Urbis Think Tank
Peri-urban developments are densifying – but are they changing their character?
Urbis are currently engaged in many residential projects on the fringes of Australian cities. In some cases, these communities are described as peri-urban. But the question is: when is peri-urban really outer urban?
The phrase peri-urban comes from “on the perimeter” of urban, and is intended to describe localities where the city meets the bush. However, as our urban areas expand, the outer fringes of the urban development front move closer and closer to these peri-urban communities. As a result, when more ‘suburban’ subdivision patterns and urban forms catch up to them, questions arise as to whether these communities should retain their rural character.
One of these localities is the town of Beveridge, in Mitchell Shire, north of Melbourne. Mitchell Shire is a founding member of the Peri-urban Group of Councils. In 2009, the Council submission to Melbourne @ 5 Million provided support for the development of Beveridge into “a complete and fully self-sustaining peri-urban township”, and the Council subsequently encouraged “the prioritisation of development within Beveridge … for Framework and Structure Planning processes to commence immediately to allow for … integration of the Mandalay development with urban services and Beveridge Township.”
Council acknowledged Beveridge was within the Hume growth corridor, and sought to maintain its identity as a standalone township, separate from the advancing urban growth fronts, and from Wallan township to the north. However, the recently released Growth Corridor Plan (GCP) for Melbourne’s North suggests to the contrary, that Beveridge is now conceived as one of many local neighbourhoods planned within the growth corridor (refer to ‘Community Plan’).
Does this mean that Mitchell Shire has chosen to become an outer urban council, has it redefined what it means to be peri-urban, or has the State Government, through the GCP, challenged its character as peri-urban?
These are important considerations for other peri-urban communities on the fringes of our major cities, particularly with respect to the staging of urban development. Municipalities at the urban fringe will be seeking to ensure that key infrastructure investment in their peri-urban towns continues to be considered on the basis of their self-containment from the contiguous urban front, rather than being brought within the staged delivery of growth corridor planning which tends to prioritise inner locations over outer.