Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to congratulate the dedicated group of residents in Box Hill South in my electorate who have just won an enormous victory to halt an inappropriate development in their neighbourhood. I received my first complaint from a resident about this proposal in May last year. They were very concerned about a plan to build a 310-dwelling development, including apartment buildings of up to six and seven stories and an aged-care facility, on the site of the former St Leo's College in Hay Street, Box Hill South. It is a very large site that borders Gardiners Creek and has been the subject of a number of previous development applications, all of which have been knocked back due to environmental impact concerns, the difficulties of building on a flood plain area which covers a significant portion of the site and the horrendous traffic issues faced by a development from which traffic can only flow back into small suburban side streets.

It was on this basis, and considering the history of development applications over the last 15 years, that I thought there was no way that the local council would ever approve this application. I have been dealing with this site for the last 15 years as a member of parliament. I thought, 'It'll be knocked off again.' It turned out I was wrong. Between the last development application and this one, the traffic concerns, the density, the environmental impacts, suddenly became no longer of concern to council, VicRoads, Melbourne Water and the independent panel who considered the proposal, despite the fact that there had been no significant changes to the environment, to the issues. These issues had apparently all been overcome and this development could go ahead.

One large issue had changed. The EPA boundary issue about distinction between factories and the site has changed because, sadly, the factories bordering the site have closed and those jobs have been lost. But there is still the issue around environmental impacts, around the flood plains and, most importantly, around traffic. So I and the residents were perplexed. The local residents banded together, led by diligent residents-turned-activists and community leaders such as Tracey Suidgeest and Jane Moulin, and letterboxed their neighbourhoods, held large community meetings, made submissions to the independent panel, vigorously lobbied councillors, arranged for a huge turnout of residents at local council meetings and learned very quickly how to navigate Victoria's complicated planning process. It was a tremendous effort, one that first led to disappointment, when council voted, with one councillor absent, to proceed with the development. But, lo and behold, a month later, in a stunning turnaround, when the absent councillor, Councillor Sharon Ellis, was back, she made an impassioned plea to her collages to rescind the decision and abandon the development. It was a tremendous speech by Councillor Ellis, who articulated what the residents had been objecting to all along. Combined with the last-ditch lobbying work of the Box Hill South residents, it changed the one extra vote on council they needed to stop the development. They have had a stunning victory. The development, as it stands, has been stopped. Common sense has prevailed.

The St Leo's site on Hay Street South does need to be developed. I and the residents do not want to see this large site go to waste. We understand that a reasonable development is needed on this site. We also understand that, as we live in suburbs that are actually serviced well by public transport and other amenities, it is an ideal location for development. But it needs to be properly planned for. If the original site had been used an as aged-care facility, or indeed had converted back to a school, it would have been a magic outcome. But we cannot, as one councillor put it during the debate, just build it and deal with the traffic problems later. The issue, which was stunning the residents, was: 'Somebody will have to die after we build this to actually mitigate the traffic issues.'

This is exactly the approach that has led to more traffic problems in Melbourne. It makes it impossible to park in local streets and hampers the movement of road-based public transport. Far greater emphasis needs to be placed on improving our transport options before we approve large developments, because we know from experience they just will not work. If you build it, it does not mean the public transport and other services come. What does always come, though, are more cars—more demand on street parking and increased difficulty for residents who use these local streets, which also house a local school. Because of where the site is there is no main road access and all the traffic has to flow back into the local streets. I implore the Victorian government, local council and developers to place more emphasis on improving transport infrastructure in these areas before going down the route of making inappropriate developments. Congratulations to all the residents involved.

See this speech in context