Beyond Greenline

Despite not getting the support of a majority of councillors, Melbourne Maritime Heritage Network (MMHN) commends Crs Philip Le Liu and Owen Guest on the recent motion relating to Greenline funding commitments, status and permit approvals.

MMHN has questioned the concept rationale and cost of Greenline from the outset. The Greenline concept was inherently problematic. In fact, there are three pre-existing waterways trails in Melbourne: Northbank, Southbank, and Victoria Harbour.

MMHN notes that the council prioritising Northbank (aka Greenline) was a misguided and ill-informed concept mimicking a project in New York rather than capturing the heritage significance of Melbourne’s existing waterways trails.

Despite our best efforts over several years Greenline plans continues to disregard all evidence of the significance of these waterways and the critical role they played in enabling maritime trade which was and still is, the basis of Victoria’s prosperity. Greenline had, in effect, “turned its back” on Melbourne’s rich maritime heritage.

MMHN is a staunch and knowledgeable advocate for waterways and has commissioned accurate historical research to substantiate our advocacy. This MHHN research has been offered to the City of Melbourne as the basis for an MMHN Draft Budget submission.

In essence MMHN is a calling for a feasibility report on a project to capture and make accessible the entire maritime heritage “story” through the installation of way-finding/informational signage (QR codes) along all three existing and interconnected waterways trails :

Northbank – Birrarung Marr to the mini park at the tip of North Wharf

Southbank – Billabongs (Royal Botanical Gardens) to the Bolte Bridge

Victoria Harbour – Moonee Ponds Creek to the Shipping Control Tower.

Collectively these three waterways trails constitute an, as yet undeveloped, major City of Melbourne public realm asset of social cultural and economic significance.

Whether you are a local, interstate or international tourist, or a visiting group of students in Melbourne, you will be able to access historically accurate and fascinating “stories” along each of the three waterways trails.

Our hope is the council will support the MMHN budget submission and invest in the proposed feasibility report which we confidently argue will lead to the three waterways trails bringing Melbourne’s rich maritime heritage to life.

Marine Services Depot

More good news from the City of Melbourne! Progress at last on a Marine Services Depot at Bolte West Precinct.

An interim step certainly, but nonetheless progress after years of advocacy and wrangling for permits a plethora of responsible state bureaucracies (e.g. Development Victora, Parks Victoria, Department of Transport, Melbourne Water).

The council resolved to issue a planning permit to enable “back of house” access for necessary services from Lorimer St to operate a temporary waterside marine site.

Such a council facility will support, and most certainly further activate, recreational and commercial boating on the Birrarung /Yarra as well on Victoria Harbour.

Port of Melbourne (PoM) – threat to Melbourne waterways

The Docklands community will be familiar with the catastrophic PoM plan to create an at-grade rail freight crossing adjacent to the Bolte Bridge.

In the latest Draft Port of Melbourne Strategy Plan (April 10, 2025) this plan once again looms, threatening to stifle recreational and commercial boating activity both on Victoria Harbour and the Birrarung/Yarra upstream from the Bolte Bridge.

The Draft PoM Strategy Plan proposes that the rail line be included in the new City of Melbourne Municipal Planning Strategy (MPS). Release of this has been delayed until November 2026.

However, MMHN applauds the City of Melbourne’s pre-emptive rejection of this proposal. Demonstrating its support for community amenity and for the boating industry, council management requested that the Minister for Planning Sonya Kilkenny appoint an Independent Planning Panel to which all such contentious submissions be referred for consideration including this freight link.

The council decided that it would be “premature” at this stage to include this matter in the Municipal Strategic Plan. MMHN is pleased to note this indication that the council appears to understand the damage that this rail line will cause to community amenity and the likely adverse impact on the waterway’s economy.

It should rightly consider – and indeed prioritise – local amenity over a proposal promoted to serve the operational needs of a corporate entity. Indeed, there are other design options for such an obstructive rail bridge. Both the PoM and the state government must consider these issues. •