As the Victorian Government struggles to sell the increasingly troublesome Melbourne 2030: Planning for Sustainable Growth, it is interesting to see other authorities attempting similar initiatives.

Portland, Oregon has had a rather successful urban growth boundary for quite a while, and now Toronto, Ontario has just released its draft Places to Grow document. Released as a draft growth plan for the ‘Greater Golden Horseshoe’ area (think Greater Melbourne’, the plan has similar goals to Melbourne 2030 in that it is attempting to manage, in a sustainable manner, the growth of Toronto over the next 30 odd years.

It seems to be quite advanced when stood next to Melbourne 2030, with a bill passed this June that introduced the plan as legislation under the Places to Grow Act 2005 (Melbourne 2030 is similar through its inclusion as Clause 12 in the VPP). Yet even the most casual observer will note that Places to Grow is a far more powerful than Melbourne 2030. For example, when Melbourne 2030 speaks of urban intensification - Direction 1: A more compact city - there is a lot of talk about what should be happening, not what is happening.

In contrast, Place to Grow not only identifies growth areas (or activity centres) much better than its counterpart, but also sets minimum density requirements for these areas. At any rate, both documents seek similar outcomes, but it would appear that despite the glossy cover and lofty goal, Melbourne 2030 falls behind Toronto’s Places to Grow substantially.

Links:

- Melbourne 2030 - As if we haven’t all seen this before…

- Places to Grow - Draft growth area plan, Feb 2005-11-04

- Place to Grow Act 2005

Planning 4th November, 2005 16:13:04   [#] 

Comments

Links?
All those links are broken Tom, try again.
Russ  6th November, 2005 13:19:28