Understanding Neighbourhood Character: The case of Camberwell

Abstract

Over recent decades, two commonplace viewpoints have come to dominate metropolitan planning in Australian cities. The first is that sustainability imperatives demand the pursuit of 'compact city' policies; the second is that implementation of these policies will be met with fierce resident resistance in defence of neighbourhood character. The first of these has long been contested within the literature: while there is considerable academic support for compact city policies (Hall 1997, Jenks et al 1996, Newman & Kenworthy 1989, 1999) there are also many Australian sceptics (Birrell et al. 2005, Bishop & Syme 1995, Bunker et al. 2002, Davidson 1997, Lewis 1999, Moriarty 2002, O'Connor 1998, 2003, Randolph 2006, Searle 2003, Troy 1996). Much of the concern about compact city policy has focused on practical limits to implementation, yet there is also a broad acceptance of change in a context of climate change (Jenks & Dempsey 2005; Gleeson 2006). It is not our concern to enter this debate here, but rather to explore the question of resident resistance which has received scant academic analysis. Where it has been studied it is generally bound up with broad speculations about NIMBYism, struggles to maintain socio-economic status (Huxley 2002) or the desire for a suburban way of life (Davidson 1997, Gleeson 2005). The need to better understand resident concerns is nowhere more apparent than in Melbourne where the defence of neighbourhood character is often in fierce conflict with compact city policy. On one hand, the metropolitan strategy (Melbourne 2030) aims to contain the city's outward expansion by identifying a growth boundary and by concentrating development in transit·oriented 'activity centres'. On the other hand, Melbourne's residential design code (ResCode) demands that 'neighbourhood character' be the primary criterion for assessing residential development applications in established urban areas.' A densification strategy destined to alter the 'character' of numerous areas is coupled to legislated 'respect' and 'protection' of the existing 'character'. The tension between these policies is compounded by a lack of clear definitions of 'character'. When residents seek to protect 'neighbourhood character' what is it they are working to defend? This paper is part of a larger research project exploring everyday experiences and discursive constructions of urban place-identity. Here, we focus on the middle-ring suburb of Camberwell where one of the city's primary transit nodes is located. Since early 2003, a vociferous and media-savvy resistance campaign against redevelopment of Camberwell railway station has been waged, including a street march led by Geoffrey Rush and Barry Humphries.