Voluntary home buyback schemes are funded by the state and federal governments but the responsibility for the ongoing use and maintenance of that land falls on local government. That has meant 20 hectares of land in Brisbane and more in surrounding council areas. (Brisbane city acquires 20 hectares of public land through post-floods property buyback scheme, ABC News)
We already have so much public land in our region that there will never be enough funding for it to be managed to a high standard by councils. Creek catchment and bushcare groups, and other volunteer organisations help in places where they can find the volunteers or funding. And most residents maintain the verge in front of their homes.
Not only do the buyback properties add to the total land to be maintained by councils, it is land that can be expected to flood frequently, and it is likely to have some levels of contamination from the previous use.
How can we turn that liability into an asset?
Here is some research and ideas about how this land could be used to contribute to the sustainability of the city and region as a whole.
Saturation point: Parks as water infrastructure article by Dan Nyandega, and the research paper it was based on…
Beyond Flood Resilience—Rethinking Typology and Strategies for Flood-Prone Buyback Land in Suburban Brisbane by Dan Nyandega and Lauren Williams, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology (QUT).
Nyandega, D., & Williams, L. (2025). Sustainability, 17(12), 5565. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125565People Powered Green Spaces for Climate—a 2025 entry by a multidisciplinary team Anjalee Panditha (public health), Evelyn Liew (engineering), and Sebastian Bernal Garcia (environmental science) in the Natural Hazards Research Australia’s Disaster Challenge about the use of public land for managing stormwater and flood mitigation
How might we translate these ideas into doable, affordable, and sustainable action?
Different Approaches
Guerilla gardening by community members ignores the risks of contaminated soil and further environmental damage done by unwise planting. It also lacks a strategy for long term maintenance. Like verge gardening, it carries the risk of neighbourhood battles over their preferred use of the land. I’ve also heard suggestions of random tree planting, car parking, playgrounds, and community food gardens.
Seek funding for recommended uses as described in the papers above. However, there are many excellent projects competing for funding. The dispersed nature of buyback properties would make it difficult to compete on political or environmental grounds. A need for recurring funding for ongoing maintenance makes it even less viable.
The current approach is to use turf and sometimes a few trees. Many of these properties adjoin parks so it’s just a matter of extending the mowing area slightly. Even then, remaining residents complain that it isn’t mown frequently enough. Mowing grass is the low-commitment, high-maintenance but easily outsourced option for parks, verges, and even private gardens.
What if we could find another way to implement the ideas of using flood-prone land suggested in the research? What if we turn dealing with this problem into opportunity and community assets?
A Creative and Collaborative Approach
It’s no accident that SDG17 is partnerships and Doughnut Economic has networks.
While most people have accepted that the problems we face are interlinked, we still tend towards linear, single-issue solutions. What’s needed is a range of solutions that meet multiple needs—and at the very least don’t benefit one area at the expense of others.
It all hinges on networks, collaboration, trust and relationships.
That’s the point of the Shady Lanes Project approach to verge gardens - we form collaborations first as individual gardeners, councils, and nature working together for a wide range of benefits. Once we’ve done that, we can leverage and scale outward with more diverse participants and more diverse projects.
This approach shifts councils and residents from being confrontational to being aligned with a shared purpose. When we’ve done that, we begin asking what can be done by combining the resources we have available.
What we already have
Council verge garden policies combined with the Garden on the Verge approach
Residents who care about their neighbourhood
The land from the buybacks
The research above
Expertise and experience within councils about urban forests, contaminated land, stormwater management, and related fields.
Existing frameworks within councils for working with local volunteers for bushcare, catchment creeks, and other community groups.
Existing networks and community groups on the ground, social media groups, Substacks, example verge gardens of council-planted street trees with resident-planted native verge gardens.
What could we do with that?
We could use verge gardens as the entry point for residents and community groups. This is the place and activity where residents learn by doing—about planting in public spaces, keeping onside with neighbours, why and how to follow council policies. These verge projects can be used to form small groups of committed residents. This is where we begin to build the trust and relationships needed for networks and collaboration.
Councils create a new policy based on their verge garden policies - with Council planting and maintaining trees and residents doing low-growing native plants with additional focus on species and design for flood mitigation.
When a group has enough committed volunteers from the immediate area (all of whom have proven their commitment by doing their own verge garden) they apply to do a site.
Council approves it with any additional requirements based on their knowledge of contaminated land, drainage, and suitable native plants. Councils would need to decide how they want to manage these groups (similar to bushcare, catchment groups, community gardens.)
Governance and insurance could require local groups to be incorporated or come under the umbrella of a larger incorporated organisation.
Note: These plots are in residential areas, not creeks and other sensitive areas that would require professional management or oversight. The local community groups would be responsible for ensuring their residents stay within council guidelines.
What’s the next step?
The intention of this post is to start conversations to take us closer to a solution that can scale outwards into many localised projects.
Please share this post with your colleagues, and consider ways to address the “Yes, but..” and “What about” questions. Welcome these questions as they make us think harder to come up with better solutions.
And share your questions and thoughts with a wider network using the comments below.
Subscribe or follow to keep up with where we go from here.