Developing Fishermans Bend

The Framework's infrastructure plans

The Framework specifies important planning documents required to support the delivery of Fishermans Bend. Figure 5 explains the purpose of some of these key documents.

Figure 5: Planning documents for delivering Fishermans Bend

Source: VAGO, based on the Framework and the Victorian Planning Authority website.

Status of PIPs

The Framework outlines that, throughout 2019, the Taskforce would deliver the 5 PIPs with input from the community, business and industry. This did not occur in the planned timeframe. We discuss the reasons for the delay in more detail below.

As of March 2025, the Montague PIP is the only one to have been made public. It was released in draft for public consultation in December 2023. The Taskforce prioritised drafting and releasing the Montague PIP first because this precinct was more developed than the others and had some pre-existing public transport connections.

The Taskforce advised us that it intends to finalise the Montague PIP and DCP first before it prepares or finalises the remaining PIPs. Preparing the remaining PIPs is dependent not only on the DCP, but also on Fishermans Bend transport planning, which will inform their content. As transport planning is not yet finalised, developing the PIPs is likely to be further delayed.

In the absence of the PIPs, the Taskforce told us that it collaborates closely with agencies delivering infrastructure to make sure development aligns with the Framework. This includes through the planning controls that accompanied the Framework’s release.

PIPs, however, are intended to provide a fine-grain level of detail to support development in each precinct.

The Taskforce is now developing a draft of the NEIC PIP. The Taskforce told us it has started some early planning and policy work on the PIPs for Lorimer, Sandridge and Wirraway.

Factors contributing to delayed release

Over the course of developing the Montague PIP, there were several factors that DTP says contributed to the delayed public release. These factors include:

• the COVID-19 pandemic and related economic impacts, which shifted the government’s and departments’ priorities
• a reduction in the size of the Taskforce in 2019
• MoG and ministerial portfolio changes, leading to multiple re-briefings needed
• delays in required approval processes.

These factors have also affected other aspects of the broader Fishermans Bend work program.

However, DTP told us the draft Montague PIP was ready to progress through the consultation stages in late 2021. It told us that progress on this consultation process was slow. The following case study shows a timeline of events leading to the release of the draft Montague PIP and its intersection with the DCP.

Comparison of PIP drafts

We reviewed the 2021 draft Montague PIP that was not publicly released and the December 2023 draft Montague PIP that was released for public consultation. We compared them to determine if the documents materially changed. We found there were no material differences between them.

Both PIPs had the same 5 'key moves', or overall actions, that direct the precinct’s progress. Each key move in the 2023 PIP had between 4 and 7 supporting actions. All but 2 of these supporting actions were in the 2021 PIP.

The final part of the draft Montague PIP includes a list of 14 infrastructure projects. They are categorised by key projects that are:

• already delivered
• part of this 10-year implementation plan
• part of a later implementation plan.

The list is the same in both versions of the Montague PIP, except that the 10-year implementation plan for these was delayed to account for the delays in releasing the PIP.

Draft DCP

DTP released the draft DCP at the same time as the draft Montague PIP in December 2023. They were open for public submissions for 3 months.

The draft DCP outlines:

• an approach for funding required infrastructure
• the introduction of an open space uplift development incentive mechanism (OSU), discussed further below
• costings and indicative timing for more than 120 infrastructure projects across Fishermans Bend, which have an estimated total value of $2.45 billion.

It includes a commitment that the DCP will be updated at least every 5 years.

The draft DCP breaks down infrastructure into 3 categories:

Implementing the DCP

DTP is responsible for:

• delivering all infrastructure projects funded by the DCP (though not necessarily all infrastructure needed in each precinct)
• scheduling all works.

But DTP has not yet been able to finalise the DCP.

DTP's internal documents from March 2024 noted that while the draft DCP had recently been endorsed and released by the government, there were no arrangements in place to support implementing the DCP.

In particular, there were no:

• internal governance arrangements to support the minister and Secretary to collect and allocate funds in line with the DCP
• ways to prioritise projects or monitor and report on them.

DTP told us that work to establish appropriate governance is underway. This will form part of finalising the DCP now that the PSAC panel hearings have concluded. There have been arrangements in place to support the development of the DCP and interim development contributions are in place until it is finalised. There has been reporting to the minister, the former Fishermans Bend Development Board (the Board) and within DTP on the collection of these development contributions.

Open space uplift and DCP funding

The proposed approach to funding the essential infrastructure in Fishermans Bend includes:

• the draft DCP
• introducing an OSU.

The OSU intends to create a development incentive to help fund land for some parks. It would do this by incentivising developers to include a greater number of dwellings on each site if they agree to provide land for public open space. This would allow the number of dwellings in a site to exceed the original dwelling density requirements.

The City of Melbourne and the City of Port Phillip have been collecting public open space contributions to provide open space in Fishermans Bend as part of interim developer contribution arrangements. These arrangements have been in place since 2014.

Currently, in Victoria, a person who applies to subdivide land may be required to:

• set aside up to 8 per cent of the land for public open space
• pay up to 8 per cent of the site value of the land
• a combination of both.

Municipal councils can specify a different contribution amount in their planning scheme. Public open space contributions are sought through planning permit conditions for most residential subdivisions of 3 or more lots.

The draft DCP proposes consolidating this and other funding streams to help deliver open space.

Status of the DCP

Throughout the public consultation, DTP received 62 submissions in response to the proposed plans in the DCP. These submissions were made by the public and interested parties and related to several issues, including:

• land valuation and acquisition
• how the proposed funding approach, including the OSU, would operate and be implemented
• the scope of essential infrastructure.

In March 2024, the Minister for Planning referred all 62 submissions to the PSAC for independent review and advice. Between November 2024 and February 2025, the PSAC held public hearings to consider the submissions.

After public hearings, the PSAC produced a report that:

• assessed the issues raised
• recommended how the issues should be resolved.

The report was due on 14 March 2025 but was delayed. It was publicly released on 29 April 2025. 

As intended, the report provides advice to the responsible minister on recommended responses to the matters raised through the submissions.

Documents and activities supporting Fishermans Bend planning

Between 2019 and 2023, the Taskforce developed and released other documents that form part of Fishermans Bend planning and the research that supports it. DTP advised that these documents are important inputs to help complete the PIPs and the DCP.

DTP told us that the Taskforce has also been involved in progressing transport planning for the precinct. This includes:

• contributing to advice to government on options for improved transport connections between the CBD and Fishermans Bend
• progressing public announcements, such as the 2024 announcement of the preferred route and station locations for a future rail tunnel through Fishermans Bend and Docklands.

Operational context

Since the Framework was released in 2018, there have been multiple changes in the Fishermans Bend governance arrangements and operating environment. These have included:

• MoG changes. The Taskforce has sat within 3 different departments over the course of its existence and has had varying resources to perform its functions
• changes in ministerial portfolios. Eight different ministers have overseen Fishermans Bend and the Framework, meaning each new minister needed re-briefing
•  multiple changes in the reporting and governance structures for overseeing Fishermans Bend. For example, the Board stopped operating in 2023.

Governance structures

We identified the governance arrangements in place at various stages throughout the course of the Fishermans Bend development and assessed each structure based on its terms of reference, functions and role.

The nature and degree of change in the operational environment has contributed to slowing the Taskforce in planning and delivering projects for Fishermans Bend. However, overall, we found the governance structures in place for Fishermans Bend have:

• had well-documented roles and responsibilities
• had clear decision-making pathways
• provided for oversight of the Framework.

Cross-agency bodies

Cross-agency coordination and project prioritisation is important to help deliver the vision for Fishermans Bend.

Several committees and bodies have been set up over time to support, oversee and coordinate the whole-of-government operations for Fishermans Bend. This included the Taskforce, as described in Section 1. The following bodies played a key role in decision-making and coordination across agencies, as discussed in case studies 3 and 4.

Cross-agency coordination and project prioritisation

As the PIPs are yet to be finalised, committees and oversight bodies have not had the benefit of this detailed planning and fine-grain detail to support cross-agency coordination and project prioritisation for Fishermans Bend.

While cross-agency committees met and discussed updates, these updates were focused on the progress of key planning activities helping to guide partnerships and investment in Fishermans Bend. These included the:

• DCP
• Montague PIP
• Seed toolkit.

Council involvement in cross-agency coordination

Councils will be responsible for helping to deliver some of the projects under the Framework. To recognise this, the City of Melbourne and the City of Port Phillip were included as members of some cross-agency oversight committees up until 2021.

DTP provided us with documents that list the City of Melbourne and the City of Port Phillip as members of the following state government decision-making committees:

• Planning Interdepartmental Committee
• Major Projects Interdepartmental Committee
• Fishermans Bend Intergovernmental Delivery Group.

But the City of Melbourne told us that it does not have any records of it attending the Planning Interdepartmental Committee or the Major Projects Interdepartmental Committee.

After 2021, the governance arrangements changed and the City of Melbourne and the City of Port Phillip were no longer on these committees.

Following this, a Mayors Forum, CEO Forum and multiple officer-level working groups were established in 2019 with the intention of making sure there was continued knowledge-sharing, communication and council input into Fishermans Bend.

However, the City of Port Phillip provided us with emails that suggest it planned to stop attending the Mayors Forum meetings from July 2023.

Councils having inconsistent participation in governance for Fishermans Bend potentially limits both state and local government agencies' knowledge and understanding of:

• what others are doing
• the priorities for Fishermans Bend.

Fishermans Bend partnership agreement

The original Fishermans Bend partnership agreement between DTP, the City of Melbourne and the City of Port Phillip was signed in 2021. It outlined how the parties would engage as part of the development, and it was designed to:

• identify and establish priority projects for each of the precincts
• define the parties’ roles
• allow for transparent and open sharing of information
• enable a level of accountability for progress.

This partnership agreement expired in December 2022 during a time of change to departmental structure and governance. The Taskforce was shifted from the former DJPR into the newly formed DTP as a result of MoG changes that came into effect on 1 January 2023.

The City of Melbourne told us the agreement was extended to June 2023 as a ‘refresh’ to allow for MoG changes to be implemented. The Taskforce and the councils intended to comprehensively revise the agreement in June 2023.

However, the City of Melbourne told us that revisions were not prioritised later in 2023. This was because the Taskforce was focused on releasing the draft DCP and the councils were working on providing feedback on it.

New partnership agreement

The 3 parties drafted a new partnership agreement during 2024 and completed the draft in August of that year.

The City of Melbourne says it cannot finalise the partnership agreement until the work program in the agreement is comprehensively updated. It understands that this is awaiting ministerial approval.

The City of Melbourne told us the partnership agreement is central to how it understands and plans for resourcing, phasing and budgeting the Fishermans Bend work it is involved in. Its position is that continuing to work with the state without a partnership agreement in place opens it up to unnecessary risk. It does not want to be incorrectly perceived as validating work by the Taskforce that it does not consider it has been adequately consulted on.

The City of Port Phillip provided us with several pieces of correspondence it sent to departments, various ministers and the Deputy Premier. In this correspondence, it raised various issues and risks about delayed progress on infrastructure plans and projects. It asserts the state is failing ‘to honour the commitments’ of the partnership agreement by not consulting with it on key issues and decisions, describing it as ‘not a true partnership’.

DTP told us that consultation and engagement on the partnership agreement can only occur within the constraints of its operating environment. It notes that some material it holds is Cabinet-in-confidence and cannot be shared.

Case study on the Australia Post site

The case study below shows how the absence of PIPs and the DCP to inform detailed planning about land use contributed to inefficient coordination between the Taskforce, DE and the City of Port Phillip.

Framework timeframes

The Framework identifies key infrastructure projects for each of the 5 precincts in Fishermans Bend and specifies a delivery timeframe of:

• short term (2018–2020)
• medium term (2020–2025)
• long term (2025+).

The Framework lists 54 unique infrastructure projects to be delivered. Figure 6 breaks these projects down by precinct and timeframe.

Figure 6: Number of Framework infrastructure projects by precinct and timeframe 

Note: 'Multiple' refers to projects located across more than one precinct.
Source: VAGO, based on The Framework.

Revised timeframes

While doing early planning work for the PIPs and drafting the DCP, DTP has revised the delivery timeframes for many of the projects in the Framework. 

In doing so, it has now scheduled project completion work up to 2055. This means the development of Fishermans Bend will take at least 5 years longer than anticipated when the Framework was released in 2018. 

The draft DCP states the timeframe extension is due to the unforeseen impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on economic activity.

Short-term projects completed

The Framework listed 5 short-term projects. Agencies delivered all 5 within the Framework's specified timeframe. The short-term projects delivered were:

• building the South Melbourne Primary School and community hub
• upgrading route 96 and 109 tram stops (stops 126 and 125A) in Fishermans Bend
• intersection upgrades at City Road/Ferrars Streets in the Montague precinct
• developing Kirrip Park
• upgrading the streetscape at Railway Place/Ferrars Street.

Changes to the Framework's projects

As part of planning work for the Lorimer, Sandridge and Wirraway PIPs, DTP has altered some of the projects originally proposed in the Framework. This was done as part of the planning work in developing the DCP and in discussion with councils

After factoring in these changes to the original Framework’s projects, agencies will be responsible for delivering:

• 18 medium-term projects (reduced from 21)
• 23 long-term projects (reduced from 28).

Medium-term projects status

The revised number of medium-term projects for Fishermans Bend is 18. Agencies have completed 4 medium-term projects. The finished projects are the:

• JL Murphy Reserve upgrades (completed in 2020)
• Fishermans Bend education and community hub (renamed to Port Melbourne Secondary College and completed in 2022)
• pop-up community hub in the Bolte West precinct (completed in 2020–21)
• upgrade of the Westgate punt (completed in 2022–23).

The draft DCP and Montague PIP propose timeframe changes for some of the Framework's medium-term infrastructure projects, extending the original expected delivery date of some projects by up to 21 years.

With 14 medium-term projects delayed or deferred, the Framework is not on track to be delivered as planned. Delays or deferrals in delivering medium-term projects are likely to have run-on impacts that may mean the vision and targets set out in the Framework will not be achieved.

Long-term projects status

The Framework's long-term projects timeframe was less specific than those for short and medium-term projects. Many projects were listed as '2025+'.

The draft DCP and Montague PIP outline delivery plans and timeframes for 11 long-term projects, with completion dates ranging from 2024 to 2055.

However, this leaves 12 projects with no timeframe yet determined, noting that the Montague PIP only includes projects for a 10-year period.

Impact of outstanding projects

Some of the 37 Framework projects yet to be completed are substantial and could significantly impact overall outcomes of the Fishermans Bend development.

Remaining projects include:

• schools in 3 precincts that DE is currently planning for, with one under construction and planning to open in 2026
• transport infrastructure
• local council projects.

It is vital that DTP completes the remaining planning to give agencies adequate information and time to effectively plan and deliver the remaining projects, and to determine or seek funding for them.

Fishermans Bend Innovation Precinct

In 2021, DJPR contracted Development Victoria to deliver stage one of the Fishermans Bend Innovation Precinct (FBIP stage one) on the former General Motors Holden site.

The project scale is substantial. FBIP stage one makes up approximately half of the innovation precinct's planned roads, utility services and parks, including key intersection upgrades.

Development Victoria and DTP have worked with other agencies to establish a comprehensive project management plan that lays out:

• project governance, including joint working groups
• each party’s roles and responsibilities
• project control mechanisms, including procedures for managing scope change
• project quality management.

DTP leads project governance through a cross-government project control group, which makes sure projects have oversight and are regularly tracked. This includes through Development Victoria’s:

• detailed master program of activities, which is revised regularly
• regular reporting to the project control group
• comprehensive and fit-for-purpose risk management process for FBIP stage one
• project management and working groups to lead the various workstreams and oversee the overall project.

FBIP stage one is on track. Early works are complete and main works are in progress. There is approved funding to deliver the main works. FBIP stage one is expected to be completed in 2026 in line with its original planned timeframe.

Public transport

There have been considerable delays in planning and delivering public transport projects in Fishermans Bend, as demonstrated in the case study below.

Building schools in Fishermans Bend

Under the Framework, the government plans to deliver 5 education and community hubs across Fishermans Bend. An education and community hub is a primary or secondary school co-located with other community facilities or services.

The government plans to build one hub each in Lorimer, Montague and Sandridge and 2 hubs in Wirraway.

DE has made good progress by delivering the:

• South Melbourne Primary School and community hub in Montague
• Fishermans Bend education and community hub in Wirraway (renamed Port Melbourne Secondary College).

DE constructed both schools within the timeframes outlined in the Framework.

The Framework listed the Lorimer school as a medium-term project and the Sandridge and second Wirraway school as long-term projects.

However, in 2022, DE analysed demand forecasts and concluded that Sandridge and Wirraway would experience significant residential and commercial growth sooner than Lorimer.

As a result, DE began planning to deliver schools in Sandridge and Wirraway before Lorimer.

Roads and traffic management

Some projects in the Framework have gone ahead without the guidance, coordination and prioritisation that the PIPs are meant to give. The case study below shows what can happen when Framework projects go ahead without the broader planning needed to fully support them. It also reinforces how critical it is for key planning documents to be in place.

Current project statuses

Figure 7 shows the status of Fisherman's Bend projects in the Framework, their intended delivery agency (which will be further informed by the DCP), the original completion date indicated in the Framework and the expected completion date.

The table includes project statuses across each precinct, ordered by short term (2018–2020), medium term (2020–2025) and long term (2025+).

Evaluation methodology still in development

The Framework lists developing an evaluation methodology as a priority action to deliver by 2019. An evaluation methodology would allow agencies to report to government and the community on whether they are on track to achieve the Framework's goals, targets and objectives.

In October 2020, the Board advised the minister that a comprehensive methodology had not been developed. It described agencies putting reporting arrangements in place as urgent.

A DJPR internal audit from November 2021 found that it did not have effective monitoring and reporting arrangements for Fishermans Bend. DJPR accepted the findings and said it would begin monitoring and reporting by December 2022, subject to the approval of the DCP.

The PSC began reporting against proxy measures in early 2022.

While the DCP has not yet been finalised, DTP is in the early stages of developing an evaluation methodology to measure and evaluate the Framework’s progress. In late 2024, DTP engaged 2 research organisations as partners to help develop it.

DTP developed a strategic research agenda in March 2024, which includes a potential topic on ‘Establishing an evaluation framework for measuring outcomes in precincts – a case study of Fishermans Bend’.

In November 2024, DTP confirmed funding for and began a project called FILTER: Framework for Integrated Land and Transport Evaluation for Renewal Precincts. It says this work will produce a methodology for how it evaluates achieving outcomes for renewal precinct projects, including Fishermans Bend.

Measuring delivery of the Framework

Having measurable goals, objectives and targets is important so agencies can understand if they are achieving the vision for Fishermans Bend. Monitoring performance allows agencies to track their progress in meeting their objectives and to adjust delivery if required.

The Framework outlines:

• 8 sustainability goals, with:
  • 2 to 13 objectives for each goal, with a total of 43 objectives
  • performance targets for each goal
• 54 key infrastructure projects across the 5 precincts
• 12 planning actions to prepare for implementing the Framework.

Fishermans Bend has 30 performance targets set out in the Framework:

• 29 are linked to the 8 sustainability goals, which aim to drive overall social, environmental and economic planning for the area
• the remaining target is for Fishermans Bend to be home to 80,000 residents by 2050. It is referred to throughout the Framework but is not linked to any specific goal or objective.

Linking key projects and actions to the Framework's goals and objectives

The Framework links each of the 54 infrastructure projects and the 12 planning actions to one or more of its sustainability goals and objectives.

Each sustainability goal is supported by objectives, which are in turn supported by strategies.
However, the infrastructure projects and planning actions are not linked to all of the objectives and goals. They are linked to:

• 21 (49 per cent) of the Framework's objectives
• 6 (75 per cent) of the Framework's goals.

The Framework does not make it clear how it will achieve the remaining 51 per cent of objectives and 25 per cent of goals. They do not have any infrastructure projects or planning actions linked to or supporting them, and do not otherwise specify how they will be achieved.

DTP told us that the projects and planning actions are not the only way its sustainability goals and objectives are delivered.

However, without a monitoring and reporting framework to determine how the objectives and goals will be measured and achieved, it is not clear how agencies' actions help to achieve the Framework’s intended outcomes.

PSC cross-agency monitoring and reporting

In March 2022, the PSC noted that different state and local government agencies shared responsibility for some of the Fishermans Bend projects. To improve central oversight of these projects, the PSC established a cross-agency monitoring and reporting process, which had not existed up to this point.
The process aimed to capture projects' delivery status, performance, risks and ways to mitigate them.
The PSC's reporting was bimonthly and included:

• an overview of key government budget commitments for Fishermans Bend
• government's population, housing and transport targets
• committed next steps and key projects
• a monitoring and reporting dashboard, which outlined:
  • government policy and budget commitments
  • Fishermans Bend–related projects for each department or agency.

PSC performance reporting methods

The PSC did not directly track progress toward the Framework's targets of providing homes for 80,000 people and employment for 80,000 people. Instead, it used proxy measures to record and report on:

• the number of dwellings in the development pipeline
• the amount of commercial floor area in the development pipeline.

The PSC used these measures due to the complexity in measuring the Framework’s goals directly while infrastructure was still being developed.

DTP advised us that the PSC used these proxy measures to help agencies to broadly understand if they were on track to achieve the Framework's objectives. This is because they are tangible, verifiable quantities that indicate development activity within the precinct.

However, the PSC did not have a reporting framework that outlined:

• its reasons for using these proxy measures
• the way the proxy measures worked
• how the proxy measures represented progress towards the Framework's objectives
• how the proxy measures would change over time as Fishermans Bend developed.

Figure 8 compares the Framework's targets with the data the PSC collected and includes reporting from September 2022.

Figure 8: Examples of PSC performance measures

Note: Data is from September 2022. The development pipeline includes projects that are built, under construction and approved (not built). It excludes projects that are under assessment.

Source: VAGO, based on PSC meeting papers from December 2022.

PSC monitoring and coordination

Agencies used the PSC as a forum to help coordinate some work across government.

For example, in the July 2022 meeting, the PSC discussed transport safety issues near Port Melbourne Secondary College. This produced 3 actions for:

• DoT, DJPR and the former Department of Education and Training to meet and then engage with councils on the issue
• DJPR to engage with DoT and other agencies on priority infrastructure delivery
• DJPR to share a list of priority infrastructure items at a future PSC meeting.

Papers from the following meeting in October show DJPR had started working with DoT and the City of Port Phillip on the safety issue. DJPR also shared proposed criteria for funding priority projects and recommended immediate release of funding for safety improvements as a high priority.

In another example, the PSC dashboard noted that the Lorimer and Wirraway health and wellbeing hubs were to be consolidated into the Inner South Community Hospital, proposed to be relocated out of Fishermans Bend. Recognising that the consolidation and relocation could result in a risk to health service provision, the PSC suggested that the Department of Health work with DJPR to advise on the health services required to meet future population needs in Fishermans Bend.

Agencies did not continue this cross-agency reporting after the PSC ceased in January 2023, which was due to MoG changes.

DTP's reporting on development activity

DTP reported to the Board on development activity after the PSC wound up. It continued to focus on similar metrics and targets as the PSC, but it made some changes.

The main change was to use data on commercial floor area and dwellings to estimate the number of residents and permanent new jobs the precinct could support.

DTP began to use these figures to calculate their progress towards the Framework's residential, employment and affordable housing targets. DTP believes this reporting method better reflects its progress towards achieving outcomes and strategic objectives. The results are included in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Development activity in Fishermans Bend as at December 2023

Note: Data is from December 2023. The development pipeline includes projects that are built, under construction and approved (not built). It excludes projects that are under assessment. Also, we note that DTP reported progress toward the jobs target as 25 per cent, but they did not include the NEIC in the jobs target, which accounts for 40,000 jobs.

Source: VAGO, based on DTP reporting to the Board in December 2023.

Data quality

We analysed DTP's reporting on development activity for June and December 2023. We found data quality issues that undermined the reliability of the reporting.

It was clear that while some data in DTP’s reporting was being updated, other related data that should also have been updated was not, meaning the results shown were not reliable.

DTP advised us that MoG changes and related internal restructures meant it lost key staff who maintained reports. This created challenges in interpreting data.

It said it has since worked to improve the clarity, accuracy and robustness of reporting and to resolve the issues we identified.

Lack of public reporting

Considering the economic scale of developing Fishermans Bend and the impact it will have on the surrounding communities, it is important that the public can see how the work is progressing.

DTP advised that the status of all major investment in government's catalyst projects and infrastructure is publicly reported.

Aside from this, agencies do not currently report publicly on their progress towards delivering the projects in the Framework.

This contributes to a lack of transparency on the status of key projects, which means that the public cannot understand if intended outcomes outlined in the Framework are being achieved.