The 1200 odd pages of this week's council agenda might not make for the most thrilling reading for the average resident but it could be argued these pages represent some of the most critical ideas shaping Ballarat's future.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In particular they contain two reports of weighty significance that are emblematic of how Ballarat approaches this future, specifically in regard to handling growth.
New urban growth zones and a long term strategy for infill development around Bakery Hill ( in many ways a model for a wider CBD) were always going to carry a web of complexity and excite a degree of controversy but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
The point is both these documents highlight the dilemma Ballarat faces at the crossroads of change; how to adapt and absorb the best that growth brings yet not change so much as to lose its essential nature.
The reports also highlights a contrast in where this growth can be absorbed; a seemingly inexhaustible appetite for new standalone housing on greenfields sites and the problematic hope of denser inner-city living in a heritage town.
So far it is market demand that has driven the lion's share of the growth in housing and it is overwhelmingly in the new estates, so much so, that aspirational targets for in-fill development seem currently unattainable .
In a worst case scenario, the vision is one of limitless and treeless seas of monochromatic housetops, dormitory suburbs unpopulated by day and choked by car dependency at the job-migration hours.
But much as these potential new suburbs represent a new gold rush for landowners, property developers and the building industry, it inevitably comes with its own significant problems.
That deceptively simple umbrella word 'infrastructure' leapt instantly to mind for the thousands who first read our story on these potential new suburbs this week.
The instinctive concern is 'infrastructure lag', exemplified by so many growth areas across Australian cities.This is not the delay of the basics beneath the surface which make a housing estate operational but the many elements that make that same sea of new housing liveable. This is what build communities, not just buildings.
In a worst case scenario, and Melbourne's boom suburbs have plenty of salutary lessons here, the vision is one of limitless and treeless seas of monochromatic housetops, dormitory suburbs unpopulated by day and choked by car dependency at the job-migration hours.
Consider a real-life example; even if the state government were to urgently electrify the Melton rail line (and it should!) the vast new populous of the western suburbs will have waited more than three decades for a suitable metropolitan train line.
But to bring this closer to home. For anyone who is already despairing of the (relative) congestion of Ballarat's busiest intersection, Sturt and Gillies at morning " peak " hour, imagine adding the pressure of ten thousand extra people, each in their own car, wanting to get to work or school like some great clockwork eastward-westward surge.
Such dystopian images lend enormous weight to the importance of preemptive infrastructure, the necessity of making these costly demands concurrent with the market driven expansion.
But even relatively obvious projects where the planning work has been done, like the extension of the Link Road to make another major north south link and a virtual city bypass, languish for want of funding.
The clamour for these things by Ballarat's leaders and indeed any resident who cares about its future should be all the louder in an era threatening imminent austerity at higher levels of government and where the case for stimulus investment is growing stronger every month.
But even in a future replete with new schools, hospitals, parks and shops to break up the uniformity of these spanking new suburbs, there is another well known danger presaged by inexorable urban expansion; the doughnut affect.
The American adage highlights the problem where the overwhelming focus of resources, commercial opportunities and perhaps most importantly, the people, concentrate on the fringes of cities, draining historical centres of life and success.
As such the Bakery Hill concept, a strategy to reinvigorate a much loved centre with its most important ingredient, including promoting the unpalatable concept of higher density inner city living, is a vital part of Ballarat's future.
The timing of these twin concepts could not be more opportune when the difficult task of getting the balance right will influence so much of what a future Ballarat will look like.
So, dry as both these documents in the council agenda may seem, they are well worth the attention of any our readers who are interested in the Ballarat of the future.
*******
I am sure there will be more than a few readers who would argue the other key decision councillors have to make this week in shaping its future is in the choosing of its next mayor.
Certainly in choosing leadership positions council carries a lot of responsibility in how it can best carry these bigger ideas forward.
And it is the ability to deliver on these future plans, how to shape, guide and communicate them that must guide the decision on the mayoral choice.
We believe the rate-paying public has little time for political blocks or intrigues when the work that has to be done is so instrumental for the future of a city.
For whoever is appointed mayor not only has the leadership responsibility within council but also plays a critical role in spearheading that advocacy to other levels of government to support and fund all those key projects which council cannot afford.
The less that has to do with party politics and the more it is based on merit the better and in turn the better the outcome for Ballarat.
The future of the city at a key time of growth depends on it.
