Are the Olympics the catalyst for compulsory acquisition?

As Brisbane and South East Queensland (SEQ) sets it sight on the 2032 Olympics, perhaps a once in a generation opportunity presents itself. A ten-year horizon in a low interest rate environment should provide the catalyst for Brisbane to define what it wants to be, and what it can be.

Please indulge the author quickly for some context as to why compulsory acquisition is the missing piece in Brisbane’s continual evolution.  The Olympics remains highly visible across the world and generates significant levels of tourism that place substantial pressure on all forms of infrastructure. Whilst not visitation numbers, the level of ticket sales does provide an insight as to what short term population growth could be acknowledging that a proportion of ticket sales will be local, intrastate, interstate as well as international.

Point 2, Brisbane Metro is a $1.244 billion project aimed at creating better opportunities for moving people around our city and suburbs. Simple concept with a big ticket attached that ultimately should take pressure off existing road networks and maybe increase public transport utilisation.

With such expensive and extensive infrastructure, this has to be more than a simple public transport initiative. If this is all that the public get for their $1.244 billion, I suspect many taxpayers will probably shrug and say; “is that it?”

The South East Queensland Regional Plan (SEQRP) has continued to challenge the development industry and councils to accommodate more of the population in higher density dwellings. Whilst we have written about the missing middle many times defending the lack of commercial viability, the targets for population growth have largely remained unchanged as has the outer urban footprint which has created a set of separate issues in its own right. The ability for the development community to do anything meaningful in addressing the population growth; near city challenge continues to be an uphill battle.

The map below highlights just how much of the route is surrounded by single lot detached housing. This is not maximising the capacity of such an expensive piece of public transport infrastructure. If I was an international tourist travelling this route, what would make me want to get off and go explore, have an experience to tell my friends about or admire interesting architecture/public spaces? Remembering what we create for the tourists is arguably more important for our residents, Southbank being a case in point.

So here’s the rub, or suggestion. What we do know is that the missing middle is literally missing. The economic viability is highly problematic, the built form is compromised as a result and the public in many suburbs have literally started facebook pages saying “NO MORE”.

On a positive note, we have award winning, design leading projects like Sekisui House’s West Village, Fraser Property’s Hamilton Reach, Brookfield’s Hamilton Harbour, Lend Lease’s King Street RNA Showgrounds development and Aria’s Fish Lane. One thing that all of these projects have in common is scale. They are masterplanned medium and high density built form outcomes that create a viable alternative for someone to consider who would usually be a house buyer. They may well still buy a detached dwelling, however the alternative is a genuine option in these projects, particularly where there is green space for children activities. Inclusiveness is not just a gender or economic consideration as it is typically simplified down into, it also has to be age sensitive.

The author would suggest that around these key metro stations, compulsory acquisition has to occur. The public have to accept that some people will lose their dwellings, albeit at a genuine premium to the market. Character housing should be relocated where practical. Environmental overlays are less restrictive and the existing utilities infrastructure is already in place. The economies of scale should be achievable with council creating the opportunities for a highest and best use outcome, rather than a highest and highest outcome.

In terms of scale and as an example, West Village is a 2.6 hectare near city masterplanned, vertical residential community that initially experienced significant community opposition. The site had historical significance for some local residents and trust was an issue. It is now a very important part of the West End community and when complete, will house circa 2,700-3,100 residents, have 600-700 white collar jobs and arguably half that again in retail employment. There is an expectation that through visitation to the apartments, employees, shoppers and community lifestyle engagement, there will be around 5,000 people per day using that urban footprint. Sites like these are incredibly rare, and anyone that has worked in an acquisitions role understands that fragmented ownership almost always ends up in wasted time and energy for no result.

What this ultimately acknowledges is that the private sector can not do this alone. A collaborative approach with council, the community and the development industry over the next decade with the Olympics as the end date puts a defined horizon in place. Our expensive infrastructure will experience far better patronage and scale through compulsory acquisition and increased densities that allow for deep planting, parkland, inclusive accommodation options, design control and destinations that the surrounding community are proud to call their own. They will be interesting and open to the broader community. If done well, there is an expectation that people further down the line will hop on the metro service to reach these destinations, much as they do in other parts of the world. The Brisbane Metro route needs to be more than just commuting. If that’s all it is, then a significant opportunity has been lost.

In 2019, the Global Liveability Index listed Melbourne in rank 2, Sydney in 3, Adelaide in 10, Perth in 14 and Brisbane in 18. Is this the measurement that Brisbane should be using to benchmark its success as a city over the next decade? The previous Lord Mayor Quirk had the vision of Brisbane as the New World City. The current Lord Mayor Schrinner has the vision of improving liveability in our suburbs. With both of these visions being highly complimentary to each other and absolutely binary in the success of both outcomes, Brisbane has ten years to become the destination that non-residents want to come back to.

Without compulsory acquisition, it is difficult to see Brisbane maximising the benefits from the substantial infrastructure expenditure, hitting the growth targets defined under the SEQRP, but more importantly creating a funky city that the world will look at and want to visit. The legacy of the Olympic Games should be a city that is far better than it was before the event with local residents being the primary long term beneficiaries.

Matthew Gross | Director | mgross@nprco.com.au