Bracks, the developers' friend
August 7, 2003
This Government, just like the last, likes flogging
public land for profit, writes Kenneth Davidson.
The Bracks Government is booting out the intellectually
disabled from the remnant of the grounds allocated at the bend of the Yarra in
Kew by an enlightened community in the 19th century for those needing asylum.
The Government denies the reason it is doing this is that
it wants to sell the remaining 27 hectares of Kew Cottages to developers. No,
the Government says it wants to integrate the remaining Kew cottagers into the
broader community.
But if the Government's prime concern was the disabled, it
would use the Kew land to build a mixture of community residential units (CRUs)
and collegiate accommodation, and thus reduce the backlog of nearly 2000
severely intellectually disabled whose family carers are desperate to find any
sort of government accommodation for their children.
But the government plan, involving the building of
expensive new CRUs elsewhere to rehouse the cottagers, ensures that nothing
will be done about the urgent waiting list until after the Kew site is cleared
for developers.
Already plans are afoot for a totally inappropriate
development based on the "urban design framework", with high-rise
apartments up to seven storeys. This was approved this week by Boroondara
Council, under pressure from the Bracks Government.
For this sort of development, the land could be worth $300
million. Whether all this would accrue to the Government is a moot point, given
the Bracks Government is apparently giving away 21 hectares of Royal Park for a
residential development under the guise of creating a Commonwealth Games
village.
The land to be given away is worth in the order of $250
million. According to the Commonwealth Games Planning Advisory Committee report
on the village, released this week, the "total development cost of $144.3
million will be offset by revenue from housing sales of approximately $58.9
million, leaving a net cost of $85.4 million. This amount of $85.4 million
includes $50 million in enduring public assets, including social housing and
environmental features."
Whichever way you look at it, an isolated development that
is going to generate so-far-unresolved social infrastructure costs (especially
related to transport), the alienation of parkland and the destruction of 1300
trees and at least two heritage buildings is doing absolutely nothing for the
environment.
I am sure that with $50 million it wouldn't take much
imagination to get more than the 100 units of social housing that are now
promised on this site. Indeed, I doubt that even these 100 units will ever
eventuate, simply because they would undermine the value of the intended yuppie
enclave.
What Commonwealth Games Minister Justin Madden has promised
so far is nothing more than a proposal, which can be changed as the political
and commercial climate dictates.
To take just one aspect: height restrictions. In a letter
to concerned citizens on September 16, 2002, the executive director of major
projects, James Cain, wrote on behalf of the minister, Peter Batchelor,
"the Government has made it clear that any future development of the site
will be required to restrict development to low to medium rise".
In October 2002 the winning design provided for
"mid-rise" apartment buildings of six storeys along the western
boundary of the site. By March 2003, the apartment design was amended to vary
the height along the western wall to up to nine storeys.
The issue of the maximum height of the development wasn't
discussed at the public inquiry. The final report recommended a modified master
plan for the site that was accepted by the interested councils on June 13. It
made no mention of increasing the height limit to 11 storeys.
The first intimation that three buildings would have 11
storeys is contained in Madden's press release this week that says "three
buildings will be 11 storeys to provide a counterpoint to the Melbourne
Gateway".
Where did this recommendation come from? What was it based
on? I can't find a reference to it in the 260-page report.
The only reference is in appendix Q, which is an
aide-memoire to the chairman of the advisory committee, Helen Gibson, from
Charter Keck Cramer, a firm that looked at the financing of the project. The
note said that, based on the documents sent to them on June 17 and their
meeting with the committee at the inquiry offices on June 20, "the
retention of the highest residential apartment, up to 11 storeys, at the
southern end... would, we consider, be commercially viable, taking advantage of
the excellent views to be obtained".
This suggests that, somewhere between June 13 and June 20,
a decision had been made to include one 11-storey apartment block. It also
suggests that somewhere between June 20 and August 5, when Madden produced his
press release, a decision was made to incorporate three 11-storey towers into
the development.
So Victorians are faced with a Government that hasn't got a
clue from month to month, or even week to week, what it is doing, and which is
simply being led by the nose by its developer mates.
Either that, or the whole inquiry and consultative process
has been a sham designed to exhaust committed Melburnians who are concerned
about the assault on public space for profit, and to convince the majority who
take only a cursory interest in the public debate that this is being done for
the best possible motives.
Kenneth Davidson is a staff columnist.
Email: kdlv@ozemail.com.au
This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/06/1060145722738.html