ShapingSEQ: Sustainable Futures for 2041 and Beyond?

The AIM Network

8 years ago

By Denis Bright

Time alone will fully test the capacity of the South East Queensland Regional Growth Plan (2016-41) (ShapingSEQ) to deliver sustainable urban and regional development.

At stake are the challenges of improving the quality of life of an additional 2 million people in SEQ by 2041. The regional population is projected to increase to 5.35 million in the next 25 years and to 6 million in 2050 and 7.2 million in 2061.

ShapingSEQ is steered by a pragmatic balance between broad policy priorities with a significant delivery of commercial and residential growth by market forces. Market Led Proposals (MLPs) are still the flavour of the year in Qld Treasury for the delivery of some infrastructure and economic development agendas.

ShapingSEQ will take up this challenge by administrative consensus-building between seven core state government departments and twelve regional local authorities across South East Queensland (SEQ).

Despite colourful pro-infrastructure rhetoric from Prime Minister Turnbull, the federal government is currently making only a token financial contribution to assist the SEQ Regional Planning Committee.

In this era of federal financial austerity, big ticket economic development and infrastructure items are being delivered through the more meagre resources of state and local governments in this and other target regions across Australia.

Concentrating the development of new housing, employment and community services near existing and projected transport corridors is of course a welcome feature of Transport Oriented Development mechanisms (ToDs).

Evaluation of the effectiveness of new public transport initiatives is crucial to balance five priority themes for the attainment of the 50 year vision which underlies ShapingSEQ.

A cautious incremental to the provision of transport infrastructure comes from Q Treasury guidelines. The use of public transport is expected to double to 14 per cent of total trips in 2031. SEQ will remain a largely dependent new motorways to the cheers of aspiring LNP representatives at state and federal levels.

The Strategic Passenger Transport Challenge

Cost restraints are evident in the curtailment of some projected rail expansion plans in favour of bus transport and light rail ventures. Such infrastructure and accompanying community development projects would require large amounts of federal infrastructure funding which is not forthcoming under the current LNP federal government.

Even Brisbane’s Cross-river metro rail project has not received definite federal funding beyond a token $10 million for the current planning phase.

Election of a state LNP government in 2018 might result in a total abandonment of the Cross-river metro rail project which has attracted sceptical comments from Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce.

The financial challenges for planning in a neoliberal era

The Australian Government’s Smart Cities Programme is a windfall for the property developers in an era of financial austerity in federal government sectors.

The federally endorsed 30 Minute Cities Project strives to reduce unnecessary motor vehicle traffic by improving the economic and cultural self-sufficiency in new freeway suburbs.

Property developers will play a leading role in delivering these new urban futures and will be cheered on by inclusive sustainable planning rhetoric that without appropriate levels of public sector funding.

Optional extras like the revitalization of inner established city areas and the construction of new peripheral growth centres are beyond the price tag of a centre-right LNP national government.

This is evident in a historical regional city like Ipswich with its projected population of 435,000 by 2031.

The Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads still publicises a public transport rail corridor to link the Ipswich CBD to new suburban growth areas as far as the Springfield Town Centre which is 25 kms away.

This projected rail corridor from the Top of Town Precinct in Ipswich will pass through an underutilized mixed land use inner city zone at West Ipswich. It follows the now closed rail corridor to the left of the high-lighted property redevelopment site.

Extending this projected rail link to Ipswich University, the Ripley Valley and Springfield will cost billions if the scope of this project was extended to cover connecting bus terminals, off-street-parking network, an additional railway station complex for the Top of Town in Ipswich and substantial flood mitigation measures for low lying parts of the Ipswich CBD and future suburban creek crossings.

A future Top of Town Ipswich CBD project might include a well landscaped pedestrian precinct with high aesthetic standards, fitness and indoor swimming facilities as well as appropriate commercial, entertainment and cultural facilities that are appropriate for one of Australia’s most historic regional centres.

Public expenditure of this urban renewal is currently far beyond the financial resources of the state government which will struggle to finance the high priority Cross-river metro rail link in Brisbane’s CBD.

Overseas models of successful Infrastructure and Community Development Funds are of course available. Such measures do not fit in with the marcoeconomic tool kit of the current federal LNP government.

Singapore’s capacity to fund sustainable infrastructure is influenced by retention of key sectors of the national economy within the government sector.

Funds are also injected into the national budget of Singapore from profits generated by sovereign wealth funds such as the Development Bank of Singapore and the national two sovereign wealth funds of Temasek Holdings and GIC Private Ltd.

Singapore’s Land Transport Authority (LTA) has developed the art of planned development with co-operation from these established social market institutions to accommodate a current population of 5.5 million in an area that is just half the size of the City of Brisbane.

In the absence of viable Infrastructure and Community Development Investment Funds, prospects for a smooth delivery of big-ticket infrastructure items in the ShapingSEQ Plan are highly questionable.

In the battle of political wills between underfunded state, federal governments and local authorities, property development lobbies are likely to have the right of way in the delivery of essential ToD growth centres in the ShapingSEQ Plan.

Feedback is welcome from other localities on the success and limitations of reliance on the development lobbies for the delivery of a sustainable long-term vision for near metropolitan regions in Australia and overseas locations.

Questions on the sustainability of public infrastructure funding for ShapingSEQ were raised with Queensland Treasury and the Queensland Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning. This article can easily be modified to accommodate any forthcoming feedback.

Submission of this article cannot be delayed indefinitely as the ShapingSEQ Plan is still in its formative phase at a time when more public discussion is required before the deadline for community feedback on the ShapingSEQ Plan closes on 3 March 2017.

[textblock style=”6″]

Denis Bright (pictured) is a registered teacher and a member of the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA). Denis has recent postgraduate qualifications in journalism, public policy and international relations. He is interested in developing pragmatic public policies based on commitment to a social market that is highly compatible with trends in contemporary globalization.