On Coburg 2020 and political opportunism

Mr CARLI (Brunswick) — I have great pleasure in rising in support of the Appropriation (2008/2009) Bill. I am particularly pleased that it continues the support the government has given to Melbourne 2030, to transit cities and to activity centres, and its real commitment to a more compact and sustainable city. That is something that we on this side of the house certainly share. We share the idea that the city of Melbourne has to become more compact and more sustainable and that we have to improve transport through the city. I must say that our announcements around activity centres in particular made following the budget have been greeted poorly by the shadow Minister for Planning, Mr Guy, a member for Northern Metropolitan Region in the other place, because the opposition does not believe in a more compact city. His suggestion was that one of the problems with the proposal was that it would mean more development in activity centres. That is exactly what we want — more development in activity centres. Of course we want more activities and more density. We want to develop those activity centres.

There is one that is particularly important to me, and also to the member for Pascoe Vale, and that is the Coburg activity centre, which was identified by the Minister for Planning in the other place as one of the principal activity centres that would be overseen by a special planning panel, a development assessment committee (DAC), that would be part of a whole of government approach to that principal activity centre. We would see an infrastructure plan where we would look at resolving local issues in partnership between local government and the state government, particularly some of the more difficult transport issues around that activity centre but also other areas where investment is needed to be to really get that principal activity centre happening.

We are talking about a major development. We are talking about 3000 extra housing units, we are talking about 4000 extra people, we are talking about more office space and we are talking about more commercial development. It is a very important component of Melbourne 2030, of which Coburg 2020 is an integral part. This government is getting on with the job, and certainly as far as Coburg is concerned it is providing a very good partnership. The council response was very positive. It put out a press release in which it said the state government plan had merit.

Mr Wynne — Is this Moreland?

Mr CARLI — Moreland City Council said that it had merit and that, if done correctly, it would be very welcome. We are all committed to making sure it is done correctly. Unfortunately the councillor for city development, Jo Connellan, a member of the Greens party, decided she was going to come out and criticise it. She says it would disengage residents. She began to make accusations that people would not be involved. But the community has been involved in the structure plan, and the council will determine the function and zoning of that activity centre. So the only thing that the DAC will do is facilitate the applications for development, and that is critical in this project.
It is probably more critical in Coburg 2020 than in any other principal activity centre in the city of Melbourne.
The reason for that is that most of the land that is available for development belongs to council, and it is not possible to be both the planner and the proponent. Council tends to be the developer. In fact it is seeking a private development partner to develop a massive amount of council land into this principal activity centre, and there is a clear conflict of interest if council intends to be the sole arbiter, the sole statutory planner for this development, and the council officers I have spoken to understand that. We have been talking about this very problem for a long period of time: how does the planning process ensures there is arm length decision making between proponent and planner?

The development assessment committee has two representatives from council, two representatives from the state government and an independent chair. That will give residents much more confidence in the process and will remove conflicts of interest. It will ensure that developments that occur in the Coburg activity centre are developments with which people in that community feel comfortable. The community will be involved in the structure planning, in the process of rezoning and in setting the performance criteria for a particular activity centre, but we have a planning authority, a DAC, that can make a decision and that is at arm length from the proponent and at arm length from the developer. I think everyone in council understands that bar the Greens party.

The Greens have decided they want to fight an issue of principle about this, but what they are creating is an enormous conflict of interest. They want the council to be the principal developer in that area. They want council to plan and decide where investment ought to go, but at the same time they want council to be the sole arbiter in terms of the planning authority. That is an enormous conflict of interest. It is impossible, in my view, to be both planner and proponent. We have a very good proposal. It works wonderfully in the Coburg activity centre, and the only people creating a fuss are members of the Greens party, who are trying to seize a political opportunity rather than getting on with the job of developing Coburg 2020.

I would like to go a little into what Coburg 2020 means. It is important that members of this house understand the importance of this development in the northern suburbs and how it will revitalise the environment. At the moment Coburg has a very ageing housing and shopping infrastructure. It was a product of the 1970s, when houses were knocked down and supermarkets were built. There is a massive amount of car parking and a massive amount of open space but very little else bar the supermarkets and a few shops. The intention is to revitalise that environment through a modern form of urban revitalisation, one that incorporates modern design, energy efficient architecture and engineering solutions to lay strong foundations for the future of Coburg and the northern suburbs.

That is a vision that we have worked on collectively at local government, state government and community level, and I must say that up to this point the Greens have agreed with our vision. They said, ‘Yes, we want a more compact city; we want to revitalise Coburg’. But what happens when we get to the point of saying, ‘How do we actually manage this development?’. The Greens want to cut the project drift. They do not want partnership with state government. They do not want us to have an infrastructure plan that we can share or to understand how state government decisions fit in with the development of that centre. They seem to want to go it alone. They want council to go it alone, to be the developer and to be the planning authority. That is a recipe for failure.

It should be very clear that we have a shared vision for Coburg 2020, or the Coburg initiative, as it is often called. It will generate thousands of jobs, it will produce future social and economic activity and it will provide a lot of housing. We estimate that close to $1 billion will be involved in the revitalisation of Coburg. We consider that an extra 3000 dwellings will fit into that area. We believe it will revitalise shopping along Sydney Road, Coburg. We believe it will provide great public spaces and areas of great opportunity and improve pedestrian linkages. We are interested in ensuring that there will be a level of affordable housing there. We want to work with the Minister for Housing, who is in the house at the moment; we want to work with the Minister for Public Transport; and we want to work with the Minister for Roads and Ports. We want to ensure that there is a whole of government approach to this incredibly important area of urban renewal.

As I said, this is a shared vision of mine, as the local member for Brunswick, and of the member for Pascoe Vale. This is a vision that will have an influence on both our electorates. We understand the importance of Melbourne 2030. We understand the importance of a more sustainable city. We want to get on with the job. We think we have been given the tools to get on with the job. We are very keen to work with Moreland council, and I think the majority of Moreland council is keen to work with the state government and its local MPs. But, as I said, there are those members of the Greens party in Moreland who would rather play politics with these important projects.

They are trying to turn an important project of urban renewal into an area of political conflict, to be able to attack the Victorian government and their state representatives.

Certainly I want to ensure my commitment is towards the realisation of the Coburg initiative — the realisation of a vision that we have been working towards for many years now. It is a vision that we believe fits with Melbourne 2030 and one that we believe produces an enormous improvement to the area. We have already seen a lot of redevelopment in that area. Lots of housing has been established on the site that was Pentridge Prison. We are now looking at commercial and office developments within that precinct. Council has made a fabulous amount of investment in its own infrastructure.

We are looking at new sporting and library facilities. We are looking at lot of public investment but more importantly, we are looking at the private investment of a lot of money in an area which is close to the city — I think only about 8 kilometres from the central business district. It is also close to Melbourne Airport. The area is served by regular train and tram services, and a new SmartBus service. Important road links are scattered through the area, which really is a transport hub with an enormous amount of promise.

I suspect there would be very few parts of Melbourne that have the opportunities that Coburg presents. We are particularly keen to get housing into the area. In the 1970s houses were bulldozed and a massive amount of car parking was built. We want to see some of that housing re established through denser housing centred around an important transport hub and an important area of economic activity which has offices as well as retail precincts, and which is really buzzing.

It still maintains the multicultural feel that is so characteristic of the Coburg area, which lends itself also to Moreland and Sydney Road. I should say that apart from Coburg being a principal activity centre, Sydney Road, Brunswick, constitutes part of a major activity centre for the City of Moreland. That, too, is an area where we envisage more economic and retail activity and also more housing. We subscribe to the idea that we should have a more compact and sustainable city in Melbourne, one that we can share a vision of.

To do that, we need the tools and mechanisms. We need to ensure there is a planning process that people have confidence in. The development advisory committee provides local confidence. It certainly ensures that council as a developer is also accountable and it does not try to be, as I said before, both planner and proponent. I think it is possibly the best model and to a certain extent it has got the council off the hook. Members of the council were looking at what mechanism would be appropriate, given the situation where so much of the land that is available now for development actually belongs to the council.

The Appropriation (2008/2009) Bill is a further commitment to Melbourne 2030. A number of projects, particularly transit cities, were funded in the budget. I certainly look forward to seeing projects that arise out of the Coburg activity centre being funded in future budgets to ensure that Coburg 2020 is truly realised.