Yesterday's
Herald Sun includes an article by Shaun Carney, an Adjunct Associate Professor
in Politics at Monash University in which he expresses some views on the Munro
site development.
Shaun
Carney makes a mistake that many observers are making. The Munro development is
not the Queen Vic Market. It happens to be adjacent to the market (and
therefore has relevance) but essentially Munro's is adding a more appropriate
surrounding to our market than currently exists.
The
proposed red brick construction of the podium, the lane ways, and the retail
content are all more appropriate for that site. There are probably not too many
people who are in love with high rise towers but they are a prerequisite for
managing business and populations in CBD's, and this one, set in the back
corner of a fairly large block, is probably as inconspicuous as any tower can
be even allowing for the requested additional height. The CoM makes a good
point when it says that a 100 metre monolith across the whole site would be far
more unattractive than the proposed single corner tower.
The
Queen Vic Market is low height, and as far as we know, will stay that way. While
we pontificate on applying the same rules to a surrounding CBD we jeopardise
fixing the "tatty" aspects of our market. Mr. Carney quite rightly
calls our market "treasured", but the treasure is declining and needs
our attention.
The
Munro site has relevance for QVM in at least two key ways. Firstly, it is
adjacent to us and needs to be an appropriate neighbour for a retail market.
The red brick construction, the lane ways, and the purpose (accommodation,
entertainment, retail, community services) are all relevant. Secondly, it is
owned by the city and presumably inextricably connected with financing the
market renewal itself.
There
is a discussion going on in Baltimore at the moment about four public markets
that are in need of renewal. Market renewals all around the world have their
difference but there seem to be one standout aspect in US renewals and that is
the American understanding of community responsibility. When renewals have
business financing and community financing, all parties seem to take
responsibility for making sure the figures stack up. Here we seem to say -
"fix the problem but don't change these things, and by the way, financing
is your problem." No wonder international market guru, David O'Neil, puts so much emphasis on
community.
It
is true that opponents to renewal have alternative options that include weather
proofing, a platform car park over the current asphalt, and renewable energy
(although that already exists).
As
far as we can tell, the proposed QVM renewal won't change the market's
historical appearance much at all. Whatever happens, financing will be needed.
The eventual sale of the Franklin St triangle and the profit the city makes
from Munro's will help provide that financing.
And
while we are talking financing let's take a look at the QVM spend. Up to $250m
is to be spent on the renewal. "Up to" is a key term, and $79m has
already been spent on Munro's. There isn't a lot left. This week it was
announced that $500m was to be spent renewing The Glen Shopping Centre out at
suburban Glen Waverley. That might give some perspective to our own renewal.
(Incidentally the plans at The Glen include an upgraded "Fresh food market
hall", just in case we need to be reminded of our competitors addressing
the need for change.)
Mr
Carney admits that there are some obvious shortcomings that need correcting at
QVM. He needs to talk to some of our struggling traders, and those who have
recently left the market, to understand that actions of the past are unlikely
to protect the future of traders at QVM. As measured as his article is, it
smacks of leaving things as they are, and that is not the best option for QVM.
So,
do we listen to those who want to leave things, or at best play around with the
edges of our market, or do we accept the vision of city designers who have made
Melbourne the world’s most liveable city. Every trader needs to make up their mind about that - and of course so does the State Planning Minister as he decides on the approval process.
Have Your Say - click here.
COMMENTS:
15/03/2017 19:42:40 accept the vision of city designers "If we leave things as they are its inevitable, the slow decline over the past 15 or so years will continue.
Lets embrace the change, and be able to compete with the rest of the world." Andy
Thanks for your input Andy - Ed
20/03/2017 09:38:51 MUNRO SITE "It doesnt matter how you ""dress up"" the surrounding
area of the MARKET....the real problem is the MARKET itself.
Who do we have in management to answer the REAL problems such as EMPTY SHEDS
& POOR STANDARD of Merchandise by CASUAL and LONG TIME stallholders?"
The surrounds to our market do matter but you are correct about the internal things that need fixing. Wouldn't it be great just to click our fingers and have it all done at once. Thanks for your input - Ed
