based support for the Plan’s Directions. Without support from all stakeholders, particularly local communities and local government (which must play a significant role in implementation), the objectives of the Plan will not be fully achieved. One such approach would be to distil the Directions of Melbourne 2030 to five core topics, which emphasise the fundamental objectives of a Plan that could be called, more informatively, ‘Sustainable Melbourne’. We discuss this idea in more detail below.
We cannot see the Plan being effectively implemented unless these
three overriding imperatives are understood, accepted and addressed. The State
Government’s Meeting Our Transport Challenges spells out planning and resources
for the next 25 years. We see this as the start of a trend
that must continue, marking the beginning of serious, long-term (30–50 years and
sometimes longer) planning and resource allocation for the infrastructure to support
Melbourne’s growth.
Similarly, the publication A plan for Melbourne’s growth areas sets out the scale and nature of funding required for growth area development and records the State Government’s commitments. This is a positive step, but we stress the need to ensure that the necessary investments are made in a timely manner.
We have made a number of recommendations in this report in responding to our Terms of Reference.
The most important of these are as follows:
The three imperatives:
Our other recommendations include:
Managing growth by:
Planning and implementing public transport services as an essential part of land use.
Developing a stronger planning framework for regional towns and cities, to enhance their vitality and sustainability, while relieving pressure on metropolitan Melbourne.
Engaging communities by:
Enhancing liveability and sustainability by:
The report
Our report has two main sections. The introductory section covers the process of the Audit and then focuses on ‘What we’ve done and what we’ve learned’. It summarises the considerable range and amount of feedback we received. The second section, ‘The way forward’, presents the context for future action by expanding on the three overriding imperatives – set out above – that we feel must be implemented if Melbourne 2030 is to achieve its objectives.
The report then considers in more detail key aspects of Melbourne 2030, namely: better management of growth (economy and employment, central and inner Melbourne, activity centres, established suburbs, Growth Area planning, managing the Urban Growth Boundary and developing networks with regional cities); transport; environmental sustainability; affordable housing; and monitoring. Given our mandate and the time available we are unable to cover all the 226 initiatives of Melbourne 2030 or all the issues brought forward to us through the submission and interview process. We have deliberately chosen to focus on the key issues we believe are ESSENTIAL to the implementation of the Plan.
It is our view that Melbourne 2030 has not failed, nor is there
anything fundamentally wrong with its underlying principles. Simply put, it has
yet
to be fully implemented. This is partly a matter of time and partly a question of
the need for better understanding and more commitment. We have the Plan. We
have the objectives. The task is to translate the words into action. One might well
heed the words of the great Hawthorn football coach John Kennedy: “Don’t think –
just do”.