submission to plan melbourne

submission to plan melbourne prepared by hansen partnership pty ltd december 2013

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd contents 1 introduction... 2 2 key issues facing melbourne... 3 3 activity centres and potential urban renewal areas... 4 4 20 minute neighbourhoods... 5 5 implementation... 6 6 conclusion... 7

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd 2 1 introduction hansen partnership is one of Australia s leading multidisciplinary planning and design consultancies, servicing the private and public sectors across Australia and internationally. Our expertise crosses a wide range of disciplines including urban planning, urban design and landscape architecture. Our team has extensive experience working on a variety of different strategic projects including master plans, housing strategies, growth area planning, character studies and planning policy amendments. It is with interest that we welcome the release of a new metropolitan strategy - Plan Melbourne - for Melbourne. Various staff in our firm have participated in the consultation process leading to the preparation of the new strategy. In particular, we commend the overall integrated approach to the planning of our great city, combining infrastructure and transport development and land use planning, with a strong focus on jobs and economic productivity, not just housing. The extension of the central city area, focus on employment clusters in key locations (and the connections between them), the principle of a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods, urban renewal areas, a State of cities, focus on the peri-urban areas and a metropolitan wide open space strategy all stand out as key drivers of a broad strategy. The principle of introducing of a Melbourne Planning Authority to oversee the implementation of Plan Melbourne, and the streamlining of the development approvals process in some areas has merit in theory. Whilst the Vision for Melbourne 2050 is concisely stated at the beginning of Plan Melbourne the disjointed nature of the detail and the failure to include a narrative which puts the new strategy in context, makes it confusing and difficult to understand. The purpose of the strategy and how are we going to get there is lost in the details and the inconsistent and conflicting language within it. The success of Plan Melbourne will fundamentally rely on the community accepting and taking ownership of the strategy together with strong leadership and commitment from government and businesses. It is unclear how this will be facilitated given the confusing detail and lack of clarity about what the plan is seeking to do. Our submission below seeks to draw attention to what we believe are some of Plan Melbourne's key areas of concern.

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd 3 2 key issues facing melbourne Melbourne 2030 (and subsequently Melbourne @ 5 Million) was based on implementing a cohesive set of policies collectively seeking to create a sustainable city. It defined the urban growth boundary around the metropolitan area and focused on urban consolidation in and around activity centres and areas close to public transport. Melbourne 2030 was concise and clear about what it wanted to do and how it was going to achieve its aims. It was one of the first planning strategies to bring to the forefront the fundamental importance of environmental sustainability and its role in the future liveability of our city. This focus is lost in Plan Melbourne or at least confused in the message Plan Melbourne is seeking to convey. The focus appears to have shifted to job and investment creation and protecting our suburbs. Whilst the focus on preventing inappropriate development and protecting our residential areas will be popular, it is irresponsible, negative in language and fails to acknowledge city policies which have been in place for over 30 years. Housing policies which have sought to gradually increase the intensity of what is a low density, unsustainable city. Plan Melbourne loses sight of the fact that there are many existing and emerging issues in metropolitan Melbourne and beyond, which if not identified and addressed in a positive manner, will threaten Melbourne s claim as one of the world s most liveable cities in the future. Some of these important issues that have not been properly addressed or simply underplayed in Plan Melbourne include: The lack of effective and frequent public transport to many middle and outer suburbs. Excessive commuter times are commonly experienced by residents in those areas, and the adverse impact of such on health and wellbeing. The growing socioeconomic disparity between the central and inner suburbs and the outer suburbs of Melbourne, which if not addressed, has the potential to lead to increasing social and community issues during the life of Plan Melbourne. Plan Melbourne is a lost opportunity in aggressively addressing these pressing issues which are, and will continue to affect, the liveability of our city. Recent population forecasting by the Bureau of Statistics indicates that Melbourne s population will continue to grow at a faster rate than previously anticipated. The consequences of continuing population growth at rates which exceed those underpinning housing directions and initiatives in Plan Melbourne are significant and must be addressed with regard to the provision of housing, housing affordability, transport and social and community infrastructure. The division of metropolitan Melbourne into five sub-regions for the coordination of regional based strategies with regards to housing is commended. However, in the absence of clear targets and guidelines, it is ill-defined how growth will be achieved equitably and sustainably in response to some of the issues raised above. Melbourne s extraordinarily low density. As a consequence, Melbourne suffers from high levels of traffic congestion, low levels of sustainability and experiences high costs of infrastructure provision, especially in relation to critical infrastructure such as public transport and community facilities like schools and hospitals in growth areas. An aging population and the trend towards smaller households. This is a common issue that has been occurring for decades and will continue to occur throughout the life of Plan Melbourne. It will persist in placing a demand for diversity in the types and sizes of households throughout much of Melbourne s residential areas. This will result in a level of change in existing residential areas that is likely to be circumvented by the Plan Melbourne initiative in relation to the application of neighbourhood residential zones. The unaffordability of housing. This is particularly important in the central city and inner suburbs, which are infrastructure rich with respect to public transport, jobs, community, social services and facilities.

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd 4 3 activity centres and potential urban renewal areas The downplaying of existing Neighbourhood Activity Centres in Plan Melbourne is a significant concern and has the potential to undermine the achievement of one of the strategy's key direction's, being a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods. hansen agrees with the view that there is great diversity in neighbourhood activity centres across metropolitan Melbourne, with respect to their size, heritage, access to public transport and the range of services and facilities they offer. In our opinion, these centres will and must play an important role if the concept of a 20 minute neighbourhood is to be truly realised in Plan Melbourne. Plan Melbourne directs residential growth within a very specific 400 metre distance from the boundary of commercial zones of Activity Centres (existing principal and Major Activity Centres), further restricting the existing 800 metre walkability guideline. The direction clearly conflicts with the lack of clear understanding of the appropriate or targeted application of the new residential zones. Much has been made of the application of the new residential zones in the City of Glen Eira (the locking up of 80% of its residential land in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone), which appears to contradict a number of directions and initiatives of Plan Melbourne. The focus on urban renewal sites (including transit-oriented development) as achieving many of the housing and job/economic investment initiatives is a positive direction of Plan Melbourne. However, the reliance on the potential urban renewal precincts close to rail and the lack of actual designation of sites and areas provides little confidence that these initiatives will be realised. Some clarity must be provided on the designation of urban renewal sites particularly in light of the restrictive manner in which the new residential zones are being implemented by many Councils, the downplaying of Neighbourhood Activity Centres in Plan Melbourne and additional limitations on residential growth around activity centres.

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd 5 4 20 minute neighbourhoods The principle of creating a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods is commended and can potentially make significant inroads in achieving healthy, safe and sustainable communities. However given the generally low density of residential development throughout our metropolitan area, particularly in the middle and outer suburbs, we are not confident that this direction can be achieved without a considerable level of change in residential densities within existing residential neighbourhoods and activity centres. The concept of a 20 minute neighbourhood requires successful and vibrant Neighbourhood Centres to be realised. Vibrant Neighbourhood Centres require a local population sufficient to generate a critical mass of spending and activity to support local businesses, local community services and facilities, public transport, and investment in improved walking and cycling infrastructure, public open spaces and other public domain improvements. There are fundamental policy contradictions within Plan Melbourne that will work against the achievement of a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods. For example the initiative of supporting local government to plan and manage their neighbourhoods, is appropriate in principle, except that it is linked to negative initiatives such as protecting Melbourne s Neighbourhood Centres, including provision for mandatory controls, rather than positive policies that seek to encourage an appropriate level of change in and around our Neighbourhood Activity Centres. For over 30 years Melbourne has had a suite of residential zones that has supported the gradual and incremental intensification of Melbourne s extremely low density residential suburbs. That policy approach has been very successful in accommodating a significant proportion of Melbourne s housing growth within established residential areas, not just the inner suburbs. To proceed with the locking out of at least half of Melbourne s residential zoned land from many forms of medium density housing is a retrospective step in the wrong direction that will take the strategic planning of this city back generations. The inclusion of the majority of residential zoned land in the suburbs is likely to make it virtually impossible to remove such a restriction in years to come, as it once again becomes apparent the Melbourne s residential areas need to continue an ongoing process of regeneration and intensification. Plan Melbourne should provide balanced policy directions and clarity regarding the application of the new residential zones, to ensure that the Neighbourhood Residential Zone is applied to unique residential areas only, together with greater guidance on the application of the Residential Growth and Residential General Zones. Plan Melbourne needs to highlight and emphasise that the inner and middle ring ( infrastructure rich ) suburbs of our city have a major role to play in the delivery of housing which is affordable, diverse, near jobs and social infrastructure and where people want to live or continue to live In addition to this, the stated action to deliver the Neighbourhood Residential Zone across at least 50 per cent of Melbourne s residential-zoned land. in the short term, demonstrates a conservative and prescriptive approach which in hansen's opinion, will significantly impact the opportunities for residential infill development throughout large areas of metropolitan Melbourne and the achievement of a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods. The strategic basis for this stated initiative is unknown or explained in Plan Melbourne. It corresponds to Initiative: 4.2.1, which seeks to Protect our unique neighbourhoods from residential densification (author s underlining). There is no strategic basis to explain or justify how and why at least half of Melbourne s residential-zoned land is considered to be unique. Recent experience of how some Councils are applying their new residential zones indicates that some Councils consider the vast majority of their residential zoned land to be unique enough to warrant the application of the most restrictive residential zone. This overly restrictive approach to the new residential zones is not in the overriding interest of achieving a sustainable city or a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods. It also has the potential to significantly impact on the supply and affordability of housing in established residential areas.

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd 6 5 implementation Plan Melbourne places an emphasis on governance, streamlining the development approvals process and better linking infrastructure provision to strategic planning initiatives. These are all welcomed initiatives and directions. The proposal to remove planning impediments from the delivery of not-forprofit community facilities is also welcomed. The introduction of a Melbourne Planning Authority to implement Plan Melbourne is commended. We note it has already been established, and see this as a positive indication of the Government s commitment to the new metropolitan strategy. In hansen's opinion, the successful implementation of PM will rely on the Melbourne Planning Authority being proactive and having the authority to make decisions on a range of matters, including development approvals in urban renewal areas, metropolitan Activity Centres and employment clusters and other key strategic precincts, sites and zones. The Melbourne Planning Authority ought to be providing local Councils with assistance and guidance in implementing the new residential zones in a manner which is consistent with and supportive of all the housing related directions in Plan Melbourne. Greater direction at State level is necessary to ensure the proper implementation of the new residential zones in the overriding interest of all of the metropolitan area, not just individual Councils. In general, Plan Melbourne contains a large number of initiatives but says little about how these will be delivered or implemented in an integrated way. Many of the initiatives in Plan Melbourne are focused on the clustering of activities, using terms such as 'metropolitan Activity Centres', 'national employment clusters', 'the expanded central city', 'state significant industrial precincts', 'health and education precincts and urban renewal sites including transit oriented development'. All of these initiatives will require significant funding and will compete with each other in terms of attracting State government funding of the infrastructure necessary to realise the ambitious aims of Plan Melbourne.

submission to plan melbourne hansen partnership pty ltd 7 6 conclusion Melbourne is identified as one of the world s most liveable cities. It is our responsibility to ensure that well considered, sensible and achievable strategies are in place to manage our city s growth in an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable way. Whilst many of the directions and initiatives of Plan Melbourne seek to do so, Plan Melbourne presents many lost opportunities in failing to adequately address the issues affecting the future growth of our city. The challenges arising from the key concerns require strong leadership and governance in implementing sometimes unpopular policies to ensure and protect Melbourne s liveability into the future. Plan Melbourne fails to provide the confidence that this will be achieved.