Any property buyback scheme implemented by the Victorian government in fire-prone areas should involve a combination of compulsory and voluntary acquisition, a planning expert has told Crikey.
In handing down its final report on Saturday, the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission recommended that the Brumby government implement a scheme for non-compulsory acquisition of property in areas at high risk of bushfire.
However, Michael Buxton, RMIT associate professor in Environment and Planning, has told Crikey that the Victorian government needed to “relearn the lessons of history” and investigate proven buyback schemes that involve voluntary and compulsory acquisition.
Buxton identified the land acquisition program implemented by the Hamer and Cain governments in the Dandenong Ranges in the 1970s and 1980s as an example of a successful property acquisition scheme. That program saw the government purchase thousands of fire-prone blocks from private owners over an extended period.
“It was a combination between voluntary and compulsory acquisition,” Buxton told Crikey. “The government didn’t just go in and buy thousands of lots over a given year, they placed a development reservation over the land. When somebody wanted to sell the block, they had to sell it to the government.”
In terms of property owners getting value for their property, Buxton said that blocks identified for acquisition under the Dandenong Ranges scheme were valued as if a house could be built on the land. It cost the government more money than had they identified it as a blighted block, however it meant people got a fair return for their property.
“This was a very popular program, it gained the Cain and Hamer governments huge support,” said Buxton. “The net result was that all the land identified was bought back over time. The tragedy is that this program has been forgotten and now the Brumby government seem to think that a widespread buyback scheme would be unpopular.”
Premier John Brumby has so far resisted the idea of a buyback scheme, one of the more contentious recommendations handed down by the Royal Commission. According to reports, the cost of purchasing the 50,000 properties identified as high-risk under the commission’s recommendation has been put at $15 billion.
However, Buxton said that that the government had to act now to ensure that the development of high-risk blocks was halted to ensure fewer people were exposed to fire danger.
“People recognise the problem, what they want is a solution,” he told Crikey. “I don’t think anyone wants to get 30 years down the track and have to ask why the Brumby government didn’t act where they were told there was an issue.”
Buxton said that the community would support the idea of a buyback scheme, as long as the government implemented it correctly.
“We don’t want large-scale acquisition of land, we don’t need that. As long as development is limited on remaining blocks, through well-established accepted techniques, then we can achieve a safer community for people in fire-prone areas.”
As much as my heart goes out to people who endured this terrible tragedy I cannot agree with the buy back. People choose to live in these areas….they are not forced to. I would rather see the Government use that kind of money for extensively increased funding for people with disabilities of all kinds…funding for mobility aids, artificial foot orthotics, limbs, wheelchairs has not been increased for over ten years and very little funding goes into research of diseases that cause disabilities and impairments. People with disabilities do not have a choice to live with impairments…people have a choice where they live.
They won’t do it. It would set too much of a precedent for those wanting to unload their soon-to-be-underwater million-dollar waterfronts at taxpayer expense.
Or use the money to bury the powerlines.
Hey Davidk…just to kindly let you know…it wasn’t one or the other…the recommendations said to do both….
(and the liberals…have said they will do both..)
Salamander has a point. Hamer and Cain weren’t yesterday, and tomorrow is looking decided watery around the coastline. Now is the time for a bit of sanity in regards to sea level rises around Australia’s huge perimeter.
Based on what I have been able to find out, any block which is within 3 to 6 metres of high tide mark is very probably likely to be underwater within a couple of generations. There go Docklands, St Kilda and Williamstown in Victoria. Crown Casino will be underwater from the 2nd floor down. All those beautiful Yarra bridges will be under.
In NSW, about 150 coastal communities will be unrecognisable. Every single coastal marina subdivision will be extinct. Even inland towns such as Maitland, 30km up the Hunter River, will be totalled.
The solution for uninhabitable Victorian properties may very well become the template for years and years to come.
Town Planners of Australia, what say you?