Mac Point worth too much to rush

Don't get locked out of commercial opportunity, warns the Evers Network

HOBART’s Macquarie Point offers Tasmania enormous opportunity but only if its development is governed by prudence and patience, and not the need for a quick result.

There are critical considerations in the redevelopment of Macquarie Point which are central to its long-term success, and it will require government leadership to ensure those considerations are at the forefront of the planning and development process.

The starting point is to determine what Hobart really needs in terms of infrastructure development and what is suitable for a precinct of its size and location.

And a warning, there is the potential to be captivated by either grand or sociallyinspired ideas for which there is neither need nor demand. Such idealism must be calibrated against commercial reality or face the prospect of failure.

The challenge is to pave the way for an anchor development the city really needs that will bring with it premium ancillary investment and development.

An example would be an exhibition and convention centre which sets a new global standard in environmental design, construction and operation. It would not only enhance Tasmania’s global reputation for environmental leadership, it would fulfil an important need in terms of our burgeoning tourism industry. There is a highly lucrative market in exhibitions which are supported by ancillary convention facilities.

While a commercially sound anchor development would ideally be funded by private investment, it may be that government will need to step in to underwrite, or otherwise support, the funding of such a cornerstone initiative. That’s because the belief that the redevelopment project should be underwritten solely by private funding can have serious pitfalls. The Victorian Government used a sports stadium to underwrite its redevelopment of Docklands with disastrous consequences. By contrast, the world-renowned redevelopment of the Baltimore Docklands was underwritten by government which ensured the project was inoculated against the need to grab any development that came along.

The potential and appeal of the Macquarie Point redevelopment site is another crucial issue. Is it as good as it could be? The answer is clearly “no”.

The Macquarie Point precinct is land-locked with no direct access to the city’s historic waterfront. This shortcoming automatically downgrades its potential to attract premium development. However, the problem is not unresolvable.

All the land from the northern boundary of the Macquarie Point site, stretching from the current wharf facilities north along the foreshore bordering the Cenotaph and taking in the Hobart Regatta grounds, the slipyards and the former naval base are all in government ownership – mostly state and local government ownership. Imagine the potential of the Macquarie Point precinct if all that foreshore land was opened up for redevelopment. Imagine how it would enhance the city, especially for visitors crossing the Tasman Bridge whose immediate view of the waterfront takes in a sewerage works, wharf facilities, unsightly buildings and slip yards.

The Government has the capacity to make that happen and turn a landlocked redevelopment site into a far more attractive investment precinct with direct connection to a premium stretch of adjoining river frontage.

Another key consideration is to avoid the mistakes of others by being patient and discerning. In other words, don’t be captured by the appeal of a quick result. Resist the carping of those critics who want cranes in the air now. The folly of that approach is starkly reflected in the problems that still plague the Melbourne Docklands to this day.

Sadly, successive Victorian governments fell for the trap of grasping virtually any development proposal that was put on the table in their desire to demonstrate progress. In doing so, they abandoned the comprehensive plan that had been developed for the Docklands, which proposed a series of precincts that were put out for expressions of interest. Several failed to attract the investment needed at the time and so the original plan was replaced by the perceived need to grab

virtually any investment that came along. The critical message is that planning, no matter how excellent, is not of itself sufficient.

An extended Macquarie Point precinct, which takes in an inner-city stretch of river frontage, can also improve Hobart’s traffic management woes by delivering commuters by both ferry and light rail onto the doorstep of the city.

It is not too late for the Government to revisit planning for this area by taking a broader look at its available land stock, aiding TasWater in relocating the sewerage plant and by engaging the wider expertise necessary to drive the project forward in a way that reflects our cultural, maritime, conservation and heritage values.

Of course, the redevelopment of Macquarie Point should be seen in the context of a much wider vision and plan for the entirety of the Hobart’s iconic waterfront and historic Sullivans Cove, a subject that is attracting increasing community interest. The N.C.K. Evers Network, made up of Bob Annells, Damian Bugg, Don Challen, Dan Norton, Tony Pedder, Greg Ray and Mike Vertigan, is a group of specialists in government, policy development, strategy and corporate administration in Tasmania. It is named for the late Nick Evers, former Liberal minister and chair of TT-Line and Australian Tourism Commission.

And a warning, there is the potential to be captivated by either grand or socially-inspired ideas for which there is neither need nor demand. Such idealism must be calibrated against commercial reality