1. Decisions that have Shaped Planning in Rural and Regional Victoria:
MAV: Rural and Regional Planning Conference 2013
Decisions that have Shaped Planning in
Rural and Regional Victoria:
One Step Ahead ….
Kathy Mitchell, Chief Panel Member, Planning Panels Victoria
4 July 2013

2. 1. Planning Panels Victoria
Role of Planning Panels
Independent forum for the conduct of public hearings and consideration of submissions
Prepares reports and recommendations in respect of Planning Scheme Amendments, Environment Effects Inquiries, Advisory Committees and other referred matters
Structure
7 full time Panel Members, (plus project manager/officer and admin support staff) – all very approachable
70 Sessional Panel Members with various skills and backgrounds ( reviewed late 2012)

3. 1. Planning Panels Victoria
PPV is not VCAT
VCAT makes decisions based on the existing law and VPPs – focus on statutory planning
Panels are often concerned about changing the Planning Scheme – the focus is on strategic planning
Panels are not the final decision maker – they provide independent, expert advice to the Planning Authority and Minister
PPV does not make decisions
Notwithstanding, most Panel recommendations are accepted and adopted

4. 2. Key PPV Matters
MSS Reviews
Growth Area Plans
Coastal Strategies
Retail Reviews
Rural Strategies
EES Projects
Gaming Policies
Wind Energy Facilities
‘Omnibus’ (Southern Grampians C25)
Standard Development Contributions Advisory Committee

5. 3. MSS Reviews
Ballarat, Bass Coast, Wodonga, Mildura, Warrnambool, Moorabool, Campaspe, Colac Otway, Indigo, et al
Complementary to, and consistent with the SPPF
MSS’s to be written concisely and in plain English
Are strategically based and robust
Provide clear policy direction for the municipality
Adhere to best practice guidelines and precedent
Focus on relevant themes and/or geographic spaces
Clause 21 and Clause 22 do not repeat each other - eliminate verbosity and repetitiveness
What most regard as policy, can be included as part of Clause 21
Structure and language continues to raise issues
PPV consolidated report on drafting of MSS’s
Its all about the process
Some controversy about whether Panels has a broader responsibility to ensure that the detail of Amendments is technically perfect OR
Just recommend in relation to unresolved submissions – Example Port Phillip
Planning Authorities get agitated if we ‘stray outside our brief’. VCAT get agitated if we don’t
Authorisation process through DPCD is supposed to deal with this – but doesn’t always pick up anomalies. Eg Horsham
Authorisation process might be something that may change ??

6. DCPs, who should pay and apportionment
4. Growth Area Plans
Armstrong Creek, Ballarat West, North of Merri River Warrnambool, Latrobe, Shepparton
DCPs, who should pay and apportionment
Level of detail in a PSP or Master Plan - long term framework plans
Multiple or single landowners
Timing and staging issues
Biodiversity, native vegetation
Different views on the ‘vision’ for an area between Council and landowners
As a Panel or Advisory Committee?
Doing the strategy work may take anything up to 2 years on its own
Strategic work is important – it must align with State policy and MSS

7. Greater Geelong, Glenelg, South Gippsland, East Gippsland, Bass Coast
5. Coastal Strategies
Greater Geelong, Glenelg, South Gippsland, East Gippsland, Bass Coast
Complex matters that require significant thought and time
Planning responses to flooding and erosion threats
Rising sea levels – 0.8m policy directive
Protection of coastal landscapes
Introduction of Significant Landscape Overlay, Environment Significance Overlay, Design and Development Overlay, Development Plan Overlay into various schemes
Inclusion of new local policy re coastal Structure Plans
Consideration of appropriate controls (e.g. Narrawong)
Other rules of Natural justice:
The right to defend charges
The right to be represented
The right to not be intimidated
The opportunity to prepare a case
No prejudgement

8. Wellington C71: Old and Inappropriate Subdivision
5. Coastal Continued
Wellington C71: Old and Inappropriate Subdivision
Council proposed to introduce permanent development controls and back zoning of 90 Mile Beach subdivision area to the RCZ
Council and the State Government have also been running a voluntary title hand back scheme, in recognition that development is inappropriate
Nearly 12,000 residential lots created without services in the 1950s – 1970s in the dunes
Panel supported the Amendment but recognised the difficulty that land holders have faced in attempting to develop or gain fair value for their lots, often purchased in good faith over 40 years ago

9. Mildura C63, C67 and C68, Warrnambool C63, C70, C84, Bass Coast
6. Retail Reviews
Mildura C63, C67 and C68, Warrnambool C63, C70, C84, Bass Coast
‘Competition’ based on policy between major players, particularly supermarkets
Strategy – and then along comes something outside of the Strategy – how to deal with it
Very dynamic retail and commercial environment
Cost and length of time to deal with retail amendments – often very highly contested – will that change with the introduction of the two new Commercial Zones?
Multiple amendments heard together – savings in time and cost

10. 7. Rural Land Use Strategies
Baw Baw C44; Campaspe C69, Shepparton C121, Moira C51; Ballarat C148 and C149; Surf Coast C67; Colac Otway C69
One Panel to hear three amendments in three municipalities as part of one process
When and how to use the RAZ and RCZ
Greater flexibility in use of the FZ
Fire, water and other environmental constraints
Protection of agriculture in the regions
As of right provisions

11. 8. EES Projects
Geelong Ring Road, Lonsdale Golf Course, Point Lonsdale (Stockland) Redevelopment, Princes Highway EES, Western Highway duplication (3 projects), Tarrone Power Station
Resourcing – very high costs to all players
Community angst – no change scenario
Native vegetation and threatened species
VicRoads standards – variation in different regions
EES processes – result in very technical reports, significant amount of detail
Difficult for local Communities to absorb

12. 10. Gaming Policies
Benalla C21, Campaspe C87, Macedon Ranges C64, Greater Geelong C168, Mitchell C50, Greater Bendigo C110, Ballarat C154 (current)
Local planning policy
Mapping prohibited areas
Mapping discouraged areas
Net community benefit
Socio economic and gaming vulnerability indices
Destination gaming
Existing use rights
Township zone

13. 11. Wind Energy Facilities
Assessed 23 major wind farms under EES or called in permit provisions between
Flora and fauna
Landscape
Noise
Construction traffic
Social division
Planning control handed back to Local Government in 2011
Limited new proposals being considered by PPV
Some now being considered through EES process, e.g. Penshurst in western Victoria

14. 12. Omnibus (Southern Grampians)
Amendment C25 (multiple components)
Hamilton Structure Plan
Economic Development Strategy
Retail Strategy
Planning Scheme review – revised MSS
Hamilton Airport Master Plan
Various rezonings in and around Hamilton
Introduction of various Urban Design Master Plans
Introduction of a Parking Precinct Plan
Identification of an investigation route for a proposed truck bypass (heavy vehicle route)
South Gippsland – four amendments heard together

15. Standard Development Contributions AC
13. Advisory Committees
Standard Development Contributions AC
Report 1 – Setting the Framework - released January 2013
Report 2 – Setting the Levies - submitted May 2013
Significant consultation – engaged with all regions in Victoria, as well as in Qld and NSW
Development Settings, Allowable Items
Standard Levies for Growth Areas, Urban Areas and Strategic Development Areas
Potential exists for all municipalities to set levies for all forms of new residential and commercial and industrial development for local items of infrastructure

16. 14. Concluding Comments
PPV recognises the strategic work that Councils put into amendments
PPV understands the tightness of resources and that most work is done in house, with varying levels of support from elected representatives
More self representation at Panels – mostly very good
Although, sometimes better to have an advocate, particularly in contested matters
Grouping of amendments to save costs, and to achieve consistency in consideration by Panels
In preparation for hearings, read like matters
Ministerial Direction No 15 is working very well, gives good notice of forthcoming matters