Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014 · Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014...

Attachments: 1. Supporting Attachment 2. Melbourne Planning Scheme Review Report 2014

Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda item 6.5 Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014 Presenter: David Mayes, Manager Strategic Planning

Purpose and background

1. The purpose of this report is to seek the Future Melbourne Committee’s endorsement of the Melbourne Planning Scheme Review Report 2014 (refer Attachment 2).

2. Section 12B of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires a planning authority (Council) to review the provisions of the planning scheme within one year following the date by which Council is required to approve its Council Plan (which was 30 June 2013). On completion of the review, the Council must report the findings of the review to the Minister for Planning.

Key issues

3. The City of Melbourne was granted an extension to 30 August 2014 to submit the review. This was to ensure a number of significant State policy positions, in particular Plan Melbourne could be referenced in the review.

4. In compliance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 the review has been undertaken using the (former) Department of Planning and Community Development Continuous Improvement Review Kit as the audit tool. This has dictated the format of the Review Report.

5. The Melbourne Planning Scheme provides the legislative framework, the overarching strategic vision and the objectives, strategies and provisions which regulate the use and development of land within the municipality.

6. The Review found that generally the Melbourne Planning Scheme adequately reflects Council’s objectives for the use and development of land in the municipality. However areas for improvement have been identified as follows:

6.1. Provisions are required to be amended or introduced to respond to recent State Government initiatives particularly the Victorian Governments Metropolitan Planning Strategy, Plan Melbourne.

6.2. Several existing built form amenity provisions should be reviewed and strengthened to ensure they provide sufficient guidance.

Recommendation from management

7. That the Future Melbourne Committee:

7.1. endorses the Melbourne Planning Scheme Review Report 2014 at Attachment 2

7.2. requests management forward the Melbourne Planning Scheme Review Report 2014 to the Minister for Planning.

of 44

1

Supporting Attachment

Legal

1. The Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 2014 has been undertaken to meet the requirements established in Section 12B of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Finance

2. There are no direct costs associated with the Melbourne Planning Scheme Review Report 2014.

3. Projects which arise out of the review will have varying financial impacts which will be factored into the preparation of future Strategic Planning branch budgets.

Conflict of interest

4. No member of Council staff, or other person engaged under a contract, involved in advising on or preparing this report has declared a direct or indirect interest in relation to the matter of the report.

Stakeholder consultation

5. The Review has been undertaken in consultation with the internal stakeholders. This Internal consultation has factored in feedback received from external stakeholders. Aside from this no external stakeholder consultation has been undertaken or is proposed in the preparation of the Review.

Relation to Council policy (if applicable)

6. The review of the Melbourne Planning Scheme has highlighted the planning schemes consistency with, and implementation of the vision and land use and development goals of, Future Melbourne Community Plan and Council Plan 2013–17.

Environmental sustainability

7. In undertaking this review environmental sustainability policy development has been considered and any policy gaps in the Melbourne Planning Scheme have been identified.

Attachment 1 Agenda item 6.5

Future Melbourne Committee 5 August 2014

of 44

Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 2014

1

MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME REVIEW 2014 JULY 2014

of 44

haneis

Text Box

Attachment 2 Agenda item 6.5 Future Melbourne Committee 5 August 2014


2

of 44


3

Table of Contents

Introduction 4

Consistency with SPPF 7

Local Planning Policy Framework 9

Assess the Strategic Objectives 15

Strategic Gaps 17

Links with the Council Plan 21

VPP Implementation Tools (LPPs, Zones, Overlays) 23

Format, Consistency and Usability 24

Assess the Monitoring of the Planning Scheme 26

Statutory Planning Services 27

Program for the Review of the Planning Scheme 29

Appendices 30

Appendix 1: Audit of the 2008 Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 31

Appendix 2: Analysis of State Government Policies, Strategies and Initiatives 35

of 44


4

INTRODUCTION

The review of the Melbourne Planning Scheme (MPS) is required under Section 12B of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act). It ensures that the planning scheme addresses current planning issues and is delivering Council’s strategic planning goals.

A planning scheme is to be reviewed no later than one year after the date by which Council is required to approve its Council Plan. On completion of a review, the Council must report the findings of the review to the Minister for Planning. The City of Melbourne (CoM) was granted an extension to 30 August 2014 to ensure significant State policy, released in May 2014, could be incorporated into its review.

The objective of the review is to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the planning scheme in achieving the objectives of planning in Victoria and the objectives of the planning framework.

The review must evaluate the planning scheme to ensure that it is consistent in form and content with Ministerial directions and guidelines, sets out effective policy objectives for the use and development of land and makes effective use of State provisions and local provisions to give effect to State and local policy objectives.

The new format MPS was introduced in 1999 and was reviewed in 2004 and 2008. This review outlines the findings of the audit of the MPS undertaken by the CoM between February and June 2014.

The 2008 Review The Audit of the 2008 Melbourne Planning Scheme Review is at Appendix 1. The 2008 review and audit of the MPS identified eight strategic topics and led to a significant suite of changes to the MPS. The 2008 Review incorporated the main goals of the Future Melbourne Community Plan into the MPS which aligned it with the then Council Plan. The main changes to the MPS following the 2008 Review have been:

• Amendment C142 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) (gazetted as Clause 22.23 on 13 March 2014).

• Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), gazetted on 11 September 2013. The key directions in the new MSS are:

• planning for long-term growth in identified areas;

• a well-connected and accessible city;

• new developments to complement public places and spaces;

• creating an 'eco-city’; and

• supporting a vibrant, diverse and complementary mix of land uses.

• Amendment C186 Central City (Hoddle Grid) Heritage Review. Part 1, to include 87 buildings, approved by the Minister for Planning on 25 July 2013.

• Amendment C171 Southbank (gazetted 20 June 2013).

• Amendment C187 Energy, Water and Waste Efficiency (gazetted as Clause 22.19 on 4 April 2013).

• Amendment C163 Student Housing Policy (gazetted as Clause 22.24 on 16 August 2011).

of 44


5

Further planning scheme amendments based on the 2008 review that are underway are:

• Amendment C186 Central City (Hoddle Grid) Heritage Review. Part 2, 10 remaining buildings are being further assessed and considered;

• Amendment C196 City North – adopted by Council on 29 April 2014;

• Amendment C190 Arden-Macaulay – on hold due to the East West Link;

• Amendment C198 City North Heritage Review;

• Amendment C207 Arden-Macaulay Heritage Review;

• Amendment C215 Kensington Heritage Review;

• Amendment C208 Development Contributions Plans Overlay;

• Amendment C209 Public Open Space Contributions; and

• Review of the heritage local policies.

Other policies and strategies which address the major issues identified in the 2008 review and may, in part, be implemented through the MPS include:

• The City North Structure Plan;

• The Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan;

• Housing Strategy (Homes for People);

• Walking Plan;

• Transport Strategy 2012;

• Heritage Strategy;

• Docklands Community and Place Plan;

• Docklands Public Realm Plan;

• Bicycle Plan 2012-16;

• Access Docklands;

• Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal;

• Total Watermark – City as a Catchment Update 2014;

• Open Space Strategy;

• Growing Green Guide; and

• Urban Forest Strategy.

Changes to the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP) also address identified issues, these include:

• VPP – Clause 12 strengthened through VC105 (Gazetted 20/12/2013) implemented reforms to Victoria’s native vegetation and biodiversity provisions; and

• Amendment VC92 to the Victoria Planning Provisions (urban renewal in Fishermans Bend and E-Gate).

The MPS as amended over the past four years provides a good foundation to continue to guide planning in the CoM over the next four years.

of 44


6

Methodology To ensure that the review meets the requirements of the Act, the Department of Planning and Community Development’s Continuous Improvement Review Kit was used as the audit tool. The steps of the review:

• Collection of data to guide the review of the MPS, this includes: past audits, changes to the MPS, Government strategy, VCAT decisions, Council Plan and planning performance data;

• Consultation with internal users of the MPS;

• Review and analysis of data; and

• Conclusions and reporting the findings.

The findings are reported on the following pages using the categories of, and responding to the questions in the Continuous Improvement Review Kit.

of 44


7

CONSISTENCY WITH SPPF

Does the planning scheme further the objectives of planning in Victoria? The MPS does further the objectives of planning in Victoria and addresses all of the objectives under Section 4a of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Does the planning scheme advance the strategic directions in the State Policy Planning Framework (SPPF) and adequately implement State Policy applicable to the municipality? The MPS generally provides a local interpretation of the SPPF, advances the strategic directions in the SPPF and implements State Policy applicable to the municipality.

The following areas could be strengthened within the LPPF to better reflect SPPF intentions and strengthen the local interpretation of the SPPF (this does not include work that is underway):

• Whilst the LPPF is not inconsistent with the SPPF, there may be scope to align terms, incorporate local interpretation and further the strategic directions of the SPPF (as amended to incorporate Plan Melbourne). This may include:

• Transport initiatives and strategies;

• Reference to 20-minute neighbourhoods;

• Further work has been identified in the CoM Indigenous Heritage Action Plan, which may require a planning scheme amendment to implement;

• Further work relating to the future of industry may be necessary; and

• Housing diversity and provision of affordable housing.

An analysis of State policies, strategies and initiatives has been undertaken to ensure the MPS is consistent with the strategic direction of the State (refer Appendix 2). Since 2008 there have been a number of changes in State policy. While the MPS is generally consistent with the changes, inconsistencies relate to proposed new transport strategies and priorities and Council’s no longer having the ability to manage restaurants in local shopping centres have been identified.

The SPPF is currently under review, with the draft Planning Policy Framework (draft PPF) released for consultation in March 2014. The CoM submission to the review was generally supportive but highlighted:

• Policy gaps and omissions, including the role of the Central City in accommodating significant residential and employment growth and the contribution to the economic prosperity of the State;

• The emphasis on thematic planning which would not allow for Council to express its vision for growth and development and local area planning as identified in the MSS; and

• Repetition and superfluous information and minor structural changes which, when addressed, will help to rationalise and reduce the length of the PPF.

The new metropolitan planning strategy, Plan Melbourne, was released in May 2014 and has been incorporated into the MPS via Amendment VC106 (gazetted 30 May 2014). It is anticipated that further detail will be included through the review of the SPPF.

of 44


8

A review of the alignment between the MPS and Plan Melbourne has been undertaken to ensure the MPS continues to advance the strategic directions of State Policy. Generally the MSS will need to be reviewed to ensure it is consistent with Plan Melbourne. Areas identified that may require future update or review include:

• Updates to reflect the transport strategies and initiatives identified in Plan Melbourne;

• Updates with regard to the Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area;

• Further strengthening of the Parkville Employment Cluster including Carlton Connect in the MPS;

• Improvements to the quality and amenity of residential apartments;

• Strengthening of health planning in the MPS; and

• Integrating noise and air quality guidelines.

Are there clear links between the SPPF and the LPPF? The links between the SPPF and LPPF are clear. On occasion there is repetition between the SPPF and the LPPF, this will need to be reviewed and addressed following the finalisation of the PPF and future work integrating the LPPF.

Conclusion The MPS is consistent with, and provides a local interpretation of the SPPF.

of 44


9

LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Have any issues emerged with the MSS since any previous review?

• Inconsistencies with State policy

• Difficulty in defending policy basis at VCAT

• Out-dated policy

• Outstanding items from the last review

• Issues raised in consultation

• MSS and City Index Monitoring Papers

Inconsistencies with State policy

The MSS is generally consistent with State policy, inconsistencies have been noted in relation to local shopping centres and their convenience role and the new transport initiatives and priorities identified in Plan Melbourne.

Difficulty in defending policy basis at VCAT

The MSS can generally be defended at VCAT. However concerns with defending decisions which rely on the following local policies have been noted:

• 22.07 Advertising Signs (and guidance relating to Advertising Signs elsewhere in the MPS);

• 22.01 Urban Design within the Capital City Zone; and

• 22.04 and 22.05 heritage local policies.

Difficulties in defending building height in relation to the definition of architectural features in the DDOs and the policy basis of the discretionary DDOs have been experienced as in some cases the desired built form outcomes and design objectives may lack clarity to guide decision making.

Out-dated policy

The review has identified that several local policies require updating and strengthening. These include:

• 22.01, 22.17 and 22.18 Urban Design policies;

• 22.02 Sunlight to Public Open Spaces;

• 22.04 and 22.05 Heritage Policies;

• 22.07 Advertising Signs;

• 22.20 CBD Lanes; and

• A number of the DDOs, including the DDOs in the Docklands Zone, which need to be reviewed and updated to ensure consistency across the municipality and appropriate decision guidance triggers (in some DDOs no permit is required to construct below the discretionary height limit).

of 44


10

Outstanding items from last review:

Outstanding items from last review include:

• Advertising signs;

• Urban design policies including sunlight to public open space;

• Heritage policies (review currently underway); and

• Unnecessary permit triggers in DDOs.

In addition to the work identified in the 2008 review, the 2004 review of the MPS identified the need for two new local policies – Bicycle Facilities and Accessible Buildings.

Bicycle Facilities Policy

The CoM is considering whether the State provisions (Clause 52.34) are adequate in an inner city context. The review also considers motorcycle parking.

Accessible Buildings Policy

As this has still not been addressed at State level, the introduction of an Accessible Buildings Policy should be reconsidered.

Issues raised in consultation:

Targeted consultation has been undertaken with CoM officers.

Feedback, which the MPS can address and is not underway, can be broadly summarised as:

• General administration:

• updates to referencing and reference documents within the MPS; and

• address ambiguity surrounding the definition of the Hoddle Grid and the Central City; the problem arises from giving the name “Hoddle Grid” to a local area, the boundary of the local area does not correspond with what is meant by Hoddle Grid in policy.

• The MSS:

• review statements that seek to manage restaurants and ensure shopping areas retain their convenience role for residents and workers.

• Urban design and built form:

• 22.01 requires strengthening, particularly in regard to tower separation, podium heights and building setbacks;

• design considerations such as balconies, canopies/awnings, materiality/texture; and

• consideration of ATM’s and over-road structures.

• Open Space:

• review Sunlight to Public Open Space (22.02) to ensure all open space is appropriately protected;

• address the overshadowing of streets; and

• address and strengthen the guidance relating to the shadowing of the Yarra River.

• Advertising signs:

of 44


11

• a review of the operation of all clauses and schedules that relate to advertising signs.

• Zones (and schedules to the zones):

• CCZ – review permit triggers within the CCZ and triggers for matters to the “satisfaction of the responsible authority”; and

• window displays (a lack of definition within the MPS).

• Overlays:

• DDOs in the Docklands Zone – inadequate permit triggers (no permit is required to construct below the discretionary height).

• Particular Provision;

• investigate if 52.06 can include a requirement for loading bays for waste collection and furniture removals.

• Car parking:

• promote car share spaces within private property.

• Policy and guideline gaps, including:

• apartment design, internal amenity and provision of gardens, communal spaces, play spaces etc. in tall buildings;

• climate change adaptation/resilience; and

• no guidance in the MPS on the mandatory height restrictions determined by the airfields.

• Strategic Plans and Projects identified include:

• West Melbourne, Dynon precinct, Fishermans Bend – areas requiring further guidance; and

• any land use implications stemming from infrastructure projects including East West Link and Melbourne Rail Link.

• Walking Plan and the provision of through block pedestrian links.

• Application requirements and the provision of requiring more detailed / 3D modelling.

Is there repetition or conflict in the MSS, such as between housing and settlement policies? The revised MSS provides clear guidance, largely without repetition, to support the city’s growth and development over the next 40 years.

However, there is inconsistency between 21.04 Settlement and Figure 2 in 21.06 Built Environment and Heritage as this does not illustrate the expanded Central City.

Does the MSS comply with the Format of Municipal Strategic Statements (February 1999) VPP Practice Note? The MSS does comply with the VPP Practice Note.

Does the MSS need simplification or clarification in any area?

• Have issues been raised in consultation?

• Is there difficulty in arguing a case in officer reports or at VCAT hearings?

of 44


12

Besides the need to address the definition of the Hoddle Grid and the Central City the MSS provides clear direction. No difficulties have been noted in arguing a case is officer reports or at VCAT hearings in relation to the MSS.

Is any aspect of the MSS not relevant to land use decision-making?

• Do officer reports refer to the MSS? There is some information contained in the MSS which provides context and adds a descriptive element to some clauses, however, there are no objectives and strategies in the MSS which are not relevant to land use decision making.

Officer reports refer to the MSS as appropriate.

Are there any matters raised in VCAT decisions, or Planning Panel or Advisory Committee reports that require improvements to the LPPF? Difficulty in defining and defending architectural features, as identified in the mandatory height DDOs has been experienced. A recent Supreme Court decision has broadened the interpretation of architectural features and has identified the need to undertake a review of the wording in the MPS.

Local Policy 22.01 Urban Design within the Capital City Zone requires review. The CoM has experienced difficulties at VCAT, in that the elements which 22.01 is attempting to manage are not holding sufficient weight in decision making. The LPPF may not be the appropriate place for these controls and other tools, such as DDOs, need to be investigated (e.g. as for Southbank, Schedule 60 to the DDO).

The Capital City Zone Schedules 1, 2, and 3 permit requirements in relation to window displays and transparency have been highlighted in VCAT decisions. In general, the advertising signs provisions have proved ineffective in providing appropriate guidance that is upheld at VCAT.

As identified in the past review, the CoM’s heritage policies require review and strengthening. There are no statements of significance for areas outside of the Capital City Zone, this is impeding the operation of the policies and impacting on the decisions made. Work is underway to address this.

The CoM currently has numerous amendments underway, which if gazetted will require updates to the MSS and the LPPF. An example of this is Amendment C196 City North; City North will be an Urban Renewal Area and part of the expanded Central City, updates will need to be included in future reviews of the MPS. Further review and analysis may be required as part of the amendment process or immediately following.

Amendment GC9, gazetted on 13 June 2014, replaced all land in the Residential 1 Zone and Residential 2 Zone with the General Residential Zone. Amendment C179 to the MPS is underway to implement the rezoning in accordance with the recommended application of the new residential zones (as endorsed by the Future Melbourne Committee on 3 June 2014, following public consultation) and to submit this to the Residential Zones Standing Advisory Committee. It needs to be established if there are implications elsewhere in the MPS following the introduction of new zones.

Land use implications stemming from Ministerial decisions, such as the approval of the Eastern Section of the East West Link, will need to be investigated.

Work is currently underway to review the SPPF. Pending the recommendations, changes to the LPPF may be required to ensure it fits within the integrated PPF.

of 44


13

Is council relying on adopted council policies or guidelines in decision-making that are not included in the planning scheme? Council is not relying on adopted policies or guidelines in decision making that are not included in the MPS. However, there is no guidance in the MPS relating to the mandatory height limits determined by the airfields.

Are there particular planning issues that would benefit from a new or revised local policy? The need for provision to facilitate the following should be assessed:

• Accessible Buildings Policy;

• Walking Plan; and

• Housing Strategy (including affordable and diverse housing).

As has been discussed above, the following policies require updating and/or need to be reviewed to ensure they provide sufficient guidance for decision making:

• 22.01, 22.17, 22.18, 22.25 (Urban Design local policies) including:

• heights;

• spacing between towers;

• podium tower design;

• diversity of building typologies;

• siting of buildings; and

• density.

• 22.02 Sunlight to Public Open Spaces;

• 22.07 Advertising Signs;

• 22.20 CBD Lanes; and

• A number of the DDOs (relating to permit triggers in the Docklands DDOs, definition of architectural features, policy basis of discretionary height DDOs etc.).

The following have been identified in consultation. Council needs to develop a position on planning provisions for the following:

• Apartment design and internal amenity;

• Provisions addressing climate change/resilience;

• Green roofs;

• Built form guidance relating to specific structures e.g. ATM’s, over-road structures;

• Mechanisms to address the issue of loading bays; and

• The introduction of airfield mandatory heights.

of 44


14

Are there reference documents that should be included as a local policy (i.e. Advertising Policy or Urban Design Guidelines)? There are no reference documents that are used to inform or guide decision making that should be included as a local policy.

Conclusion The revised MSS provides a clear framework to guide the sustainable development of the municipality over the next 40 years.

Clause 21.04 Settlement and accompanying clauses in the MSS have been successful in providing a strategic planning framework for growth and development in the municipality. Further work, as discussed above, will further refine the MPS.

of 44


15

ASSESS THE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

Do the objectives in the MSS adequately reflect the land use and development outcomes council wants to achieve? The objectives and the structure of the MSS adequately reflect the land use and development outcomes that Council wants to achieve.

Do all the objectives have specific land use or development outcomes? There is a clear link between the objectives and strategies in the MSS and the VPP tools chosen for their implementation.

However, there are no provisions in the MPS to achieve the desired strategic outcomes in regard to:

• Delivering a range of housing tenures, types and options including affordable housing;

• Apartment design and internal amenity;

• Addressing issues identified in the Walking Plan; and

• Buildings which are accessible to people of all abilities.

Are the objectives being achieved? The objectives of the MSS are generally being achieved.

Do the objectives successfully guide planning decisions? The objectives successfully guide planning decisions.

Are the strategies clearly linked to and achieving the objectives? There is generally a clear link between the objectives and strategies in the MSS, this link extends to the VPP tools chosen to achieve the strategies and objectives.

Are the strategies achieving the desired outcomes? The strategies are achieving the desired outcomes.

Do the strategies help inform planning decisions? As the strategies have a clear link to the objectives and to the implementation measures, they successfully inform and guide planning decisions.

of 44


16

Conclusion The objectives and strategies of the MSS appropriately inform and direct planning decision guidelines. The objectives deliver Councils and the community’s aspirations for the growth and development of the city to achieve Council’s goals.

of 44


17

STRATEGIC GAPS

Has council reviewed the progress made on strategic gaps identified in the LPPF and actions identified in the last review? Generally, strategic gaps identified in the LPPF and actions identified in the last review have been, or are in the process of being, addressed.

Have changes been made to the SPPF that require amendments to the LPPF? State-wide planning scheme amendments that need to be considered by the CoM are identified in the following table.

Table 1: State Planning Scheme Amendments

# Brief Description In operation from

CoM Comments/Questions for Review

VC106 East West Link (Eastern Section). Preparation, adoption and approval of Planning Scheme Amendment GC2 to the Melbourne, Yarra, Moonee Valley and Moreland Planning Schemes under ss 8, 29 and 35 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 Approval decision under section 77 of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009

30/06/2014 Approves the East West Link. Requires preparation of Development Plans for Part B which will continue to make planning of the Arden-Macaulay Urban Renewal Area and implementation of Planning Scheme Amendment C190uncertain until the development plans are completed and approved.

30/05

VC116 Changes the VPP and all planning schemes to implement the residential zoning reforms.

01/07/2014 The implementation of new planning zones is outside the scope of this review, has been implemented through Amendment GC9 (gazetted 13/06/2014) and Amendment C179 New Residential Zones (underway).

VC106 The VPP and all planning schemes amended to recognise Plan Melbourne.

30/05/2014 Updates to the MPS may be required to ensure it is aligned with Plan Melbourne and provides a local interpretation.

VC100 The amendment changes the VPP and all planning schemes to introduce reformed zones.

15/07/2013 Local centres and the retention of convenience retailing for residents and workers needs to be addressed following the amendment.

VC95 The amendment changes the VPP and all planning schemes by amending Clauses 18, 52.06 and 55.03.

19/04/2013 The MSS supports the strategic operations of the Port and no further changes to the MPS are required.

VC96 Amends Clause 11 Settlement of the SPPF to protect and enhance the significant river corridors of Metropolitan Melbourne.

15/10/2012 This is consistent with the MSS (21.05). No change to the MPS required.

of 44


18

# Brief Description In operation from

CoM Comments/Questions for Review

VC94 The amendment introduces new strategies in Clause 13.01 Climate change impacts related to sea level rise. Changes Clause 18.03 Ports to strengthen the objective and strategies related to planning for ports and their environs.

04/07/2012 The implementation of The Victorian Coast Strategy was identified in the 2008 review of the MPS. An ongoing action in the strategy is “apply this strategy at a local level through local governments developing planning policy frameworks and coastal management”. The MSS recognises the role of the Port, the CoM is currently working with the Port to realise the strategic objectives of PoMC, VPP and the LPPF.

VC92 Amends Clause 11.04-4 Central Melbourne to introduce a new objective and strategy for major development opportunities that support Central Melbourne’s capital city functions.

29/06/2012 This is consistent with the MSS.

VC90 Changes the VPP to introduce a new Clause 45.09 – Parking Overlay. Changes the VPP and all planning schemes to amend Clause 52.06 – Car Parking and amends Clauses 54.03 and 55.03 to remove references to car parking rates and design. Amends Clause 37.05 of the VPP and the MPS to align references to sub-clause numbers between the new Clause 52.06 and Clause 37.05.

05/06/2012 Translates car parking provisions into a new format.

VC71 Replaces Clauses 10 to 19 of the SPPF with new revised Clauses 10 to 19 and redistributes the existing policies under the following new SPPF themes: Settlement, Environmental and landscape values, Environmental risk, Natural resource management, Built environment and heritage, Housing, Economic development, Transport and Infrastructure. The revised SPPF reflects and references State Government policies.

20/09/2010 Policy neutral restructure of SPPF.

VC58 Amends Clause 56.05-2 Residential subdivision - Public open space to include reference to the Precinct Structure Plan Guidelines and amends the objectives and standards of Clause 56.05-2. The amendment includes new and amended public open space objectives, distribution and standards, for active open space, local parks, open space links and linear parks.

01/10/2009 While generally applying to new residential subdivision, Council adopts a consistent approach in its urban renewal areas.

VC49 Changes the advertising sign provisions under Clause 52.05, including new decision guidelines and application requirements; provides a final extension of time to 31 December 2008 for lodgement of applications for existing Major promotion signs allowed under the continuance provision in Clause 52.05-5.

15/09/2008 As discussed, there is a need to review Clause 22.07 Advertising Signs.

VC47 Translates provisions from the Melbourne Docklands Area Planning Provisions, September 2006 into Clause 37.05; and introduces new purpose statements and decision guidelines to Clause 52.27 to address cumulative impact of licensed premises.

07/04/2008 The changes provide clarification in the MPS.

of 44


19

of 44


20

Does council have commitments, policies or programs to address any particular planning issues that should be included in the planning scheme? The Council business planning process, which is a mechanism to implement Councils policies and strategies and the priorities of the Melbourne City Councillors, has identified future work that may be or lead to a planning scheme amendment (PSA):

• Develop a Lorimer Structure Plan – may lead to a PSA

• Develop a West Melbourne Structure Plan – may lead to a PS

• Potential Review of the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan and PSA C190 in response to the East West Link Road

• Review Heritage local policies review – may lead to a PSA

• Develop a Housing Strategy – may lead to a PSA

• Investigate an Electronic Gaming Local Policy - may lead to a PSA

• Investigate the need for a Live Music Venues Policy – may lead to a PSA

• Develop a Walking Plan – may lead to a PSA

• Carlton Connect PSA

• Solar Access studies -– may lead to a PSA

• Bourke Hill precinct heritage review – may lead to a PSA

• West Melbourne Waterfront / Kensington Road (private proponent) PSA

• Aboriginal Heritage – may lead to a PSA

• Moonee Ponds Creek Master Plan – may lead to a PSA

• A new Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) – may lead to a PSA

• Victorian Apartment Design Standards – may lead to a PSA

• Bicycle and motorcycle parking requirements– may lead to a PSA

• Places for People review - – may inform a PSA

• New Residential Zones PSA

• Development Contributions in the Hoddle Grid Area (high Growth Area) – may lead to a PSA

• A number of community services projects that sit outside the MPS, but will provide guidance for long term infrastructure requirements, the funding of the infrastructure may be aided through the MPS.

Conclusion The majority of the work identified for actioning already has strategic justification within the MPS, following the implementation of the last review. Some issues will be addressed through amendments to policy or the incorporation of new policy, and some will utilise other mechanisms in the MPS.

of 44


21

LINKS WITH THE COUNCIL PLAN

Do the LPPF objectives align with the land use and development objectives of the Council Plan? The CoM has a robust and integrated organisational planning framework that ensures Council’s plans and strategies are working to meet the goals of the Future Melbourne Community Plan. Figure 1 below illustrates the Integrated Planning Framework at the CoM as identified in the Annual Plan and Budget.

The relationship between CoM policies with the Council Plan 2013-17 and the MPS have been reviewed, the LPPF objectives generally align with Council Plan 2013-2017.

Since the last review, do changes to the Council Plan require amendments to the LPPF? The Council Plan 2013-2017 and subsequent annual plans and budgets identify projects that may include amendments to the MPS. These amendments are consistent with, and will help to implement, the strategic direction identified in the MSS and have been discussed above.

of 44


22

Relevant Council resolutions (since 2005) and outstanding CRMs requiring consideration as part of the current review Relevant Council resolutions have identified the need for a Heritage Review of Bourke Hill Precinct, and for a review of bicycle parking rates.

Conclusion The LPPF objectives generally align with the land use and development objectives of the Council Plan 2013-2017.

of 44


23

VPP IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS (LPPS, ZONES, OVERLAYS)

Are the VPP tools successful in achieving the objectives, strategies and desired outcomes? The VPP tools are successful in achieving the objectives, strategies and desired outcomes of the Council. However, there are issues that affect all councils, including the CoM, to varying degrees, which require a State approach. These include:

• A mechanism to facilitate the provision of affordable housing; • A mechanism to provide for internal amenity of apartments; • A policy to set standards for how new development should be designed and constructed to minimise

the impact on the environment and to operate in an environmentally sustainable manner; • A policy to ensure that all new buildings are accessible and visitable by people of all abilities; and • The necessary mechanisms to implement some of the initiatives identified in Plan Melbourne.

Are there any VPP tools used that are no longer useful or effective? Should these be modified or deleted from the scheme? The SPPF is cumbersome and the current proposal to integrate the SPPF and LPPF and introduce regional policy to improve the navigation and useability of the planning scheme is generally supported subject to the provisos discussed above.

Are the tools clearly linked to the objectives and strategies in the LPPF (are they strategically driven or do they provide for a strategic outcome)? The tools that Council has elected to use are the tools clearly linked to the objectives and strategies in the LPPF.

Conclusion The VPP tools are successful in achieving the City Of Melbourne’s objectives, strategies and desired outcomes.

of 44


24

FORMAT, CONSISTENCY AND USABILITY

Are the MSS and LPP expressed in plain English? The MSS and LPPs are generally expressed in plain English. Generally the language used in the MSS and the local policies is satisfactory and easily understood by non-planning professionals.

Is the intent and language of the LPPF clear, usable and effective in meeting council land use objectives and decision-making? It is considered that the LPPF is clear, usable and effective in meeting Council land use objectives and decision-making.

The MSS, from the broad vision down to the area specific objectives and strategies is effective in presenting a vision for the community and its stakeholders, and identifying long term strategic directions about land use and development in the municipality. When reading the MSS from the “top down”, the story of the municipality is clear - what direction the municipality is heading in, the key influences on land use and development and the key priorities of the City.

The objectives and strategies for the municipality are expressed in more detail in the Local Areas. This section of the MSS is a clear and valuable tool in the assessment of planning permit applications.

Are there superfluous or inconsistent policies, overlays and schedules that no longer contribute to council planning goals and objectives? There is scope to rationalise the DDOs. The DDOs include permit requirements for purposes which are not relevant to the design objectives of the DDO. These should be removed or DTPLI should be approached to address this by amending the wording of Clause 43.02 to include more exemptions.

The height control DDOs need to be amended to address the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the interpretation of architectural features.

The DDOs in the Docklands Zone need to be reviewed to address the issue of no permit being required to construct below the discretionary height limit. This issue needs to be addressed to ensure the relevant permit triggers are provided and the requirements are consistent across the municipality.

In addition to a general review of the DDOs, the following DDOs need to be reviewed as currently there is a lack of clarity surrounding permit triggers and requirements and conflict between their objectives exists:

• Schedule 1 to the Design and Development Overlay: Active Street Frontages – Capital City Zone; • Schedule 3 to the Design and Development Overlay: Traffic Conflict – Capital City Zone; and • Schedule 4 to the Design and Development Overlay: Weather Protection – Capital City Zone.

Are improvements to the statutory drafting of the planning scheme required? Council is not aware of any statutory issues in relation to the drafting of the planning scheme.

of 44


25

Has the LPPF been assessed against the relevant VPP Practice Notes?

The LPPF has been assessed against the relevant VPP Practice Notes.

Conclusion There are numerous DDOs and a number of policies all dealing with built form issues. These should be rationalised to express the desired outcomes more succinctly and make the Scheme easier to use. A review of the DDOs should also address permit triggers and guidelines, and be completed within the context of a review of the urban design local policies. The DDOs in the Docklands Zone need to be reviewed and amended, where necessary, to ensure appropriate permit triggers and consistency across the municipality. A review of the use of architectural features in the height control DDOs needs to be undertaken to ensure consistent and appropriate interpretation.

of 44


26

ASSESS THE MONITORING OF THE PLANNING SCHEME

Is the planning scheme being regularly monitored and reviewed? There is no designated monitoring of the MPS. However, the CoM undertakes extensive monitoring of use and development of land within the municipality.

The CoM undertakes a Census of Land Use and Employment (CLUE) every two years; CLUE reports provide data, trend graphs, maps and analysis on the city’s economy and an overview of census contents.

Council also monitors the Future Melbourne Community Plan as the overarching strategic planning document.

Are there monitoring processes targeting the key strategic objectives of the scheme?

Is the information easy to collect? Monitoring processes are targeting the strategic directives of the City, not the MPS. International benchmarking is undertaken by the City Research team.

Are the monitoring processes the most appropriate means of measuring the performance of the objectives? Monitoring is an objective means of measuring the land use and development changes within the municipality. The monitoring processes currently being undertaken provide a comprehensive range of information.

Can the monitoring of the planning scheme be improved? The City’s current processes provide a range of information to understand the growth and development of the City.

Conclusion The City’s current processes provide a range of information to understand the growth and development of the City.

of 44


27

STATUTORY PLANNING SERVICES

The City of Melbourne's Statutory Planning officers are responsible for assessing applications for planning permits, assessing applications for the subdivision of land and providing general advice to the community on town planning matters.

The Melbourne Planning Scheme determines if a planning permit is required to change the use of land, or to construct a building or make other changes to the land. In most instances, buildings and works in the municipality, whether residential or business, must be approved by the City of Melbourne through the planning permit application process.

The City of Melbourne requires owners and occupiers to obtain planning permits for a wide range of works to residential, business and other properties within the City of Melbourne. Even minor alterations to your property can have a big impact on others in your neighbourhood. A planning permit ensures works are legal, and prevents unreasonable negative impact on neighbours. Failure to comply can result in fines or other penalties.

Statutory Planning Services audit The City of Melbourne is one of nine Councils to independently audit its planning services files every four years. The file audit is completed in accordance with the Victorian Auditor General guidelines. The last audit of the planning services files was completed in 2008 and a review is scheduled for the latter part of 2014. Recommendations made following the audit are reported to and implemented by the City of Melbourne. With a file audit scheduled for later this year, an audit of the statutory planning files has been excluded from the MPS review.

Planning Permit Application activity The City of Melbourne has remained stable in application activity over the three financial years (2010/2011, 2011/2012, 2012/2013), for both new and amended permit applications. In the 2012-13 financial year Melbourne placed 13th in the State for number of planning applications received for each planning scheme. The data for the 2012-2013 financial year shows Melbourne with a lower number of applications than other IMAP Councils Yarra, Port Phillip and Stonnington. It is important to note, those applications where the Minister for Planning is the Responsible Authority, are not included in the CoM’s planning figures.

Planning Permit Activity performance The City of Melbourne’s planning performance has remained relatively consistent over three financial years (2010/2011, 2011/2012, 2012/2013) according to Planning Permit Activity Reports published by the DTPLI. The planning performance does not account for those applications where the Minister for Planning is the Responsible Authority. In the following assessment, the City of Melbourne is compared to the Metropolitan and Inner and Middle Urban Group (IMU Group) averages for the 2012/2013 financial year.

Applications with public notices have remained stable over the three financial years and the CoM operates below the Metropolitan and IMU Group averages. The CoM requests for further information are consistent with the Metropolitan and IMU Group averages. City of Melbourne referrals for applications have remained consistent and are slightly lower than the average for the Metropolitan and IMU Group. The 2012/2013 financial year saw a six per cent decrease in the number of submissions received in response to planning applications. This minor drop is only slightly lower than the Metropolitan and IMU Group.

of 44


28

As to be expected the City of Melbourne is well above both the Metropolitan and IMU Group averages in all financial categories. The ‘total cost of works for permits issued’ at the City of Melbourne has fluctuated over the three financial years, with 2011/2012 significantly lower than 2010/2011. 2012/2013 saw the total raise to above 2010/2011 levels.

With regard to the processing time for applications, the following can be deduced from the data available for the three financial years:

• Average gross days to Responsible Authority determination - This figure has remained relatively stable for the City of Melbourne. This is slightly, although not significantly, lower than the Metropolitan average (no IMU Group average available).

• Median processing days to Responsible Authority determination - This has remained stable. The City of Melbourne operates at approximately 20-25 per cent lower than the Metropolitan and IMU Group averages (in 2012/2013 City of Melbourne took 64 days, compared to 84 in Metropolitan Melbourne and 88 in the IMU Group).

• Completed within sixty days - The City of Melbourne has remained stable and is, on average, completing more applications within 60 days than both the Metropolitan and IMU Group averages.

Statutory planning staff development, training and support Statutory planning staff are provided with a corporate induction and a tailored induction within the planning team. A comprehensive and supported learning and development program is also in place, incorporating both internal City of Melbourne learning opportunities and the provision of PLANET courses.

Continuous improvement of Planning Services The City of Melbourne is constantly reviewing its planning application and performance figures to identify areas for continuous improvement, the opportunities are identified and investigated. Initiatives taken by the CoM to improve processes include:

• Introduction of a fast-track planning application system;

• Investigations into reducing further information requests;

• A review of internal referrals; and

• Any other improvements that ensure the team continues to be one of the best performing statutory planning teams in the State.

The City of Melbourne undertakes biennial Customer Satisfaction Surveys to track the performance of its planning team against customer expectations. This survey is focussed on the planning process and the level of satisfaction the customer had with the planning teams’ processes (it does not account for satisfaction with the planning outcome). These surveys are undertaken with a range of customers including applicants and submitters/objectors, including planning professionals acting on behalf of applicants. Surveys are undertaken over a three month period, throughout this time surveys are sent each week to all customers who have been involved in the planning process – applicants and objectors receive a different tailored survey.

of 44


29

PROGRAM FOR THE REVIEW OF THE PLANNING SCHEME

While the MPS serves City of Melbourne well, the audit of its content has revealed that it can be improved. A planning scheme is a continually evolving document and its review is an ongoing process. In addition to undertaking the projects identified in the business planning process, the audit has shown that in reviewing the MPS the following should be prioritised.

Local policies, zoning and overlays The MSS will need to be reviewed to ensure it is consistent with the strategies and initiatives identified in Plan Melbourne.

Amend the MPS to:

• Update the MSS to remove references to Melbourne Metro and replace with Melbourne Rail Link and include references to East West Link;

• Include the Carlton Connect hub and Dental Hospital into the Parkville Knowledge Precinct;

• Address the issues identified with the interpretation of architectural features in the height control DDOs;

• Review and amend (where necessary) the DDOs in the Docklands Zone to ensure appropriate permit triggers and guidance;

• Consider introducing the mandatory height controls identified by the airfields;

• Urban design and built form provisions and rationalisation of the DDOs (including review of 22.01, 22.17, 22.18 and 22.25 urban design policies);

• Review and update 22.07 and 52.05 and schedules to the Capital City Zone and Docklands Zone- Advertising Signs; and

• Strengthen 22.02 Sunlight to Public Spaces.

Investigate new policies / mechanisms for including in the MPS:

• Accessible buildings;

• Affordable housing and housing diversity; and

• Policies relating to climate change and climate resilience.

of 44


30

APPENDICES

1. Audit of the 2008 Melbourne Planning Scheme Review

2. Analysis of State Government Policies, Strategies and Initiatives

of 44


APPENDIX 1: AUDIT OF THE 2008 MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME REVIEW

of 44


Appendix 1: Audit of the 2008 Melbourne Planning Scheme Review

MPS Audit 2008

Policy/ Issue Completed Current Future Work

MSS aligned with the Council Plan (2009-2013) and Future Melbourne.

Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement (Clause 21, Gazetted 11/09/2013).

The feasibility of, and need for, the following new policies should be considered as they are either not addressed or inadequately addressed.

Accessible Buildings Policy.

Identified in the audit/review.

Bicycle Facilities Policy. Victoria Planning Provision 52.34 Bicycle Facilities (Gazetted 19/01/2006).

Work reviewing bicycle parking in City Of Melbourne context.

Student Housing Policy. Amendment C163 Student Housing Policy (Gazetted as Clause 22.24 on 16/8/2011).

Ecologically Sustainable Buildings Policy.

Amendment C187 Energy, water and waste efficiency (Gazetted as Clause 22.19 on 04/04/2013).

The following issues are not addressed and/or there is scope for the provisions to be rationalised / reviewed.

Advertising Signage Policy (22.07).


All urban design related policies and overlays. Clause 22.01 (Urban Design within the Capital City Zone), 22.17 (Urban Design Outside the Capital City Zone) and 22.18 Urban Design within the Docklands Zone) need strengthening. Plot ratios in 22.01 Urban Design in the CCZ should be removed.


Clause 22.04 (Heritage Places within the Capital City Zone) Land use does not add value to the scheme.

Heritage Local Policies Review

Clause 22.02 Sunlight to Public Open Space.


Heritage within and outside the Capital City Zone Policies (22.04 and 22.05).

Amendment C186 Central City (Hoddle Grid) Heritage Review; Part 1.

Heritage Local Policies Review. Amendment C186 – Part 2. Amendment C198 City North Heritage Review. Amendment C207 Arden-Macaulay Heritage Review.

of 44



MPS Audit 2008


Unnecessary permit triggers should be removed from the DDOs.


Built form policies should express the desired outcomes more succinctly.


Biodiversity protection. VPP – Clause 12 strengthened through VC105 (20/12/2013) implemented reforms to Victoria’s native vegetation and biodiversity provisions.

Areas identified for the strategic intent to be strengthened.

Housing diversity, affordability, and social housing.

Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement (11/09/2013).

Housing Strategy.

Implementation required – further work / changes to the MPS.

Growth in resident and worker population.

Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement (11/09/2013).

The development of strategic growth areas.

Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement (11/09/2013). Southbank Structure Plan and Amendment C171 Southbank (20/06/2013). City North Structure Plan. Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan. Docklands Community and Place Plan. Amendment VC92 to the Victoria Planning Provisions (urban renewal in Fishermans Bend and E-Gate).

Amendment C196 City North. Amendment C190 Arden-Macaulay. Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal.

Sustainable built from and transit oriented development.

Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement (11/09/2013). Amendment C187 Energy, water and waste efficiency (04/04/2013).

Sustainable transport. Amendment C162 Municipal Strategic Statement - Particular attention 21.09 - (11/09/2013). Transport Strategy 2012. Bicycle Plan 2012-16. Access Docklands.

Implementation of the Walking Plan– further work / changes to the MPS.

Industrial land supply. Industrial Land Supply Study. Arden Macaulay Structure Plan.

Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal.

Further work may be required.

of 44



MPS Audit 2008


Marrying heritage with urban consolidation.

Heritage Strategy. Amendment C186 Central City (Hoddle Grid) Heritage Review, Part 1.

Amendment C198 City North Heritage Review. Amendment C207 Arden-Macaulay Heritage Review. Amendment C214 and C215 Kensington Heritage Review. Heritage Local Policies Review. Amendment C186 Central City (Hoddle Grid) Heritage Review, Part 2.

Funding sources for urban infrastructure.

Amendment C208 Development Contributions Plans Overlay. Amendment C209 Public Open Space Contributions.

Infrastructure funding outside urban renewal areas may require future work.

Adapting the city to the impacts of climate change.

Total Watermark – City as a Catchment Update 2014. Amendment C187 Energy, water and waste efficiency (04/04/2013). Amendment C142 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) (Gazetted as Clause 22.23 on 13/03/2014)

Building accessibility, and energy, water and waste efficiency.

Amendment C187 Energy, water and waste efficiency (04/04/2013).

of 44


APPENDIX 2: ANALYSIS OF STATE GOVERNMENT POLICIES, STRATEGIES AND INITIATIVES

of 44


Appendix 2: Analysis of State Government Policies, Strategies and Initiatives

State Government Policies, Strategies and Initiatives Since the completion of the last review of the Melbourne Planning Scheme (MPS) in early 2008, there have been a suite of changes to planning in Victoria. A change in State Government in 2010 provided the basis for a redistribution of priorities and new policy directions that continue to shape the Victoria Planning Provisions (VPP), the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) and in turn the Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF).

A focus on greater clarity in planning decisions has led to reforms to the MPS as well as amended and new legislation guiding decision makers. Population growth is also being directed into the central city, with a focus on protecting and providing certainty in stable residential areas.

In order to implement the changes in State policy a further review of the SPPF is currently underway. This review will consolidate Plan Melbourne, as the overarching Metropolitan Planning Strategy, ensuring it is appropriately reflected in all planning schemes (in addition to Amendment VC106 which amended the VPP and all planning schemes to recognise Plan Melbourne).

A review of State policy, strategies and initiatives and their relationship with local policies is included below. This exercise has been undertaken to identify any gaps in the MPS to ensure the implementation of these strategic activities in accordance with State vision.

Plan Melbourne (May 2014)

The new Metropolitan Planning Strategy, Plan Melbourne aligns strongly with the strategic directions of the City of Melbourne’s (CoM) Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) and Transport Strategy 2012. Generally, the Outcomes and Objective identified in Plan Melbourne strengthen the platform for the CoM to realise the goals of the Future Melbourne Community Plan, the Council Plan 2013-17 and in turn, all Council initiatives.

The biggest changes between the draft and the final Plan Melbourne, released in May 2014, have been the changes to the transport priorities identified in Plan Melbourne. As a result of the introduction of the Melbourne Rail Link (see below for further details), the Melbourne Metro is no longer proposed, this has led to elements of the MSS being inconsistent with Plan Melbourne.

There are initiatives and strategies included in Plan Melbourne that will require investigation, strengthening and alignment within the MPS to ensure the MPS considers and comprehensively reflects Plan Melbourne.

Many of the ideas and initiatives in the CoM’s submission in response to the Plan Melbourne Discussion Paper have been incorporated into Plan Melbourne including the 1200 Buildings Program and the Future Living housing discussion paper.

Implementing Standard Levies (May 2014)

The Minister for Planning announced the introduction of Standard Levies for development contributions in priority growth locations, implementation of a new infrastructure contribution plan and a streamlined approval process on 1 May 2014. The standard levies are available for use from 1 July 2015. The recommendations from the Standard Development Contributions Advisory Committee, Report 2 – Setting the Levies has informed the Victorian Governments reform.

CoM is currently processing Amendment C208 Development Contributions Plans Overlay for the City North and Arden Macaulay urban renewal areas.

of 44



Once they come into operation, the use of the standard levies for other high growth parts of the City should be investigated.

Victoria – The Freight State (August 2013)

A long-term strategy introduced to “improve freight efficiency, growth productivity and better connect Victorian businesses with their markets…..” the plan identifies a series of strategies and actions to implement and realise the long-term goals of the plan. The plan identifies ‘Better integrating freight with transport and land use planning” as a strategy to ‘Secure Victoria’s position as the leading State for freight and logistics”. Clause 21.09 in the MSS recognises Melbourne as Australia’s freight hub and gateway, whilst also recognising the detrimental impact freight vehicles can have on residential amenity, which needs to be minimised. Under Clause 21.09-6 Port and Freight Movement, the MSS identifies a number of objectives which are not inconsistent with Victoria – The Freight State.

Reformed zones for Victoria (July 2013)

A suite of zoning reforms has been released to deliver State Government policy and greater clarity in planning decisions. A series of State Amendments have introduced new zones and amended or reformed existing zones.

Amendment GC9, gazetted on 13 June 2014, replaced all land in the Residential 1 Zone and Residential 2 Zone with the General Residential Zone. Amendment C179 to the MPS is currently underway to implement the rezoning in accordance with the recommended application of the new residential zones (as endorsed by the Future Melbourne Committee on 3 June 2014,) and to submit this to the Residential Zones Standing Advisory Committee.

The implementation and review of the planning reforms are outside the scope of this review.

Creating Liveable Open Space Case Studies and Practice Note 70: Open Space Strategies (July 2013)

The Case Study, designed to showcase innovative responses to creating open space included examples on different models of delivery. The CoM featured in the Case Studies for ‘Creating urban space from a roundabout’.

This Practice Note provides guidance for the preparation of an Open Space Strategy, including the inputs and outputs of the process. The CoM endorsed its Open Space Strategy in July 2012. The Open Space Strategy was created incorporating a robust and comprehensive engagement and consultation process and was informed by the “planning for future growth framework” including the revised MSS. The adopted Open Space Strategy provides the relevant and appropriate guidance for strategic open space planning in the municipality. CoM is currently preparing Amendment C209 Public Open Space Contributions. Amendment C209 includes the Open Space Strategy as a reference document.

Melbourne Ferries Background Study – Discussion Paper (March 2013)

This discussion paper was a viability study undertaken to determine if Melbourne and the Port Phillip Bay region could sustain commuter ferries. The increase in residential and commercial growth in Docklands is reflected in the discussion paper – this aligns with the MSS which identifies Docklands as an area of Urban Renewal. The CoM’s Transport Strategy 2012 supports the investigation of water-based transport linking Docklands with the Central Business District (CBD) and the potential for broader transport connections with

of 44



Port Melbourne, St. Kilda and Williamstown. Further feasibility needs to be undertaken prior to this being further incorporated into the MPS.

Planning and Environment Amendment (General) Act 2013

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 is amended through this Act to ensure the Act appropriately reflects modern issues in the planning industry. The Act has also been modified to ensure the Government delivers a reduction in red tape in Victoria’s planning system. The CoM provided comments on the Draft Planning and Environment Amendment (General) Bill 2009 in February 2010 after earlier providing feedback to the discussion paper Modernising Victoria’s Planning Act.

The CoM was largely supportive of the changes made to the Act to enhance efficiency, clarity and performance of planning schemes.

Climate Change Act 2010 / Victorian Climate Adaption Pan 2013

“Introduced in 2010 and Amended in 2012, the Act contains measures that support the management of, and adaptation, to climate risks and increase the ability of individuals, businesses and communities to capitalise on opportunities.

The Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2013 provides guidance on roles and responsibilities and sets out strategic priorities for outlining how the Government is strengthening the management of climate risks to Victoria's assets and services. The plan will help position Victoria to prepare for future climate challenges. (http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/environment-and-wildlife/climate-change/victorian-climate-change-act-2010)”.

The MPS recognises the impact of climate change in the MSS (Clause 21.06) and Clause 22.19 Energy, Water and Waste Efficiency.

Cycling into the Future (December 2012)

This strategy recognises the important role of cycling, in all of its forms. The CoM supports and encourages the use of bicycles within the municipality with Cycling City being a key goal of the Transport Strategy 2012. The VPP currently support cycling through Clause 52.34 Bicycle Facilities, the MSS supports cycling as a key component of the Municipality’s transport network, with an objective to “develop a comprehensive, safe and convenient cycling network throughout the Municipality.”

VicSmart - Planning and Environment Amendment (VicSmart Planning Assessment) Act 2012

VicSmart aims to reduce the red-tape and streamline the planning process for straightforward planning applications. The VicSmart planning provisions have been released and will be introduced to the VPP (and all planning schemes) in September 2014.

The CoM submitted in relation to VicSmart: “The City of Melbourne considers that the proposed VicSmart provisions are difficult to understand and sure to result in poor outcomes including needless refusals and appeals against failure to meet the ambitious 10-day time limit. It is our strong preference to work with DTPLI to refine planning schemes to conditionally exempt more matters from requiring a planning permit and to explore ways for all Councils to continually improve the quality of decision making and reduce timeframes to meet customer expectations. This can be done without changes to the relevant Acts or Regulations”.

of 44

http://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/adapting-to-climate-change/Victorian-Climate-Change-Adaptation-Plan



Network Development Plan – Metropolitan Rail (December 2012)

Developed to assist with the prioritisation of investment in the metropolitan train system to ensure the system meets the needs of a growing Melbourne in the short, medium and long term. “The plan is designed to:

• expand the capacity of the existing network to meet the growing needs of the city; • redesign train services to maximise opportunities for seamless coordination with buses and trams; and • extend the network to areas currently not served by metropolitan rail.”

The Transport Strategy 2012 and the MSS Clause 21.09 highlight the importance of Melbourne’s rail system as part of an effective and integrated public transport system. The MSS states the objective “to maximise the use of public transport through efficient urban structure”.

Melbourne Airport Rail Link Study (December 2012)

Melbourne Airport is set to experience considerable growth, with up to 60 million air passenger trips a year by 2032. The study sets to establish the best route to link Melbourne Airport with the CBD, co-ordinate planning for the rail link and define how the service could operate.

The CoM Transport Strategy 2012 supports the investigation of public transport rail links to both Avalon and Melbourne airports. This is not inconsistent with State Policy. Any changes to the MPS would need to be implemented following further work on this project being progressed by State Government.

A Cleaner Yarra River and Port Phillip Bay Action Plan (2012)

This action plan identifies priorities for delivering a cleaner and healthier Yarra River. In an inner Melbourne planning context this plan focuses on the management of storm water. The MPS contains Clause 22.23 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) (gazetted 13/03/2014). The MPS will need to be reviewed for consistency following any amendments to the VPP following any work completed by DTPLI in conjunction with Living Victoria reviewing the performance requirements for management of stormwater, however it is anticipated Clause 22.23 will be consistent with these recommendations. Also refer to VC96 (below).

Passenger Rail Infrastructure Noise Policy (April 2013)

This Policy has been introduced to ensure transport and land use planners work collaboratively from the inception of projects to determine whether a project will cause a noise problem and identify the resulting actions that should be taken to mitigate any impacts. The DTPLI state that the policy is triggered when there is a statutory approval required for:

• construction of new passenger rail infrastructure; • redevelopment of existing passenger rail infrastructure; and • a change in land use adjacent to the rail corridor.

This policy is yet to be incorporated into the VPP, although 11.04-5 (amended via VC106) does recognise the need to ‘improve noise and air quality to improve human and environmental health’. The integration of noise and air quality guidelines into land use and transport planning has been identified as a possible area to strengthen/review in the MPS.

of 44



Maribyrnong River Valley Vision and Design Guidelines (May 2010)

Maribyrnong River Planning Controls Review VC96 (2012)

This strategy, a collaboration between affected Councils, identifies a vision for the Maribyrnong to achieve greater planning consistency and deliver “a healthy, vibrant river with quality open space, good walking and cycling trails and sensitive development that protects the Maribyrnong’s natural and urban features”. The Vision and Guidelines are largely supported through the CoM’s Open Space Strategy (July, 2012). Changes to the MPS have been incorporated through Amendment VC96 (15 November 2012) which provided an update to Clause 11 Settlement of the VPP and recognises the environmental, landscape and cultural values of the Maribyrnong River. The Maribyrnong River Vision and Design Guidelines are included as Policy Guidelines under Clause 11.04-7 and 11.04-8.

Changes to the MPS to introduce recommendations of the Design Guidelines need to be explored.

Transport Integration Act 2010

The Act ensures decisions affecting Victoria’s transport system are made as part of an integrated frame-work. The MPS supports the intentions of this act through both the VPP and the LPPF. Under the VPP, Clause 18, 18.01 Integrated Transport states the objective “to create a safe and sustainable transport system by integrating land-use and transport”. Under Clause 21, 21.09 – 1 in the MSS states the objective to “integrate transport and urban growth”.

Other Policies

These policies were reviewed as part of this process and were deemed to have no impact on the MPS:

• A fresh start for building industry reform - Reforming Victoria's building system (November 2012); • Planning for bushfire protection (November 2011); and • Delivering Melbourne’s newest sustainable communities.

Planning Policy Framework (Consultation Draft, March 2014) A series of background documents have been included in the revised Planning Policy Framework (for consultation, March 2014) these documents form background information for planning policies and have been used in the revision of the SPPF and integrated LPPF. The guidance in these documents is pertinent to the MPS and CoM does not have any policy position which is in conflict with these policies.

Documents released following the last review of the MPS that were included in the consultation draft Planning Policy Framework:

• The Victorian Best Practice Guidelines for Assessing and Managing Coastal Acid Sulfate Soils, 2010. • Waste Management Policy (Siting, Design and Management of Landfills) (Environment Protection

Authority (EPA), 2010 – Publication 788.1). • National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (National Environment

Protection Council, Amended 2013). • Contaminated Environments Strategy 2008 (EPA- Publication 1511). • Recommended Separation Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions (EPA, 2013 – Publication

1518). • Victoria’s 2020 Tourism Strategy (Tourism Victoria, 2013). • Guidelines for the Development of Principle Pedestrian Networks (DTPLI, 2013). • Port Development Strategy 2035 Vision (Port of Melbourne Corporation, 2009).

of 44



• National Ports Strategy Infrastructure for an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable future (Infrastructure Australia and National Transport Commission, 2011).

• National Airports Safeguarding Framework 2012. • Victoria’s Litter Strategy (Sustainability Victoria, 2013). • Melbourne’s Water Future (Office of Living Victoria, 2013). • State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) (EPA, 2013 – Publication 905). • Getting full value: the Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy (DEPI, 2013). • Land use planning near major hazardous facility: Guidance Note (Worksafe Victoria, 2010). • Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Plan (Sustainability Victoria, 2009).

Those included in the Planning Policy Framework, but are not relevant to the MPS:

• Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria (NIRV) (EPA- 2011). • Victoria’s Regional Tourism Strategy 2013-2016 (Tourism Victoria, 2013).

State Planning and Infrastructure Projects

External planning and infrastructure projects

There are a number of significant planning and infrastructure projects being led by state and federal government, public sector agencies and / or private enterprise, as identified following.

East West Link

The Linking Melbourne Authority is delivering the Victorian Government's East West Link project. The East West Link is a proposed cross-city road connection extending across Melbourne from the Eastern Freeway to the Western Ring Road. The Eastern Section (the Eastern Freeway to CityLink and the Port) has been approved.

The MSS references this project under Clause 21.09. Future review of the MPS may be required to address any implications associated with the completed East West Link.

E-Gate Urban Renewal

Major Projects Victoria is undertaking feasibility and development delivery work of the 23 hectare E-Gate site, located at gate ‘E’ in the Melbourne rail yard area, West Melbourne.

E-Gate is identified as a proposed urban renewal area under Clause 21.14-3 of the LPPF. A planning scheme amendment will need to be prepared to state the directions for this area and implement development plans.

Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Project

At 240 hectares, Fishermans Bend is the largest urban renewal site in Australia and sits within the CoM and the City of Port Phillip. The CoM’s MSS identifies Fishermans Bend as an Urban Renewal Area under Clause 21.13-3. Amendment C170 (05/07/2012) rezoned Fishermans Bend to ‘Capital City Zone Schedule 4 (CCZ4) to facilitate an appropriate mix of residential, retail, office and other business. This rezoning has expanded the Capital City Zone by 50 per cent and the area is expected to accommodate around 25,000 jobs and 50,000 residents. Amendment C170 also introduces a new development contributions plan overlay, new car parking overlay and updates the LPPF to reflect the changes to strategic direction’. Clause 22.25 Urban Design within Fishermans Bend was also introduced at this time. Upon completion, the Strategic Framework Plan and

of 44

http://www.linkingmelbourne.vic.gov.au/pages/east-west-link.asp

http://www.majorprojects.vic.gov.au/our-projects/our-current-projects/e-gate



provisions to implement the Lorimer Structure Plan may need to be incorporated into the MPS to guide the development of this site.

Melbourne Rail Link

Led by Public Transport Victoria, the Melbourne Rail Link will provide a rail tunnel from Southern Cross to South Yarra via Montague (Fishermans Bend) and a rail link to Melbourne Airport, connecting to Southern Cross. A suite of other changes, including improved bus and tram services to Parkville will support this.

This project supersedes Melbourne Metro and the former alignment which included stations at Arden, Parkville, CBD North and South and Domain.

Clause 21.09-1 of the MSS advocates for integrated transport and urban growth. References to the Melbourne Metro and maps depicting the former alignment need to be updated in the MPS. However, the strategic intent of the Melbourne Rail Link is consistent with integrated transport and urban growth identified in the MSS.

Port Capacity Project – Webb Dock expansion

Lead by the Port of Melbourne Corporation, the $1.6 billion project will expand Melbourne’s port capacity through the redevelopment of the operational areas of the port and establishment of a new container terminal and a world class automotive terminal at Webb Dock.

The project also includes extensive buffer works that will enhance and improve the foreshore amenity.

The MSS, in Clause 21.08 Economic Development recognises the importance of the Port to Melbourne’s economy. Amendment C204 to the MPS incorporates documents relating to the redevelopment of Webb Dock. Amendment VC94 included changes to Clause 18.03 Ports to strengthen the objectives and strategies related to planning for ports and their environs.

Regional Rail Link

Within the CoM, works are taking place in the North Melbourne, West Melbourne and Kensington areas as part of the project which will remove major bottlenecks in Victoria's rail network, by untangling metropolitan and regional tracks as they travel through Melbourne's west into the heart of the city.

The MSS Clause 21.09 recognises the role of this project in achieving the objective of “to integrate transport with urban growth” and the Transport Strategy 2012 recognises the role this project will play in enhancing our public transport network.

of 44

http://ptv.vic.gov.au/melbournemetro

Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014 · Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014...

Documents

Transcript of Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014 · Melbourne Planning Scheme Review 5 August 2014...