Melbourne 2030

• Central Activities Districts (CAD)

Seven centres including the Hoddle grid, also known as the Central Business District (CBD) or 'City'. These area require excellent connections to public transport.

• Principal, Major and Specialised Activity Centres

Approximately 100 principal, major and specialised activity centres of varying sizes, with strong links to public transport

• Neighbourhood Activity Centres

Approximately 900 local neighbourhood activity centres

A tram passing high-rise apartment buildings in suburban Box Hill, 14 km east of the CBD

• The Hoddle grid, Central Business District (CBD) or 'City'.
• Box Hill
• Broadmeadows
• Dandenong
• Footscray
• Frankston
• Ringwood

There are 93 Major Activity Centres, including: Altona, Altona Gate (Altona North), Brunswick, Cheltenham, Eltham, Ivanhoe, Kew, Mornington, Nunawading, The Pines (Doncaster East), Preston, Rosebud, Sandringham, South Melbourne, St. Kilda, Williamstown.

Encouraging intensification in activity centres sustains existing development pressure in some of the oldest parts of inner-city and middle-ring suburbs that are also often heritage precincts. The National Trust of Victoria has expressed concern about the effect on inner city heritage areas, particularly in sensitive suburbs such as Carlton, Fitzroy, Collingwood[7] and South Yarra. Some media commentators claimed that the policy would destroy Melbourne's character.[8]

Some of the organisations that have spoken out against Melbourne 2030's objectives:

• Collingwood Action Group[9] – specifically with regard to the development of Smith Street
• Sunshine Residents and Ratepayers Association[10]

A large rally was held in 2004 by community groups in opposition to the policy.[11]

Some argue that opponents of the blueprint are inconsistent in their arguments against the Melbourne 2030 blueprint. For example, although much criticism has been directed at increasing density in the inner suburbs of Melbourne, opponents are also highly critical of the releasing of new land on the fringes of Melbourne.[6] The Victorian Government has been continuously blocked from increasing density in existing suburban areas, such as the City of Boroondara, by "residents' groups" who continuously object to new medium-density developments, greatly hindering the progress of the blueprint.[12]

However, it is these same groups who oppose the urban sprawl of Melbourne, the only other option short of refusing residence to new arrivals.[12]

The Public Transport Users Association criticised the target of 20% of motorised trips transferring to public transport by 2020, claiming that the existing system is at capacity and could not cope with a tripling of users without expansion and increased frequency of services. Transport experts such as Paul Mees and others have argued that the capacity of the current system could be increased if management practices were improved, and many have called for the system to be returned to public administration when the contracts with private operators expire in November 2007. Furthermore, public transport advocates are doubtful about the capability of the privatised transport system to handle increased patronage without a large increase government investment, although little is envisaged by the strategy. After taking over the role as transport minister, Lynne Kosky, conceding that the goal was becoming impossible to reach described the 2020 aim as always only having been "aspirational goal" rather than a policy.[13]

Other infrastructure concerns included the availability of water for the growing metropolis. Victorian opposition leader Ted Baillieu has criticised the policy of "no new dams" while allowing the population to increase by another million.[14]

The high-profile resistance campaign against the redevelopment proposals for Camberwell railway station, headed by Geoffrey Rush, provide an example of how politically difficult it could be to implement policies for intensification of suburban activity centres.

To achieve the objectives, the State Government stripped local councils of many of their planning powers and escalating decisions to VCAT.[5] This has caused much controversy and many councils have become unsure of their role in the planning process.[15]

Many felt that the policy had become further flawed by the underestimated population projections contained in the report when figures were released showing higher than expected population growth for Melbourne.[16]

At the same time, proponents have been critical of the implementation of Melbourne 2030 with many believing that the government is abandoning key aspects of the strategy. For example, after a boom in new housing construction in outer Melbourne, the government released more land for outer suburban development beyond the urban growth boundary.[17] Other policies, such as the construction of freeways (including the 45 kilometre EastLink tollway, Pakenham bypass, Craigieburn Bypass and Peninsula Link) and upgrading of existing freeway systems (including the CityLink tollway, Monash Freeway, and West Gate Freeway) appear to many to be at odds with Melbourne 2030.