This opinion piece written by Peter Hodge - an MECPG committee member - appeared in ’The Age’, 11 Aug 2008. 

HERE is a challenge.The next time it tickles your fancy to scale the heights of the Rialto or Eureka towers, look towards the northern suburbs of Melbourne from the observation deck and try to spot the parkland. There’s Princes Park and Royal Park, although yet another large chunk of the latter is under threat from the Eddington report’s road tunnel. Much further north, on a clear day, you might spy a sliver of greenery, parkland on either side of Coburg Lake. Just to the east of that, running north alongside Edgars Creek from its confluence with Merri Creek, is a 6.5-hectare tract of fully functional parkland. Owned by VicRoads, it is under threat of being sold off to developers unless Moreland City Council can find $10 million to buy it.Research conducted by Professor David Crawford, research fellow at Deakin University (as reported in The Age, 4/7), has shown that “rich suburbs have better-equipped parks”. The northern suburbs have a greater dilemma though - hanging on to the precious little parkland they already have.Moreland City Council has declared its preference to retain the four parcels that constitute the Merri and Edgars Creek parkland as public open space, but have baulked at the price tag. After all, it is a local government election year and ratepayers don’t always appreciate the difficulty associated with getting more by paying less. There is also talk of a tawdry deal being struck - though those wishing to put a positive spin on it would call it a “compromise” - to sell off a choice cut of the land to preserve the rest.

Crawford explains that councils such as Moreland have got fewer resources and “are trying to spread them further to deal with more issues” which, in this instance, provokes the important question: why should they have to? Why can’t the land be gifted to the council, just as the Point Nepean land was gifted to the state of Victoria by the Federal Government?

The Melbourne 2030 plan clearly supports the position of the Merri and Edgars Creek Parkland Group, whose raison d’etre is to save this parkland.

The recent Audit Expert Group Report on Melbourne 2030 notes that “the provision of neighbourhood amenities, including parks, open space, facilities and services, is an essential component of maintaining neighbourhood liveability”. Further, it recommends “improving open space provision and services in line with population increases”.

It correctly observes: “Reduction of tree canopy and loss of open space are two of the most easily felt and resented potential (but not inevitable) outcomes of urban consolidation.” It argues that “allocation of surplus government land for open space” is an area that should be taken into consideration.

There are many other cases of public open space under threat. However, no less than any of them, the Merri and Edgars Creek parkland issue should be a lay-down misere. The park is home to a diverse range of flora and fauna. It is utilised by a vast cross-section of people, locals and from far-flung suburbs.

The land is subject to inundation, a status not likely to improve as the frequency of flash floods, related to global warming, increases. Residential developments on the old Pentridge and Kodak sites are contributing to significant population growth in the area and the State Government is yet to explain how the citizens of Moreland would be compensated for any loss of open space. Further, Moreland City Council, and hence the ratepayers, have maintained the parkland for decades now and justifiably believe they have already paid for it.

If Pascoe Vale were a marginal electorate, I suspect this issue would have been resolved before the last state election. Planning Minister Justin Madden and Minister for Roads Tim Pallas have a clear choice here: another blatant grab for cash, or a principled, commonsense decision in keeping with the Melbourne 2030 plan and to the benefit of thousands of Melburnians.

If our governments cannot even follow their own plans to protect our valuable public open space, what hope do we have of meeting greater challenges such as warding off the extreme effects of global warming?

Peter Hodge is a teacher and writer.

—

This story was found at:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/green-or-greed-the-battle-for-our-suburban-parklands-20080810-3szr.html?page=-1   

The area of parkland sold in this article is not the parkland the MECPG is fighting for, but is only a couple of hundred metres down the road.  Another loss of green space in the North Coburg area…

It further highlights the rapidity of green space loss within the Moreland area, and the keen hunger that developers would have for our flood-prone parkland!

This article authored by Mary Bolling originally appeared in the ‘Herald Sun’ 11 Apr 2008.Coburg residents are furious at a state government plan to sell off the suburb’s only parkland, while nearby developments are already squeezing thousands more residents into the area.

Thanks to all those who answered the last-minute call for a photoshoot in the park on Thu 8th Feb. Alas, we were victims of our own success. Due to the recent decision to postpone the decision deadline of 28th Feb it seems The Age decided there was no longer a story and didn’t publish the article.

It’s worth noting that even though we were advised very late (after business hours) to show up the next morning in the park during work hours we were still able to muster a large number of people. Obviously we all want to see the park remain as a community asset and whilst the short notice prevented many people from attending it showed those who could do so are willing to reorganise our lives on short notice to ensure the park remains part of our daily life.

Imagine the turnout if we’d had a few days notice and held it on a weekend!