SUBMISSION on proposed Urban Growth Boundary Changes – Melbourne@5 Million

 

Areas for investigation the Government has identified have NO STRATEGIC BASIS and are based on flawed policy and beliefs. The majority of these areas are inappropriate for urban development as were many of areas on the outskirts of Melbourne that were devastated this month by bushfires. Numerous consultation and community submissions (including from the Green Wedges Coalition) over recent years have provided the Government with more than enough information to understand the benefits and needs of the Green Wedges, suggesting that this current exercise is merely a political move to grab more land for developers and that any “consultation” will be nothing more than lip-service.

 

The Calder Highway to Sunbury was not supposed to be a growth corridor and the Green Wedges Coalition and SMVGWD had guarantees from Ministers Delahunty, Hulls and Madden that this would not eventuate. Now Minister Madden is breaking his word on this specific issue and on his undertaking not to undermine any of the gains achieved by his predecessors.

 

Hume City Council strategy plans to ensure the rural outlook surrounding Sunbury is maintained, and recent studies have shown that there is ample in-fill and greenfield land within the current Sunbury UGB to cope with predicted growth for the next 30 years. As recently as last November the Government said the Urban Growth Boundary around Sunbury would not move and that further urban development around Diggers Rest would not be permitted[1]…

 

Yet this new State Government proposal to expand the UGB in large areas to the West and North of Melbourne effectively closes the gap between Craigieburn and Werribee, creating one monster urban jungle. Much of the western plains grasslands and other environmentally significant areas are contained in these areas where urban development has been proposed. Many significant Aboriginal and European Cultural sites also exist in these areas…though for how much longer? The residents of the north-west and west of Melbourne DO NOT want to live in an urban jungle. 

 

It is time the government responded to the communities’ questions:

1.      Can we sustain such growth in some areas due to water availability and other environmental constraints?

2.      Can we sustain such growth when current infrastructure cannot cope with existing population demands, specifically public transport, roads, electricity, gas and water supply?

3.      Why isn’t there a population policy for Melbourne that limits growth? (Melbournians do not want to lose the character and open spaces of their city to become a huge metropolis like Sydney).

4.      Why do we have to keep making submissions about what we value about the green wedges, what needs to be protected and how best to go about providing controls and protection – do you not read or listen? All previous SCS submissions and Green Wedges Coalition submissions to your government have made clear statements on all these issues, specifically that, “THE UGB MUST REMAIN FIXED – AT LEAST UNTIL 2030”.

5.      How can Melbourne Airport maintain it’s “Curfew free” status if urban development is allowed to expand in the Sunbury Green Wedge, specifically around Sunbury and Diggers Rest where Overlays currently exist?

6.      Does this Government value Melbourne Airport’s “Curfew free” status?

7.      Will the Government give meaning to its environmental and heritage policies by keeping the UGB where it is and ensuring it stays there for at least the next 30 years?

8.      History shows us that strong housing growth as we have seen in Melbourne over the last 5 years DOES NOT equal strong economic growth. Too many other factors influence the economic health of the State. Indeed, the housing boom, fuelled by people being encouraged by financial institutions to spend more than they could afford on housing, has contributed largely to the current Global Financial Crisis in its heartland USA and it seems in Australia. Why then does the Government continue to use this rational for justifying continued encouragement of population and housing growth?

9.      What is the justification for providing vast new green field land at the expense of the green wedges, with no consideration of the ecological footprint, environmental and heritage significance and no genuine attempts at sustainable housing or development by controlling densities, etc?

 

 

This is a brief submission as it appears fruitless to continue to make comprehensive detailed submissions that the Government consistently ignores.

 

 

Increased densities and other mechanisms can and should be adopted to cope with any predicted growth.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Arnie Azaris

President, Sunbury Maribyrnong Valley Green Wedge Defenders,

(SMVGWD belongs to the Green Wedges Coalition)

 

Attached: Letter from Minister Madden to GWC dated 18.8.2008

---