CLICK TO ENLARGE
The above screen dump is from Thursday’s Age newspaper and as stated is in response to a previous article written by the CEO of the Victorian Planning Authority. Please remember that the VPA is all about ‘development’. They are the government’s (of both persuasions) agency designed to achieve more and more development.
Putting this aside, it is a great pity that Tim Smith is more concerned with the simplistic solution of ‘decentralisation’ and pushing the Liberal agenda, than in really attacking the Mosely (VPA) argument. There is so much more he might have written. For starters, how about:
- Reforming the planning system from a ‘performance based’ formula to one that contains prescriptive controls and parameters?
- Reining in the powers of VCAT and councils?
- Ensuring that residents do not subsidise developers, as in Glen Eira when we have no Development Contributions Levy and no Infrastructure Levy and this council is happy to exact pittance from its major developments for open space (ie Caulfield and East Villages)?
- Ensuring that delegations at compulsory conferences are accountable to residents and councillors and do not simply cave in to developers.
- Ensuring that the planning system is far more transparent and accountable to residents
- That the ministerial intervention powers also be tightened and that full disclosure of department recommendations become public.
There is much that needs to happen before we have a planning system that works for residents and not developers. It’s just a pity that both sides of politics are so entrenched in their views that Mosely may just be right ie things will get worse and developers will continue to rule.
Glen Eira Debates 
July 26, 2019 at 3:38 PM
At least half right was a vast improvement on the opinions in the earlier piece by Moseley in the Age 23rd July. If, as Tim Smith states that improving infrastructure in regional towns could be achieved – or with reduced cost compared to retro-fitting Melbourne, then productive decentralization could be the saviour of regional communities (even regional footy teams are struggling to survive, today’s Age). Development in Melbourne is changing the suburban streetscape as never before
July 26, 2019 at 5:40 PM
Infrastructure isn’t enough. Jobs need creating and keeping the young in these centres. Then there’s decent hospitals, schools, and cheaper homes. It’s not all about roads and rail.
July 26, 2019 at 6:17 PM
Rarely discussed is the influence of donors to the major parties. If much of their re-election funds comes from the development industry, then politicians are obliged to deliver a return on that investment. The Age did lead its letters today with a sub-head “Densification on a developer-led basis” and a couple of letters skewered Mosely.
The whole planning system is uneconomic, with people who don’t benefit expected to subsidize the development industry, while infrastructure routinely has its capacity exceeded because there isn’t enough money and it is very expensive to retrofit, all while exceedingly poor value PPP financial arrangements are struck then kept secret under a cloak of Commercial-in-Confidence.
July 26, 2019 at 9:39 PM
Not a mention that most of this over-development is to accommodate guest workers, hoping to get the elusive prize of permanent residency. These poor second class residents are getting fleeced every inch of the way, having to enrolling in bogas educational courses to keep their visas in order. The Education sector is now our second biggest industry, just behind mining.
I believe as a society we are stuffed, we are cannibalising over a hundred years of built amenity, tolerance and a rational respect for law.
All constraints of how wealth in generated have been throw to the wind, and all wealth no matter how it’s come by, is now seen as good.
The new neo-conservative motto is “all wealth is good. The business of wealth generation should not be inhibited by moral restraint.
Our politician and CEO’s and civic leader personally demonstrate this to us on a daily basis.