Proposed Business 3 Rezoning, Bacchus Marsh Road, Corio

389 St Georges Road NORTH FITZROY VIC 3068

Phone (03) 9482 3888 | Fax (03) 9482 3933

www.urbanenterprise.com.au

Proposed Business 3 Rezoning,

Bacchus Marsh Road, Corio

Economic and Strategic Assessment

CITY OF GREATER GEELONG

MAY 2012

AuthorsAuthorsAuthorsAuthors

Paul Shipp

Jon Power

Shashi Karunanethy

Reviewed byReviewed byReviewed byReviewed by

Matt Ainsaar

© Copyright, Urban Enterprise Pty Ltd, May 2012.

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under Copyright Act 1963, no part may be reproduced without written permission of Urban Enterprise Pty Ltd.

Document InformationDocument InformationDocument InformationDocument Information

Filename: Corio Norlane Assessment Report Draft v1.3 PS 20120503

Last Saved: 4 May 2012 10:28 AM

Last Printed: 4 May 2012 10:31 AM

File Size: 4998 kb

DisclaimerDisclaimerDisclaimerDisclaimer

Neither Urban Enterprise Pty. Ltd. nor any member or employee of Urban Enterprise Pty. Ltd. takes responsibility in any way whatsoever to any person or organisation (other than that for which this report has been prepared) in respect of the information set out in this report, including any errors or omissions therein. In the course of our preparation of this report, projections have been prepared on the basis of assumptions and methodology which have been described in the report. It is possible that some of the assumptions underlying the projections may change. Nevertheless, the professional judgement of the members and employees of Urban Enterprise Pty. Ltd. have been applied in making these assumptions, such that they constitute an understandable basis for estimates and projections. Beyond this, to the extent that the assumptions do not materialise, the estimates and projections of achievable results may vary.

PROPOSED BUSINESS 3 REZONING, BACCHUS MARSH ROAD, CORIO ECONOMIC AND STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT City of Greater Geelong

Urban Enterprise Pty LtdMAY 2012

CONTENTS

SUMMARY III

STATUTORY CONTEXT III

STRATEGIC CONTEXT III

ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT IV

SUBMISSIONS IV

1. INTRODUCTION 6

1.1. BACKGROUND 6

1.2. SITE CONTEXT 7

1.3. THE MASTERS PROPOSAL 8

2. STATUTORY CONTEXT 9

2.1. INTRODUCTION 9

2.2. BUSINESS 3 ZONE 9

2.3. BUSINESS 4 ZONE 10

2.4. PROPOSED ZONING STRATEGY 11

3. STRATEGIC CONTEXT 12

3.1. STATE PLANNING POLICY 12

3.2. CITY OF GREATER GEELONG MUNICIPAL STRATEGIC STATEMENT (MSS) 13

3.3. OTHER LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 15

3.4. CORIO NORLANE DRAFT STRUCTURE PLAN 16

3.5. CITY OF GREATER GEELONG RETAIL STRATEGY, 2006 17

3.6. PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT REVIEW 20

3.7. WOOLWORTH’S ‘OXYGEN’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE 21

3.8. SUMMARY 22

4. PEER REVIEW: NEED AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT 24

4.1. INTRODUCTION 24

4.2. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 24

4.3. CATCHMENT AREA 25

4.4. EXISTING RETAIL SUPPLY 26

4.5. POPULATION 26

4.6. EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES 26

4.7. EXPENDITURE LEVELS OF CATCHMENT AREA 27

4.8. EXPENDITURE CAPTURE 28

4.9. MARKET SHARE 28

4.10. SALES FORECASTS AND TURNOVER RATES 29

4.11. SALES IMPACT ON COMPETING BULKY GOOD PROVIDERS 30

4.12. ECONOMIC BENEFITS (EMPLOYMENT) 30

4.13. NET COMMUNITY BENEFITS 31

4.14. SEQUENTIAL TESTING 31



4.15. GEELONG RING ROAD EMPLOYMENT PRECINCT 32

4.16. KEY FINDINGS 32

5. ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS 34

5.1. FAGG BROS PTY LTD SUBMISSION TO THE DRAFT CORIO NORLANE STRUCTURE PLAN 34

5.2. URBIS SUBMISSION TO THE DRAFT CORIO NORLANE STRUCTURE PLAN 38

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 DRAFT CORIO NORLANE STRUCTURE PLAN – ABATTOIR AND SURROUNDS CONCEPT PLAN 6

FIGURE 2 SITE CONTEXT PLAN 7

FIGURE 3 CITY OF GREATER GEELONG MSS, CLAUSE 21.07-08, RETAIL CENTRES HIERARCHY 15

FIGURE 4 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 24

FIGURE 5 CATCHMENT AREAS 25

TABLES

TABLE 1 PERMITTED USES: BUSINESS 3 ZONE AND BUSINESS 4 ZONE 10

TABLE 2 SUMMARY REVIEW OF RELEVANT PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENTS 21

TABLE 3 MARKET, EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES AND ITEMS 26

TABLE 4 MARKET SHARE OF MASTERS STORE, BY SALES 28

TABLE 5 SALES FORECASTS AND TURNOVER RATES, 2013/14 29



SUMMARY

SSSSTATUTORY TATUTORY TATUTORY TATUTORY CCCCONTEXTONTEXTONTEXTONTEXT

The need to rezone the subject site from Residential 1 Zoned to a more suitable land use is considered

appropriate. R1Z is not compatible with the existing MC Herd Abattoir and rezoning the site will facilitate the

development of a key gateway site which provides a buffer between the abattoir and sensitive uses to the

east.

It is considered that the proposed B3Z allocation would be an adequate strategy in bringing forward office,

business and restricted retail uses for both the Masters site and the proposed business park.

SSSSTRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC CCCCONTEXTONTEXTONTEXTONTEXT

The State and local planning policy frameworks provide extensive guidance on bulky goods retail and

commercial business development, out-of-centre proposals and the mechanisms for assessing proposals

for such developments. The following common themes provide a high level summary the policy basis

against which the proposal should be measured:

• Ensuring the economic well-being of communities by supporting and fostering economic

growth and development by providing land, facilitating decisions, and resolving land use

conflicts;

• Encouraging development which meets the communities’ needs for retail, entertainment,

office and other commercial services and provides a net community benefit;

• Where possible, positioning new retail and commercial development within or on the edge of

activity centres identified within the existing Activity Centres Hierarchy;

• Where development within or surrounding existing activity centres is not possible, and is

demonstrated via a sequential test, ensure that assessment criteria for new centres or out-

of-centre developments are met; which demonstrate:

• That there is identifiable retail demand for the proposal;

• The existing retail supply;

• Significant escape spending which can be captured;

• That there is no adverse impact on the existing retail hierarchy; and

• That the proposal demonstrates a ‘net community benefit’.

• Homemaker and bulky goods retailing is acknowledged within the policy framework as a use

that is extremely difficult to locate within or around existing activity centres; due to issues

associated with size, scale and vehicular access. Future development in out-of-centre and

or new centres is not precluded where it can be demonstrated that proposals satisfy the

above retail assessment criteria.

It is considered that the Masters proposal would not be contrary to the strategic framework, including the

MSS and Geelong Retail Strategy, if it can be demonstrated that the proposal meets the sequential site

selection test and the assessment criteria outlined above.



Similarly, the development of an office/business park on the southern section of the site is supported by

policy which encourages development which meets the community’s need for office and other commercial

services.

EEEECONOMIC CONOMIC CONOMIC CONOMIC AAAASSESSMENTSSESSMENTSSESSMENTSSESSMENT

The Deep End report provides a detailed and comprehensive economic assessment of the Masters and

ancillary bulky goods proposal.

The major supporting assumptions underpinning the report, including catchment area, population levels,

expenditure categories and existing retail supply have been checked and verified.

Some aspects of the detailed retail assessment methodology include limitations and sources that could not

be verified. However on balance it is considered that the retail assessment demonstrates that there is a

substantial market for the bulky goods retail floorspace proposed. This is based on a high-level review of the

methodology only – more detailed analysis would need to be undertaken if a full review or alternative

assessment is required.

The calculations of economic impact on existing retailers are based on Deep End’s own estimates. As

such, the assumptions underpinning the calculations are difficult to assess. It is considered that the impact

on existing retailers may be greater (but not significantly greater) than the figures shown in the report.

However, this cannot be quantified without a full review. It is considered that the average sales impact on

competing bulky good retailers is likely to exceed -6%, given that the Masters store will increase the existing

catchment area competing floorspace by approximately 17%.

The change in impact as a result of increasing the competing floorspace in the Corio Village Shopping

Centre cannot be known without recalculation the Deep End model, however it is considered that the overall

impact on the Shopping Centre may be slightly higher than the -7% as shown in the report.

The discussion of net community benefit and sequential testing briefly address the key requirements of the

planning scheme, but would benefit from greater detail and evidence, particularly given that one of the

Advisory Committee’s key grounds for rejecting a previous Oxygen proposal was that as an out of centre

development, the sequential test had not been satisfied through economic evidence.

On balance, the economic assessment prepared by Deep End appears to meets the requirements of the

Planning Scheme and provides sufficient evidence that the proposal is viable and will not generate an

adverse impact on the existing retail hierarchy (subject to the qualifications as discussed above).

It should also be acknowledged that the construction of facilities and infrastructure within the GREP over the

short term, and the occupation and visitation of these businesses over the medium and long term, will

generate significant demand for hardware, trade supplies and bulky goods in the local area.

In addition, there is likely to be significant demand generated for supporting businesses which will require

office and showroom type facilities in the vicinity of the GREP. Given the lack of available land in the

business zones in the local area, and the lack of available floorspace or expansion opportunity within the

Corio Village Shopping Centre, it is considered that the subject site provides an ideal location for office and

ancillary business development to support the development of the GREP. This is supported by Clause 17 of

the SPPF, which states that the sale of trade-related goods is supported where are “directly serving or

ancillary to industry and which have adequate on-site car parking”.

SSSSUBMISSIUBMISSIUBMISSIUBMISSIONSONSONSONS

Submissions by Fagg and Urbis (on behalf of Masters) were reviewed and assessed in detail.



The Fagg submission raises a number of issues which largely contend that the proposal to rezone the

subject land is contrary to local policy. The submission selectively references a number of policies,

strategies and previous panel reports.

The main issues can be summarised as follows:

1. There is a lack of reference to the Geelong Retail Strategy in the Structure Plan.

2. There is no comment or analysis on the rezoning to B4Z of the future Bunnings Norlane

Store (located at 1-3 and 5-9 Princes Highway to the southern extent of the Structure

Plan area); which previously had received a planning permit on Industrial 2 Zoned land.

3. The rezoning of the Geelong Gate Homemaker Precinct to Business Zone 4 is not

discussed in the Plan.

Our assessment of the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks (as outlined in the following sections)

indicates that the Masters proposal is generally in accordance with the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

PROPOSED BUSINESS 3 REZONING, BACCHUS MARSH ROAD, CORIO ECONOMIC AND STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT CITY OF GREATER GEELONG

6 URBAN ENTERPRISE PTY LTDMAY 2012

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. BBBBACKGROUNDACKGROUNDACKGROUNDACKGROUND

Urban Enterprise has been commissioned by the City of Greater Geelong to undertake an

economic and strategic assessment of land at the corner of Bacchus Marsh Road and the

Geelong Ring Road which is proposed by the Corio Norlane Structure Plan (draft) to be rezoned

to the Business 3 Zone. This includes a high level peer review of an Economic Impact

Assessment to support a new Homemaker Store at the site.

The Draft Structure Plan proposes to rezone part of the existing Residential 1 Zone to the

Business 3 Zone. The northern section of the site is proposed to accommodate a Masters Home

Improvement Store, with a business park and office uses proposed for the remainder of the area.

The area subject to rezoning to Business 3 Zone is illustrated below in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1 DRAFT CORIO NORLANE STRUCTURE PLAN – ABATTOIR AND SURROUNDS CONCEPT

PLAN

Source: The Draft Corio Norlane Structure Plan (2011)

This report will provide:

• A assessment of existing and proposed statutory zoning controls for the site and analysis of

their effectiveness and appropriateness;

• A review and analysis of the strategic policy framework, including:

• State Planning Policy (Clause 11: Settlement and Clause 17: Economic

Development);



• City of Greater Geelong Municipal Planning Scheme (MSS) and local planning policy

(particularly Clause 22, Retail Proposal Assessment);

• Corio Norlane Draft Structure Plan and Background Report (2011);

• City of Greater Geelong Municipal Retail Assessment (2006);

• City of Greater Geelong Industrial Land Study (2001);

• City of Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment Panel Reports: Amendment

C98, C166 and C187;

• City of Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment Explanatory Report:

Amendment C253; and

• Woolworth’s ‘Oxygen’ [re-branded Masters] Advisory Committee Report to the

Planning Minister.

• A high level peer review of the Economic Impact Assessment prepared by Deep End

Service Pty Ltd, which has accompanied a Planning Permit application and concurrent

Planning Scheme Amendment proposal by Masters to support a home improvement store

on the site; and

• An assessment and critical response to key issues raised in submissions to the Draft Corio

Norlane Structure Plan made by Urbis and Fagg Bros Pty Ltd.

1.2.1.2.1.2.1.2. SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE CCCCONTEXTONTEXTONTEXTONTEXT

The subject site is situated in Corio, approximately 10km to the north of Geelong City Centre. The

site is bounded to the north by the Geelong Ring Road and to the east by Bacchus Marsh Road.

Both the subject site and land to the south and east are currently within the Residential 1 Zone

(“R1Z”). The southern section of the site is proposed to include a business park and has also

received approval for an 82 lot residential subdivision.

FIGURE 2 SITE CONTEXT PLAN

R1Z

R1Z

Subject site and location of B3Z rezoning proposal Proposed Masters Site



Source: City of Greater Geelong Planning Scheme – annotated by Urban Enterprise (For Illustrative Purposes Only, 2012)

Immediately to the east of the subject site, on the adjoining boundary of Bacchus Marsh Road, is

the MC Herd Abattoir. The abattoir is a major employment generator in Corio and constrains the

use of the subject site for residential development due to potential amenity impacts within the

buffer zone restricting sensitive uses.

To the north of the subject site, beyond the Geelong Ring Road, is the proposed Geelong Ring

Road Employment Precinct. Directly to the south and east are standard density residential

subdivisions.

1.3.1.3.1.3.1.3. TTTTHE HE HE HE MMMMASTERS ASTERS ASTERS ASTERS PPPPROPOSALROPOSALROPOSALROPOSAL

Masters wish to obtain planning approval for the development of 18,471m2 of gross floor area on

the subject site, including a 13,701m2 Masters Store and 4,770m2 of other restricted retail

tenancies. The proposed land uses of the Masters Store are disaggregated as follows:

• 2,326m2 of Trade Supplies;

• 8,336m2 of Restricted Retail (including 160 m

2 Food and Drink Premises comprising an on

site café for customers and staff);

• 2,223m2 Garden Centre; and

• 816m2 Receiving Area.

Additional restricted retail tenancies will include four tenancies, ranging between 1,120m2 and

1,400m2.

The Masters proposal is subject to a planning permit application and amendment request under

Section 96A of the Planning and Environment Act. It seeks to align the subject site with the

rezoning proposals in the Draft Corio Norlane Structure Plan and the strategic aims of the City of

Greater Geelong. The amendment request comprises the following three components:

• The rezoning of the Masters subject site to Business 3 Zone (“B3Z”);

• Removal of Design and Development Overlay 14 (relating to residential development) from

the subject site; and

• Amending the Retial Activity Centres Hierarchy in Clause 21.07-8 of the City of Greater

Geelong Planning Scheme, to include the subject site as a Homemaker Precinct.



2. STATUTORY CONTEXT

2.1.2.1.2.1.2.1. IIIINTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTION

The subject site is currently within the Residential 1 Zone as part of the City of Greater Geelong

Planning Scheme. The proximity of the MC Herd Abattoir to the subject site currently precludes

residential use on the majority of the site.

This section provide a summary of the rezoning options, considering the strategic location of the

site, the existing Planning Scheme Amendment proposal and the recommendation in the draft

Structure Plan to introduce the Business 3 Zone.

2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2. BBBBUSINESS USINESS USINESS USINESS 3333 ZZZZONEONEONEONE

The Draft Corio Norlane Structure Plan proposed to rezone the subject site to B3Z (as illustrated

in Figure 3). B3Z seeks to “…implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local

Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning

policies……to encourage the integrated development of offices and manufacturing industries and

associated commercial and industrial uses…”

Under B3Z, uses that do not require a permit include a range of industry office and warehouse

uses. Uses that are permissible with a planning permit include ‘Restricted Retail Premises’ and

‘Retail Premises (other than postal agency and shop)’ and ‘Convenience Shops’.

2.2.1. ‘RESTRICTED RETAIL’

On 20th January 2012, Planning Scheme Amendment VC88 came into effect, amending the VPP

definition of ‘Restricted Retail Premises’ and removing floor space thresholds within the zoning

controls.

Amendment VC88 expanded the definition of restricted retail premises to include:

• Outdoor and recreation goods (in addition to camping equipment);

• All animal supplies (in addition to equestrian and pet supplies)

• Baby and children’s goods, children’s play equipment and accessories; and

• Sporting cycling, leisure, fitness goods and accessories.

Furthermore, the amendment includes a broader new definition which allows two new categories

for other types of bulky goods premises; including:

• Those requiring a large area for handling, display and storage of goods; and

• Those requiring direct vehicle access to the building by customers, for the purpose of

loading or unloading goods into or from their vehicles after purchase or hire.

The changes provide the scope for a wide range of large or physically bulky goods to be sold

under the amended definition of restricted retail premises. However, in B3Z, the requirement to

obtain a permit for these uses remains in place.



In addition, minimum floorspace requirements (of 1,000m2 per tenancy) have now been removed

in B3Z (Clause 34.03); allowing smaller retail premises to be permissible.

2.3.2.3.2.3.2.3. BBBBUSINESS USINESS USINESS USINESS 4444 ZZZZONEONEONEONE

Business 4 Zone (“B4Z”) is commonly used as the zoning mechanism to facilitate the

development of new bulky goods retail premises. B4Z seeks to “…encourage the development of

a mix of bulky goods retailing and manufacturing industry and their associated business

services…”

Within B4Z, Restricted Retail Premises, Trade Supplies and Warehouses are identified as

permissible uses that do not require a permit.

A direct comparison of the uses permitted within Business Zones 3 and 4 are summarised in

Table 1.

TABLE 1 PERMITTED USES: BUSINESS 3 ZONE AND BUSINESS 4 ZONE

Business 3 ZoneBusiness 3 ZoneBusiness 3 ZoneBusiness 3 Zone Business 4 ZoneBusiness 4 ZoneBusiness 4 ZoneBusiness 4 Zone

PurposePurposePurposePurpose To encourage the integrated

development of offices and

manufacturing industries and

associated commercial and industrial

uses.

To encourage the development of a mix of

bulky goods retailing and manufacturing

industry and their associated business

services.

Permitted Uses (Permit Permitted Uses (Permit Permitted Uses (Permit Permitted Uses (Permit

notnotnotnot Required)Required)Required)Required)

� Industry (other than Materials

recycling and Transfer station)

� Informal outdoor recreation

� Mail centre

� Minor utility installation

� Office.

� Postal agency

� Railway

� Tramway

� Warehouse (other than Mail centre

and Shipping container storage)

� Electoral office

� Industry (other than Materials recycling and

Transfer station)

� Informal outdoor recreation

� Mail centre

� Minor utility installation

� Railway

� Restricted retail premises

� Service station

� Trade supplies

� Tramway

� Warehouse (other than Mail centre and

Shipping container storage)

Permitted Uses (Permit Permitted Uses (Permit Permitted Uses (Permit Permitted Uses (Permit

Required)Required)Required)Required)

� Adult sex bookshop

� Agriculture

� Caretaker's house

� Convenience shop

� Education centre

� Leisure and recreation

� Materials recycling

� Place of assembly

� Restricted retail premises

� Retail premises (other than Postal

agency and Shop)

� Shipping container storage

� Transfer station land

� Utility installation

� Adult sex bookshop

� Agriculture

� Caretaker's house

� Convenience shop

� Education centre

� Leisure and recreation

� Materials recycling

� Motel

� Office (other than Electoral office)

� Place of assembly

� Retail premises (other than Shop and Trade

supplies)

� Shipping container storage

� Transfer station

� Utility installation

Source: Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Urban Enterprise



2.4.2.4.2.4.2.4. PPPPROPOSED ROPOSED ROPOSED ROPOSED ZZZZONING ONING ONING ONING SSSSTRATTRATTRATTRATEGY EGY EGY EGY

2.4.1. THE NEED FOR REZONING

The need to rezone the subject site from Residential 1 Zoned land to a more suitable designation

is being driven by the proximity of the MC Herd Abattoir and the requirement for a 500m buffer for

sensitive land uses. The unsuitability of the site for residential uses was considered in a VCAT

Subdivision Hearing (P3570/2010) for 240 Bacchus Marsh Rd, where Tribunal recognised that

retaining land opposite to abattoir as R1Z would be an “…unsatisfactory planning outcome…” and

therefore considered it appropriate to undertake a strategic review of the site.

The abattoir is a major employer and contributor to the economy in Corio, which is supported in

the Corio the Corio Norlane Draft Structure Plan, which seeks to “…Support the continued

operation of major employment sites such as the M.C. Herd Abattoir…” [P.11]. It would therefore

not align with the City of Greater Geelong’s strategic objectives to cease or alter the primary

operations of the abattoir and it is not considered that this will occur in the foreseeable future.

It is considered appropriate to rezone the subject site from R1Z to a more suitable land use that

facilitates the development of an important strategic gateway site and provides a buffer between

the abattoir and sensitive uses such as residential dwellings to the east.

2.4.2. SUITABILITY OF BUSINESS 3 ZONE

Applying a B3Z to both the Masters subject site and the remainder of the B3Z allocation (which is

proposed for business park uses), as proposed in the Draft Structure Plan, will allow development

of a wide range of light industrial, business and commercial uses.

The Business 3 Zone is the appropriate zone to facilitate development in the southern section of

the site for office/business park uses as proposed in the Structure Plan. These would be

permissible uses that do not require a planning permit.

The proposed Masters store and ancillary restricted retail premises, which are proposed for the

northern section of the site, are permit required uses which align with the definition of ‘Restricted

Retail Premises’.

It is considered that Business 3 Zone would be an appropriate zoning mechanism to allow the

Masters proposal alongside office and business uses on the southern parcel of the land.

However, if Council were to consider an alternative zoning strategy, the application of Business 4

Zone to the subject site would better reflect Council’s strategic objectives to bring forward the site

for restricted retail development. B4Z is the most appropriate zoning mechanism to facilitate

homemaker and bulky goods retail and has been acknowledged by the Woolworth’s ‘Oxygen’ [re-

branded Masters] Advisory Committee as “…the most appropriate zone for the use and

development proposed for an Oxygen store…” [Oxygen Advisory Committee Report, 2010, P.24].

In summary, it is considered that the proposed Business 3 Zone is an appropriate zone to

facilitate office, business and restricted retail uses. However, rezoning the proposed Masters

(northern) parcel to B4Z could clearly and transparently articulate Council’s strategic objectives

for the site.



3. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

This section sets out the strategic framework which underpins the development of new retail,

commercial and industrial facilities at state, regional and local level. It provides an analysis of the

key policy objectives and mechanisms used to govern new retail and business development, and

illustrates how the rezoning proposal would fit within the wider policy framework.

3.1.3.1.3.1.3.1. SSSSTATE TATE TATE TATE PPPPLANNING LANNING LANNING LANNING PPPPOLICYOLICYOLICYOLICY

The State Planning Policy Framework (“SPPF”) seeks to ensure that overarching objectives in

Victoria are adopted via local planning policy and planning mechanisms. The SPPF aims to

promote a settlement policy that will “…anticipate and respond to the needs of existing and future

communities through provision of zoned and serviced land for housing, employment, recreation

and open space, commercial and community facilities and infrastructure…”

Key areas of the SPPF which are of relevance to the subject site are identified below:

3.1.1. CLAUSE 11: SETTLEMENT

11.01 ACTIVITY CENTRES

State policy on activity centres seeks to develop a network of centres that are “…a focus for

business, shopping, working, leisure and community facilities…” Policy encourages the

concentration of major retail, residential, commercial, administrative, entertainment and cultural

developments into or on the edge of existing activity centres.

11.02 URBAN GROWTH, THE SUPPLY OF URBAN LAND

Policy on urban growth plans to ensure that a sufficient supply of land is available for residential,

commercial, retail, industrial, recreational, institutional and other community uses. To achieve

this, authorities must:

• Ensure the ongoing provision of land and supporting infrastructure to support sustainable

urban development.

• Ensure that sufficient land is available to meet forecast demand.

3.1.2. CLAUSE 17: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

State policy governing economic development aspires to promote the economic well-being of

communities by supporting and fostering economic growth and development; by providing land,

facilitating decisions and resolving land use conflicts, so that each district may build on its

strengths and achieve its economic potential.

17.01-1 COMMERCIAL: BUSINESS

In respect of commercial business uses, the SPPF encourages development which meets

communities’ needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides

‘net community benefit’ in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation



and sustainability of commercial facilities. In relation to restricted retail trade goods the SPPF

seeks to:

“…provide outlets of trade-related goods or services directly serving or ancillary to industry and

which have adequate on-site car parking…”

17.01-2 COMMERCIAL, OUT OF CENTRE DEVELOPMENT FOR METROPOLITAN MELBOURNE

Policy which relates to out-of-centre development in Metropolitan Melbourne generally aims to

ensure that proposals or the expansion of single use retail, commercial and recreational facilities

outside activity centres are discouraged by giving primacy to development within activity centres.

However, the SPPF states that where out-of-centre proposals are considered, the proposed use

or development should be “…of net benefit to the community in the region served by the

proposal...”

17.02-1 INDUSTRY, INDUSTRIAL LAND DEVELOPMENT (P.2)

The SPPF seeks to identify land for industrial development in urban growth areas where good

access for employees, freight and road transport is available. It seeks to provide an adequate

supply of industrial land in appropriate locations, including sufficient stocks of large sites for

strategic investment.

3.2.3.2.3.2.3.2. CCCCITY OF ITY OF ITY OF ITY OF GGGGREATEREATEREATEREATER R R R GGGGEELONG EELONG EELONG EELONG MMMMUNICIPAL UNICIPAL UNICIPAL UNICIPAL SSSSTRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC SSSSTATEMENT TATEMENT TATEMENT TATEMENT (MSS)(MSS)(MSS)(MSS)

The Municipal Strategic Statement (“MSS”) underpins the Local Planning Policy Framework

(“LPPF”) in the City of Greater Geelong. It sets out the key planning, land use and development

objectives for the municipality; and provides the strategy and policy to administer these

objectives. The core policies which are relevant to the proposal are identified below:

21.02 CITY OF GREATER GEELONG SUSTAINABLE GROWTH FRAMEWORK

The sustainable growth framework aims to ensure that the City of Greater Geelong meets the

needs of the community without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their

needs. Of particular relevance, in ‘encouraging diversity in industry’ the framework requires

planning to:

• Encourage the growth of new and sustainable industry sectors.

• Look for innovative ways to engage with the private sector.

• Provide a diverse range of high quality industrial and commercial land.

21.07 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT

21.07-2 INDUSTRY OBJECTIVES

The MSS seeks to promote ongoing employment and economic development in the Geelong

Region. Relevant industrial objectives seek to:

• Provide an adequate supply of appropriately located industrial land that meets the needs of

different industries.

• Direct different types of industrial development to appropriate locations.

• Facilitate well designed and serviced industrial development that provides a high level of

amenity for workers and visitors.



21.07-2 INDUSTRY STRATEGIES

Relevant industry strategy which seeks to implement the MSS objectives seeks to:

• Focus new industrial development around major transport routes and infrastructure assets.

• Provide sufficient industrial land to meet a range of industrial needs in Geelong, including

small to medium sized industry.

21.07-2 RETAIL OBJECTIVES

Retail policy for the City of Greater Geelong seeks to enforce the following objectives:

• To facilitate the development of vibrant and viable retail activity centres in accordance with

the Geelong Retail Activity Centre Hierarchy.

• To ensure all major retail developments, and out of centre developments, provide a clear net

community benefit.

21.07-2 RETAIL STRATEGIES

The MSS sets out a series of retail strategy objectives which govern the development of new

retail facilities in Geelong. These strategies seek to:

• Ensure that new retail development is directed to activity centres and is consistent with the

role and function described in the Retail Activity Centre Hierarchy.

• Direct restricted retail (bulky goods) use and development to Central Geelong, the

nominated homemaker precinct at Waurn Ponds, the Corio homemaker precinct subject to

appropriate re-zoning and other homemaker precincts and activity centres (see Figure 3

overleaf for retail hierarchy and homemaker precincts).

• Discourage restricted retail (bulky goods) development in industrial areas.

• Require that applications for new centres to establish the retail need for such use and

development and demonstrate that there are no adverse impacts on the operation of the

retail activity centres hierarchy.

21.07-08 RETAIL ACTIVITY CENTRE HIERARCHY

The existing retail hierarchy framework (as shown in Figure 3) identifies a Potential Homemaker

Precinct in Corio (now named the Geelong Gateway Homemaker Precinct – see annotation 31 in

Figure 3). Existing Homemaker Precincts are identified in Warun Ponds, Moorabool/Fyans,

Geelong West and North Geelong.



FIGURE 3 CITY OF GREATER GEELONG MSS, CLAUSE 21.07-08, RETAIL CENTRES HIERARCHY

Source: City of Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Clause 21.07-08

3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3. OOOOTHER THER THER THER LLLLOCAL OCAL OCAL OCAL PPPPLANNING LANNING LANNING LANNING PPPPOLICYOLICYOLICYOLICY

3.3.1. 22.03 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR RETAIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS

The MSS sets out policy which applies to proposals where a planning scheme amendment or

planning permit application is required for new or expanded provision of retail floorspace. This

policy sets out the framework for assessing such applications or amendments. The core policy

and objectives and policy are set out below.

OBJECTIVES

• To ensure that applications for new centres establish the retail need for such use and

development and demonstrate that there are no adverse impacts on the operation of the

retail activity centres hierarchy.

• To ensure that applications involving a planning scheme amendment in or adjoining existing

activity centres clearly establish a retail need for such use and development and

demonstrate that there are no adverse impacts on the operation of the retail activity centres

hierarchy.

• To ensure all major retail uses and developments provide clear net community benefit.



• To allow/guide consideration of applications involving an increase in an identified floor space

cap, in order to accommodate the changing retail trends and retail demands.

POLICY

The LPPF states that an Economic Impact Assessment should be provided for ‘new major retail

development involving 2,000m2 or more in gross leasable floor area’ and ‘out-of-centre

proposals’.

The issues and information are required to be addressed as part of an economic impact

assessment and level of information required depends on the size of the retail floorspace and will

be at the discretion of the responsible authority. The key assessment criteria include:

• General Issues (type, quantum, community benefit, employment, etc);

• Retail demand;

• Retail supply;

• Escape spending;

• Impact on existing retail facilities; and

• Net community benefit.

OUT OF CENTRE PROPOSALS

The MSS, in addition to an Economic Impact Assessment, requires that out-of-centre proposals

must demonstrate why the development location is considered for retail development, by

following sequential approach which states why the proposal:

• Cannot be accommodated in an existing activity centre, or failing that;

• Cannot be accommodated on an edge of centre location (which has a functional relationship

with an activity centre) or, failing that;

• Cannot be accommodated in the nominated homemaker precincts.

An out-of-centre proposal should also then demonstrate that the location is consistent with urban

context of the surrounding area, including potential impacts of the proposed development on local

character and amenity.

3.4.3.4.3.4.3.4. CCCCOOOORIO RIO RIO RIO NNNNORLANE ORLANE ORLANE ORLANE DDDDRAFT RAFT RAFT RAFT SSSSTRUCTURE TRUCTURE TRUCTURE TRUCTURE PPPPLANLANLANLAN

The Corio Norlane Structure Plan (“Structure Plan”) supports the rezoning of the subject site

within Business 3 Zone in order to rezone the site for “…or restricted retail, offices and Business

Park….” [P.11].

3.4.1. THEME: LAND USE AND BUILT FORM, PRINCIPLE 6 – SUPPORT OPPORTUNITIES TO

IMPROVE THE RETAIL OFFER FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES

Principle 6 sets out context for retail development in the Structure Plan area. It identifies that

“…land within the residual air emissions buffer to the MC Herd Abattoir is currently zoned

Residential 1 Zone however is not appropriate for residential development because of the

potential impact the abattoir operations might have on the amenity of new residents...” and that

“…the site is well positioned to accommodate some commercial development that would benefit



from exposure to Bacchus Marsh Road and proximity to the Geelong Ring Road Employment

Precinct….” [P.18]

Accompanying Directions for Principle 6 seek to “…rezone land on Bacchus Marsh Road opposite

the MC Herd Abattoir to Business 3 Zone to support appropriate office and restricted retail

development….” [P.18]

3.4.2. CORIO NORLANE STRUCTURE PLAN: BACKGROUND REPORT

The Structure Plan Background Report compiles a body of evidence on which the Structure Plan

is based. A report by Essential Economics (Corio Norlane Urban Renewal Project Retail and

Activity Centre Assessment, 2009) analyses the retail capacity of the Structure Plan area,

concluding that [P.87]:

• Corio and Norlane are well-catered for in regard to the quantum of retail floorspace provided

located in the study area.

• The study area represents a relatively captive market, whereby escape expenditure is

relatively modest for a suburban area. However, escape spending in non-food retail is

relatively high, especially in comparison goods

• Having regard for the Geelong Gateway Homemaker Centre and the impact it will have on

reducing escape expenditure in the non-food sector, only limited potential exists to further

reduce escape expenditure levels.

• Growth in the study area’s level of retail spending will generate the potential for retail

development in the non-food sectors; only limited potential for development exists in the

food, liquor and groceries (FLG), food catering and retail service sectors.

• The dominance of Corio Shopping Centre and its location central to study area residents,

indicates there is only very limited potential for the development of further neighbourhood

shopping facilities.

• The assessment of the development potential in the non-food sector indicates that an

opportunity exists for some additional non-food retail floorspace in the study area. This may

consist of an expansion of the Corio Shopping Centre to include, for example, a second

Discount Department Store, or additional homemaker retail floorspace.

3.5.3.5.3.5.3.5. CCCCITY OF ITY OF ITY OF ITY OF GGGGREATER REATER REATER REATER GGGGEELONG EELONG EELONG EELONG RRRRETAIL ETAIL ETAIL ETAIL SSSSTRATEGYTRATEGYTRATEGYTRATEGY,,,, 2006200620062006

The City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy (“GRS”) provides the framework which underpins the

retail development and the retail activity centres hierarchy in Geelong. Whilst the framework still

provides the basis for policy making in the retail sector it is now becoming somewhat dated as a

result of the passage of time. However, the retail strategy underpinned retail policy within the

MSS and the relevant policies which apply to both the proposal and the subject site are set out

below.



3.5.1. PRINCIPLES AND ACTIONS FOR ACTIVITY CENTRES (CHAPTER 4.2)

CLOSELY MONITOR OUT-OF-CENTRE DEVELOPMENT, AND ALLOW SUCH DEVELOPMENT AT

APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS [P.17-18]

Out-of-centre policy seeks to ensure that retail activities which occur away from activity centres

involve an aggregation of uses at appropriate locations, and that such development contributes to

the achievement of a net community benefit and does not undermine retail activity centre policy.

Relevant policy actions include:

• Recognising the popularity of homemaker and other out-of-centre retail, and their specific

site criteria in terms of site size, location, exposure and access, etc.

• Supporting such developments where they are located at appropriate locations as defined in

the Retail Activity Centres Hierarchy.

• Ensuring that proposals for new or expanded homemaker development at these locations

are accompanied by a retail-economic analysis of the potential impact such proposals may

have on the existing retail hierarchy and existing level of retail service to the community.

• Assessing proposals for out-of-centre developments which are to be located outside the

specified locations against a strict set of out-of-centre assessment criteria.

APPLY THE RETAIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA FOR RETAIL PROPOSALS IN

NEW CENTRES AND FOR EXPANSION OF EXISTING CENTRES [P.18-20]

Policy seeks to support retail development applications for new centres where the proponent

clearly establishes the retail need for such development in a new location, including the

development of new communities, and where there are no adverse impacts on the operation of

the retail activity centres hierarchy. Actions include [P.20]:

• Ensuring that proposals for new retail activity centres are accompanied by a suitably-

detailed economic analysis showing market justification (or retail need) for the development

and which provides evidence that the existing retail activity centre hierarchy will not be

adversely affected and that the proposed development will generate a net community

benefit.

• Ensuring that proposals for expanded retailing in existing activity centres, and which

requires a rezoning, also meets the requirements specified above.

• Supporting retail activity centre developments where they are required to serve the needs of

new residential communities associated with major urban development.

• Requiring an economic impact assessment to be prepared for major new retail development

generally involving 2,000m2 or more.

3.5.2. HOMEMAKER RETAIL (CHAPTER 5.9)

The Retail Strategy identifies homemaker retailing as “…occupying a stand-alone site, or several

sites in a precinct, and may also be described as an integrated centre where such a location

contains a range of comparison shopping (eg, bedding, white good, electrical goods) in an

integrated shopping environment…”



HOMEMAKER RETAIL LOCATIONS

The Retail Strategy supports the principle of Council explicitly identifying specific locations as a

focus for future homemaker development (following detailed location analyses by either Council

or developers). In particular, the Strategy supports the creation of two homemaker concentrations

for this purpose: one at Waurn Ponds to the south of urban Geelong, and one in North Geelong.

NEW HOMEMAKER DEVELOPMENT

The Retail Strategy notes that “…while Waurn Ponds and North Geelong are supported as the two

preferred locations for future homemaker retail development in Geelong, this does not

necessarily preclude other future out-of-centre homemaker development outside these locations

over the life of this Strategy…” [P.41]. Therefore, the Strategy states that proposals for future

homemaker retailing may be established on a site or in a new precinct if the proponent can

demonstrate that [P.41]:

• The proposed development cannot reasonably be accommodated at either the Waurn

Ponds site or the North Geelong; and

• The proposed development meets the out-of-centre assessment criteria outlined in the

Strategy (Chapter 6).

3.5.3. CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING RETAIL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS (CHAPTER 6)

The Retail Strategy set out the framework for assessing out of centre retail proposals, based on

the following criteria:

• Locational Framework

• Accessibility Framework

• Urban Design

• Retail – Economic Justification

• Net Community Benefit.

3.5.4. LOCATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL PROVISION (CHAPTER 11.6: NON-

FOOD RETAIL)

The Retail Strategy provides discussion on the locations for additional retail provision in the

homemaker sector, stating that [P.92]:

“…The continued popularity of homemaker retail, driven by strong rates of population growth and

new home development and the popularity of lifestyle and leisure living, are expected to continue

to support new homemaker development in the region. Based on forecast spending growth - and

as an indicative estimate of future requirements to meet population growth - it is likely that the

increase in homemaker floorspace would comprise approximately 30,000m2 to 40,000m2 over

the period to 2021 (Note: This excludes non-retail and trade related floorspace). Beyond 2021,

continued population growth will support ongoing homemaker development. Homemaker

floorspace development is expected to be concentrated in locations identified in the Strategy as

priorities for such development, although there will be scope for development outside these

areas, subject to the application of a strict set of out-of-centre assessment criteria (refer Chapter

6)…”



3.5.5. SUMMARY OF RETAIL ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES (CHAPTER 13)

RETAIL ACTIVITY CENTRE HIERARCHY

The Strategy acknowledges that homemaker retailing has been an area of rapid growth in

Greater Geelong in recent years, and states that “…there is considerable interest in current

proposals for this form of development. To a large extent, planning for homemaker retailing has

mainly occurred on a case-by-case basis, reflecting the significant new growth in this form of

retailing and also the lack of a strong planning policy for assessing these permit applications.

This situation has contributed to perceptions of ad hoc planning decisions. The Strategy provides

support for homemaker retailing, having regard for industry trends, retail growth, available sites

and current proposals….” [P.124]

3.6.3.6.3.6.3.6. PPPPLANNING LANNING LANNING LANNING SSSSCHEME CHEME CHEME CHEME AAAAMENDMENTMENDMENTMENDMENTMENDMENT RRRREVIEWEVIEWEVIEWEVIEW

Table 2 provides a summary of relevant Planning Amendment proposals and decisions relating to

restricted retail premises and sites surrounding the subject site. These amendments are

specifically noted within the Fagg Bros Pty Ltd submission and are therefore relevant to the

merits of that objection.



TABLE 2 SUMMARY REVIEW OF RELEVANT PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENTS

AmendmentAmendmentAmendmentAmendment Amendment C98Amendment C98Amendment C98Amendment C98 Amendment C166Amendment C166Amendment C166Amendment C166 Amendment C187Amendment C187Amendment C187Amendment C187 Amendment C253Amendment C253Amendment C253Amendment C253

YearYearYearYear 2006 2009 2011 2012

SiteSiteSiteSite HomeTown Geelong,

Princes Highway

North Geelong.

Land south of the

Masters subject site,

currently zoned R1Z.

Geelong Ring Road

Employment Precinct

(GREP).

1-3 and 5-19 Princes

Highway, Norlane.

ProposalProposalProposalProposal Rezoning from I2Z to

Comprehensive

Development Zone to

facilitate the

development of

41,000m2 of retail

development and

6,900m2 of business

uses.

Rezone land from

Residential 1 (R1Z) to

Business 3 (B3Z);

Introduce Clause

34.03: Business 3

Zone;

Remove Schedule 14

to DDO14) and

Introduce DDO19.

Rename Heales Road

Industrial Estate to

GREP, restructure

lots, and introduce

changes to sub-

division and layout.

Bunnings proposal to

rezone land from I2Z to

B4Z to more

appropriately reflect the

characteristics of the

proposed Bunnings

Store (which is under

construction)

Key Key Key Key IssuesIssuesIssuesIssues � Potential impact on

Port of Geelong

� Scale and size of

proposal

� Need

� Current constraints

as a residential site

� Appropriateness for

business uses

� Strategic justification

� Transport

implications

� Acquisition of land

� Impact on policy

framework

� Impact on other retail

centres and need

Panel Panel Panel Panel

ConclusionsConclusionsConclusionsConclusions

Proposal did not

deliver a net

community benefit,

would impact on the

Port of Geelong and

was too large in scale.

The proposal was

recommended to be

abandoned.

B3Z is appropriate for

the land and

Amendment C166

should be adopted into

the planning scheme.

Amendment C187

should be adopted.

No objections to the

proposal were

received, therefore no

Panel was required.

StatusStatusStatusStatus Abandoned. Recommended for

approval by panel but

refused by Planning

Minister.

Adopted. Adopted (10 April

2012), awaiting

Ministerial Approval.

Source: City of Geelong Planning Scheme, Urban Enterprise

3.7.3.7.3.7.3.7. WWWWOOLWORTHOOLWORTHOOLWORTHOOLWORTH’’’’S S S S ‘‘‘‘OOOOXYGENXYGENXYGENXYGEN’’’’ AAAADVISORY DVISORY DVISORY DVISORY CCCCOMMITTEEOMMITTEEOMMITTEEOMMITTEE

An Advisory Committee was set up to assess 11 ‘Oxygen’ [now re-branded as Masters] store

proposals across Victoria which sought to provide an assessment of the suitability of the sites for

development. It provides planning policy and strategic analysis of the Masters concept and

assesses the proposal for a Masters store in North Geelong, on the site of the old Geelong Golf

Club.

Policy considerations and conclusions which are relevant to the Masters proposal and subject

site are summarised below.

The Committee provided comments on a range of strategic planning, policy and economic issues

in relation to the proposed Masters stores. Relevant comments include [P.20-21]:

• Throughout the hearings it became evident that within the inner metropolitan area and

Geelong, the ability to locate a restricted retail development such as an Oxygen Store of



some 13,000 square metres is difficult to achieve within existing activity centres. Equally, it

was arguable that it may be undesirable to locate a 3.5 hectare big box retail store, including

associated car parking, within an activity centre.

• With required sites being of the order of 3.5 hectares and the built form represented by a

large footprint, single buildings, with ample car parking immediately adjacent to the store,

the concept of locating such developments within, or even on the edge of activity centres, is

most often not practical from a land economics perspective.

• The Retail Policy Review Discussion Paper released by the Minister for Planning in October

2008 aims to provide greater clarity in relation to the policy and statutory framework for

consideration of retail proposals. The policy generally encourages bulky goods retailing to

locate within business zones (in particular the Business 4 Zone) in proximity to an existing or

planned activity centre or retail/homemaker cluster.

The committee considered a site on the former Geelong Golf Club for an ‘Oxygen store, medical

centre, food and drink premises and specialty shops’. The findings of the committee did not

support the proposal and concluded [P.17]:

• In respect of the home improvement store and the other uses proposed, the Committee

does not accept that in the main, the local and State policies are complied with. The

Committee does not accept that the proposed site fits within the Geelong North Homemaker

Precinct, and as an out of centre development, the Committee considers the sequential test

has not been satisfied through economic evidence. The Committee maintains that just

because a site is perceived to be available, it does not necessarily mean that the site is the

most appropriate.

• There was no substantive evidence that the viability of recognised activity centres would be

severely compromised through the introduction of a home improvement store on the subject

site, however the Committee noted the poor functionality of having a standalone bulky goods

retail outlet and held the view that the nominated site should not be supported.

3.8.3.8.3.8.3.8. SSSSUMMARYUMMARYUMMARYUMMARY

The state and local policy frameworks provide extensive guidance on bulky goods retail and

commercial business development, out-of-centre proposals and the mechanisms for assessing

proposals for such developments. We have considered the Business 3 Zone and Masters

proposals against the established policy framework and have identified the following common

themes that are critical in establishing the appropriateness of the proposals:

• Ensuring the economic well-being of communities by supporting and fostering economic

growth and development by providing land, facilitating decisions, and resolving land use

conflicts;

• Encouraging development which meets the communities’ needs for retail, entertainment,

office and other commercial services and provides a net community benefit;

• Where possible, positioning new retail and commercial development within or on the edge of

activity centres identified within the existing Activity Centres Hierarchy;

• Where development within or surrounding existing activity centres is not possible, and

proven via a robust sequential test, ensure that strict assessment criteria for new centres or

out-of-centre developments are met; which demonstrate:



• That there is identifiable retail demand for the proposal;

• The existing retail supply;

• Significant escape spending which can be captured;

• That there is no adverse impact on the existing retail hierarchy; and

• That the proposal demonstrates a ‘net community benefit’.

• Homemaker and bulky goods retailing is acknowledged within the policy framework as a use

that is extremely difficult to locate within or around existing activity centres; due to issues

associated with size, scale and vehicular access. Future development ‘out-of-centre’ or in

new centres is not precluded where it can be demonstrated that proposals satisfy the above

retail assessment criteria.

In summary, the Masters proposal would not be contrary to the established strategic framework,

including the MSS and Geelong Retail Strategy, if it can be adequately demonstrated that the

proposal meets the sequential site selection test and the assessment criteria outlined above.

Similarly, the development of an office/business park on the southern section of the site is

supported by policy which encourages development which meets the community’s need for office

and other commercial services. It should be noted that there is little direction provided in the

Greater Geelong Planning Scheme regarding the provision of larger format office space and

other uses typically found in the Business 3 Zone, other than support for office space to be

located within existing activity centres and the Geelong City Centre.



4. PEER REVIEW: NEED AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT

4.1.4.1.4.1.4.1. IIIINTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTION

This section provides an overview of the key findings of the Masters Home Improvement Centre

Corio: Need and Economic Assessment 2012 (Deep EndDeep EndDeep EndDeep End rererereportportportport) and a high level peer review of

the methodology employed. This section also touches on the extent to which the assessment

meets the Assessment Criteria for Retail Planning Application of the Greater Geelong Planning

Scheme (Clause 22.03).

4.2.4.2.4.2.4.2. DDDDEVELOPMENT EVELOPMENT EVELOPMENT EVELOPMENT PPPPROPOSALROPOSALROPOSALROPOSAL

A bulky goods development is proposed to be located in the northern part of the subject site. The

proposal involves the development of 18,471m2 of gross floor area, including a 13,701m

2 Masters

Store and 4,770m2 of adjacent bulky good floorspace in four tenancies. The proposal includes

487 on-grade parking spaces with access from Bacchus Marsh Road. This is depicted in the

development proposal (shown in Figure 4).

FIGURE 4 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL



Source: Deep End Report, p. 14.

4.3.4.3.4.3.4.3. CCCCATCHMENT ATCHMENT ATCHMENT ATCHMENT AAAAREAREAREAREA

The Deep End Report states that “the primary catchment sector is contained mostly within 3-10

km of the site and includes Corio and Lovely Banks as well as the townships of Lara”. The

secondary catchment area contains the “urban areas north of Geelong CBD” including Norlane,

Bell Post Hill, Bell Park, North Geelong, Hamlyn Heights and Geelong West “plus rural areas

including townships such as Bannockburn and Anakie”. 1

The catchment area is depicted in

Figure 5.

FIGURE 5 CATCHMENT AREAS

Source: Deep End Report, p. 31.

The defined catchment covers a wide area. In particular the secondary south and secondary west

catchment areas may not provide significant trade for the subject site. However, this has been

identified and accounted for in calculation of market share assessed in Section 2.11.

The defined catchment areas align closely with the catchment area used in the Bunnings Norlane

Relocation Economic Assessment (Essential Economics, 2011, p.24).

Whilst the catchment area appears broad, the market share estimates identify that only a

percentage of expenditure by residents in this area will be captured by the proposed Masters

store. In this respect, the market share estimate is the key assumption to be tested.

1 P. 30 Deep End Report



4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4. EEEEXISTING XISTING XISTING XISTING RRRRETAIL ETAIL ETAIL ETAIL SSSSUPPLYUPPLYUPPLYUPPLY

In total, 91,818 m2 of Bulky Goods floorspace was identified. This comprises 74,263m

2 of “Total

Home Improvement” floorspace and 17,555 m2 of “Other Bulky Goods” floorspace.

The report notes that bulky goods floorspace within the primary catchment area is clustered in

two main precincts: the Corio Homemaker Precinct and Corio Village Sub-regional Centre. The

primary catchment area contains over 30,864 m2 of Bulky Goods floorspace.

Utilising online mapping systems and the Shopping Centre Directory (Property Council of

Australia, 2009), Urban Enterprise was able to verify the overall quantum of floorspace as

identified in the Deep End Report.

4.5.4.5.4.5.4.5. PPPPOPULATIONOPULATIONOPULATIONOPULATION

Historical and projected population levels used in the Deep End report were verified using Profile

Id and Forecast Id data available online.

Whilst minor differences were found, it is believed that these were the result of differing

geographical boundaries and custom population data used by Deep End as opposed to Urban

Enterprise. For the purposes of the retail assessment, the population figures as provided by Deep

End are found to be reasonable.

4.6.4.6.4.6.4.6. EEEEXPENDITURE XPENDITURE XPENDITURE XPENDITURE CCCCATEGORIESATEGORIESATEGORIESATEGORIES

Deep End has undertaken a bulky goods retail assessment based on current and forecast

expenditure by residents (rerereretailtailtailtail expenditure) and businesses (tradetradetradetrade expenditure) in the catchment

area.

The report includes a number of items in the retail assessment of expenditure on bulky goods.

The following table provided a summary of the definitions of the market and expenditure

categories by expenditure items.

TABLE 3 MARKET, EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES AND ITEMS

Market Category Sub-Category Items Retail/Trade

Bulky Goods

Home Improvement

Market

Core Hardware &

Garden

Core Hardware &

Garden

Household tools, Household non-durable goods and flower & garden supplies

Retail and Trade

Other Home Improvement

Restricted Retail

Outdoor furniture, barbeques, floors & floor coverings, kitchen appliances, small

appliances, curtrains & blinds, storage and craft.

Retail and Trade

Camping Camping equipment Retail only

White Goods Refrigerators, dishwashers, washing

machines and dryers. Retail and

Trade

Other Bulky Goods Market

Other Bulky Goods

Other Bulky Goods

Auto accessories, equestrian supplies, bedding, furnishings, fabric, manchester,

home entertainment goods, party supplies, swimming pools and office equipment &

supplies.

Retail only

Source: Deep End report p. 24-29, table compiled by Urban Enterprise 2012.



The retailretailretailretail expenditure estimate includes the core hardware & garden market, other home

improvement market and other bulky goods market.

The tradetradetradetrade expenditure includes the core hardware & garden market, other home improvement

market but excludes the camping equipment market and other bulky goods market.

Deep End has also assumed that expenditure on Core Hardware & Garden and Other Home

Improvement goods will be undertaken in the Masters Store; expenditure on Other Bulky Goods

will be undertaken in the adjacent bulky goods stores on the subject site.

The items used in the Deep End Report match home improvement market items. Although white

goods are not typically sold in the home improvement market, it is understood that Masters will

sell these items.

It is also understood that items under the “Other Bulky Goods” category will be sold by the

adjacent tenancies on site. As such, it is appropriate to include these items for the purposes of

the retail analysis.

4.7.4.7.4.7.4.7. EEEEXPENDITURE XPENDITURE XPENDITURE XPENDITURE LLLLEVELS OF EVELS OF EVELS OF EVELS OF CCCCATCHMENT ATCHMENT ATCHMENT ATCHMENT AAAAREAREAREAREA

Deep End estimated that over $252.8 million of bulky goods expenditure was available in the

catchment area in 2010/11. $214m (83%) has been attributed to expenditure by residents (retail)

while the remaining $38.7m (17%) has been attributed to expenditure to businesses (trade).

Based on data provided in the Deep End Report, expenditure per resident ranges between

$2,500 and $3,402 per person (depending on the location of residency in the catchment area).

The retailretailretailretail expenditure is based on MarketInfo data, which uses the ABS Household Expenditure

Survey, Census of Population and Housing and other data sources to provide estimates of small

area residential spending patterns.

The tradetradetradetrade expenditure was estimated using the following methodology:

• Deep End undertook an assessment of the national retail and trade home improvement

market: the total national ‘contestable’ market for home improvement is estimated at

$41.388 billion. $24.034 billion (or 58.1%) of the market has been attributed to retail

expenditure, while $17.354 billion (or 41.9%) has been attributed to trade expenditure.2

Details of the national market are summarized and reviewed in following section.

• The national retail and trade home improvement market is then distributed down to the SLA

level by applying the proportion of the value of new homes and alterations in each SLA

using the ABS 2008/09 Building Approvals data. This is then distributed to the Census

Collection District (CCD) level by applying the proportion of alterations and additions

spending by CCDs using the MarketInfo data.

It was found that the methodology to estimate retail expenditure is reasonable for the purposes of

the retail assessment; MarketInfo data is generally accepted as the industry standard for small

area household expenditure.

The expenditure per person aligns closely with the figures used in the Bunnings Norlane

Economic Assessment (Essential Economics, 2011) for ‘hardware and homemaker retailing’.

2 P. 27, Deep End Report



Although the trade (business) methodology appears to be over-simplified (it is derived solely from

the value of materials used in domestic additions and alterations in the catchment area), the

result is that trade expenditure accounts for only 17% of the total available expenditure for the

Masters store. It could be argued that this proportion should be higher, based on our

understanding of the typical sales breakdown of major home improvement retailers. The trade

market could also be supported by the development of the Geelong Ring Road Employment

Precinct, which will generate significant demand for construction materials in the development

stages, as well as ongoing passing traffic and local employee demand.

A t the national level, the total value of the Masters ‘contestable market’ been sourced to the

Australian National Accounts data, annual reports and presentations by major competing retailers

and high level ABS retail data.

It is difficult to provide verification of these estimates without undertaking significant further

research on the national bulky goods market.

4.8.4.8.4.8.4.8. EEEEXPENDITURE XPENDITURE XPENDITURE XPENDITURE CCCCAPTUREAPTUREAPTUREAPTURE

Deep End has assumed that an additional 20% of the sales for Masters Corio would be captured

from outside the catchment area.

It is standard practice to assume that a small proportion of trade will be captured from outside the

catchment area, largely from passing traffic. This proportion is typically between 5% and 20% of

total expenditure captured from within the catchment area.

Given the location of the site on an arterial road and adjacent to the Geelong Ring Road, an

external impact level at the higher end of the usual scale (20%) is not unreasonable.

The Bunnings Norlane Economic Assessment (Essential Economics, 2011) has similarly

assumed that 20% of total turnover will be derived from outside the catchment area. As such,

Deep End’s assumption is reasonable for the purposes of the analysis.

However, the Planning Scheme’s Assessment Criteria for Retail Planning Applications stipulates

that the retail assessment should “estimate existing levels of escape spending” demonstrate the

“extent to which the proposal will draw trade from beyond the catchment”, including “estimates on

the share of this escape spending that could be reasonably by the proposal”. Deep End has not

provided substantial evidence with regards to this Planning Scheme requirement.

4.9.4.9.4.9.4.9. MMMMARKET ARKET ARKET ARKET SSSSHAREHAREHAREHARE

Deep End has assumed the following market shares for the Masters Store. No source is provided

for these assumptions.

TABLE 4 MARKET SHARE OF MASTERS STORE, BY SALES

Area Core Hardware & Garden

Other Home Improvement

Total Home Improvement Market

Share

Total Catchment AreaTotal Catchment AreaTotal Catchment AreaTotal Catchment Area 17.6%17.6%17.6%17.6% 10.0%10.0%10.0%10.0% 14.0%14.0%14.0%14.0%

Source: Deep End report p. 52.



The Masters store is estimated to account for between 11% and 18% of competing floorspace in

the catchment area once it is opened. This provides a guide to the likely overall market share of

the Masters store.

Given the strong marketing ability and increasing brand awareness of Masters, the market share

shown for the Masters store should be considered as a minimum share.

4.10.4.10.4.10.4.10. SSSSALES ALES ALES ALES FFFFORECASTS AND ORECASTS AND ORECASTS AND ORECASTS AND TTTTURNOVER RATESURNOVER RATESURNOVER RATESURNOVER RATES

The following table provides the sales forecasts and the turnover rates of the Masters Home

Improvement Centre Corio.

TABLE 5 SALES FORECASTS AND TURNOVER RATES, 2013/14

Total Catchment

Beyond Catchment

(20%) Total Sales

Market Size ($mil)

$139.0 -

Total Home Improvement Market Share

14.0% -

Sales Masters Corio

$19.4 $4.9$4.9$4.9$4.9 $24.3

Floorspace (m2)

13,543 m2

Turnover density ($ per m2)

$1,796 per

m2

Source: Deep End report p. 52.

The estimated sales for Masters Corio have been calculated by applying the assumed Market

Share to the total market size of the catchment area. Deep End has applied an additional 20% in

sales as a result of expenditure from passing trade beyond the catchment area (equivalent to

$4.9m).

Turnover density is then calculated by Deep End by applying the sales to the floorspace of the

proposed development. The turnover density of $1,796/m2 is very low for a bulky goods retailer.

A presentation made by Deep End to the Bulky Goods Retailers Association in 2009 indicates

that the average turnover density for bulky goods retailers was approximately $3,000 per m2.

The low turnover density confirms that the assumed market share of the store may have been

underestimated.

In a previous VCAT hearing, Urban Enterprise argued that the hardware retailer in question

(Bunnings) would be likely to experience an average turnover density of greater than $2,500/ m2

for the reasons below. These hold true for the Masters application.

• The typical bulky goods and hardware turnover density generally being in excess of

$2,500/m2;

• The strong brand recognition across Australia;

• The significant marketing capacity of the business and its parent organisations;



• The high exposure location;

• The wide range of products available; and

• The high proportion of the store dedicated to retail products which typically generate a

higher turnover density compared with trade supplies.

4.11.4.11.4.11.4.11. SSSSALES IMPACT ON ALES IMPACT ON ALES IMPACT ON ALES IMPACT ON CCCCOMPETING OMPETING OMPETING OMPETING BBBBULKY ULKY ULKY ULKY GGGGOOD OOD OOD OOD PPPPROVIDERS ROVIDERS ROVIDERS ROVIDERS

The report states that the average impact on existing Bulky Goods retailers in the catchment area

would be -5.7% as a result of the decline in sales from $324.4 m (without the proposed

development) to $305.8 m (with the proposed development) in 2013/14.

The highest percentage impact is anticipated for the North Geelong Homemaker Precinct

(expected to see a decline of -7.3% in Bulky Goods sales).

Deep End does not provide detailed information regarding the calculations methods and

assumptions used, merely that “the assessed levels of impact are based in large part upon

Deep’s knowledge of the bulky goods industry including observations of actual impact on the

sales achieved by clients; outlets when competitive stores open within their catchment area”.3

In effect, the sales impacts calculated are the result of estimates based on experience and

observations rather than a strict quantitative analysis.

It is considered that the average sales impact on competing bulky good retailers is likely to

exceed -6%, given that the Masters store will increase the existing catchment area competing

floorspace by approximately 17%.

The impact on the Corio Village Shopping Centre is estimated by Deep End to be -7%. This is

based on the assumption that there is 2,800m2 of competing floorspace in the Shopping Centre.

It is considered that the level of competing floorspace is likely to be closer to 4,000m2, including

parts of Kmart (total 6,000m2), The Warehouse (1,500m2) and specialties such as Better Home,

Fantastic Variety, House Home Party, The Reject Shop, Manchester and More and Pets

Paradise. The impact assessment accounts for items as listed in the expanded definition of

restricted retail (as resulted by Planning Scheme Amendment VC88)4.

The change in impact as a result of increasing the competing floorspace in the Corio Village

Shopping Centre cannot be known without recalculation the Deep End model, however it is

considered that the overall impact on the Shopping Centre may be slightly higher than the -7% as

shown in the report.

4.12.4.12.4.12.4.12. EEEECONOMIC CONOMIC CONOMIC CONOMIC BBBBENEFITS ENEFITS ENEFITS ENEFITS (E(E(E(EMPLOYMENTMPLOYMENTMPLOYMENTMPLOYMENT))))

The Deep End Report estimates that a total of 100 direct and 88 indirect full-time equivalent

(FTE) jobs will be provided during construction period. This equates to a total economic impact of

188 FTE jobs during the construction phase of the Centre.

Furthermore, 176 FTE jobs will be provided by the on-going operations of the Masters Store and

adjoining bulky good operators. A further 109 indirect local jobs will be supported, supporting a

total of 285 FTE jobs during the on-going operations of the Centre.

3 P. 53, Deep End Report.

4 The list of restricted retail items are outlined in p.26 and p. p. 42 of the Deep End Report.



According to the Bunnings Norlane Economic Assessment (Essential Economics, 2011), the

proposed Bunnings store will generate 100 FTE direct and indirect jobs during its construction construction construction construction

phasephasephasephase. This employment impact as provided by Deep End is almost double that of the analysis of

Essential Economics.

According to Essential Economics, a facility will generate 1 FTE job for every $500,000 of

construction expenditure. Further details on the constructions cost of the Masters Store Centre

would be required to assess the reasonability of the job impact.

According to Essential Economics report, 140 FTE direct and indirect jobs will be available during

the operations phaseoperations phaseoperations phaseoperations phase.

The employment assessment would benefit from disclosure of the multipliers used and the

estimated construction costs of the development in order to allow verification of the estimates.

4.13.4.13.4.13.4.13. NNNNET ET ET ET CCCCOMMUNITY OMMUNITY OMMUNITY OMMUNITY BBBBENEFITSENEFITSENEFITSENEFITS

The Deep End Report has outlined a number of community benefits that are provided as a result

of the development proposal. This includes:

• Use of currently vacant site;

• Increased shopping choice and convenience;

• Increased price competition;

• Minimising escaped expenditure; and

• Reduced need for travel and subsequent cuts in greenhouse emissions.5

The Deep End Report does not provide further detail beyond the statement above and further

analysis may be required to substantiate the net community benefits of the proposed

development.

4.14.4.14.4.14.4.14. SSSSEQUENTIAL EQUENTIAL EQUENTIAL EQUENTIAL TTTTESTINGESTINGESTINGESTING

Deep End has undertaken a sequential test to explore whether suitable land for a Masters store

exists within the catchment area.

The report has found that “no suitably sized vacant sites” exists. This examination was based on

the “zoning and aerial views and supplemented by site visits and other enquiries”. No further

details are provided.

However, the report has noted that two potentially suitable sites exists but are currently occupied

or subject to adverse planning considerations. These are:

• The current Bunnings Store site in Corio (with a planned relocation) and adjoining vacant

land on School Road (total site area of 2.947 ha.). Deep End has been “advised that the site

will accommodate a truck sales and servicing dealership following the relocation”; no further

details and evidence is provided; and

• A second site located at the Old Geelong Golf Club, North Geelong (total site area of 15.1

ha.). The “abandonment of Amendment C98” to the Planning Scheme has meant that the

5 P. 56 Deep End Report.



site is no longer supported as a suitable location for a home improvement store (refer to

Section 3.7: Woolworths ‘Oxygen’ Advisory Commitee for details of the policy issues).

It is believed that no other sites of appropriate size and location exist in the local area, given the

dominance of established residential land uses and the lack of available large sites within

designated homemaker centres. The Oxygen Advisory Committee report notes the difficulty in

obtaining appropriate sites for large format stores such as Masters.

4.15.4.15.4.15.4.15. GGGGEELONG EELONG EELONG EELONG RRRRING ING ING ING RRRROAD OAD OAD OAD EEEEMPLOYMENT MPLOYMENT MPLOYMENT MPLOYMENT PPPPRECINCTRECINCTRECINCTRECINCT

The Deep End report is silent on the impact of the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct

(GREP). This Precinct, located on the opposite side of the Geelong Ring Road to the subject site,

is Geelong’s largest area for industrial development and covers over 500ha of land. The precinct

includes land within the Industrial 1 and Industrial 2 Zones, and will generate significant

employment and traffic levels immediately adjacent to the subject site.

It should be acknowledged that the construction of facilities and infrastructure within the GREP

over the short term, and the occupation and visitation of these businesses over the medium and

long term, will generate significant demand for hardware, trade supplies and bulky goods in the

local area.

In addition, there is likely to be significant demand generated for supporting businesses which will

require office and showroom type facilities in the vicinity of the GREP. Given the lack of land in

the business zones, and the lack of available floorspace or expansion opportunity within the

Corio Village Shopping Centre, it is considered that the subject site provides an ideal location for

office and ancillary business development to support the development of the GREP.

4.16.4.16.4.16.4.16. KKKKEY EY EY EY FFFFINDINGSINDINGSINDINGSINDINGS

The Deep End report provides a detailed and comprehensive economic assessment of the

Masters and ancillary bulky goods proposal.

The major assumptions underpinning the report, including catchment area, population levels,

expenditure categories and existing retail supply have been checked and verified.

Some aspects of the detailed retail assessment methodology include limitations and sources that

could not be verified. However on balance it is considered that the retail assessment

demonstrates that there is a substantial market for the bulky goods retail floorspace proposed.

This is based on a high-level review of the methodology only – more detailed analysis would need

to be undertaken if a full review or alternative assessment is required.

The calculations of economic impact on existing retailers are based on Deep End’s own

estimates. As such, it is difficult to assess these assumptions. It is considered that the impact on

existing retailers may be greater (but not significantly greater) than the figures shown in the

report. However, this cannot be quantified without a full review.

The discussion of net community benefit and sequential testing briefly address the key

requirements of the planning scheme, but would benefit from greater detail and evidence.

On balance, the economic assessment prepared by Deep End appears to meets the

requirements of the Planning Scheme and provides sufficient evidence that the proposal is viable

and will not generate an adverse impact on the existing retail hierarchy (subject to the

qualifications as discussed above).



In addition, the GREP will generate significant demand for bulky goods and hardware retail

products within the catchment area. This has not been considered in the Deep End report (or

other recent retail assessments in the area). As such, the demand estimates included in the

report could be considered as conservative, particularly for trade (business) related expenditure

and expenditure growth projections as the GREP develops.



5. ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS

5.1.5.1.5.1.5.1. FFFFAGG AGG AGG AGG BBBBROS ROS ROS ROS PPPPTY TY TY TY LLLLTDTDTDTD SSSSUBMISSION TO THE UBMISSION TO THE UBMISSION TO THE UBMISSION TO THE DDDDRAFT RAFT RAFT RAFT CCCCORIO ORIO ORIO ORIO NNNNORLANE ORLANE ORLANE ORLANE SSSSTRUCTURE TRUCTURE TRUCTURE TRUCTURE PPPPLANLANLANLAN

5.1.1. SUMMARY

Fagg Bros Pty Ltd (“Fagg”), who own the Mitre 10 hardware, garden supplies and timber chain,

provided a detailed submission to the Draft Corio Norlane Structure Plan on 17 February 2012.

The Fagg submission responded issues relating to bulky goods retailing in Corio and the

proposed rezoning of the subject site to Business 3 Zone. Fagg currently operate a Mitre 10

store at Bell Park, approximately 4km to the south of the subject site.

5.1.2. GENERAL ISSUES

The Fagg submission to the Structure Plan dealt with a wide range of bulky goods retailing issues

relating to Corio. A broad review of the general comments raised following key issues:

1. There is a lack of reference to the Geelong Retail Strategy in the Structure Plan.

2. There is no comment or analysis on the rezoning to B4Z of the future Bunnings Norlane

Store (located at 1-3 and 5-9 Princes Highway to the southern extent of the Structure

Plan area); which previously had received a planning permit on Industrial 2 Zoned land.

3. The rezoning of the Geelong Gate Homemaker Precinct to Business Zone 4 is not

discussed in the Plan.

In respect of the above comments, whilst they do not relate to the subject site in question, we

would make the following comments:

1. The Geelong Retail Strategy was prepared in 2006 and has subsequently been

embedded local retail policy in Greater Geelong. The Municipal Strategic Statement

articulates the findings of the GRS and establishes the Retail Centres Hierarchy in local

policy.

2. The proposed rezoning of the Bunnings Store in Norlane is currently subject to a

proposed panel amendment (Amendment C253) which will fully scrutinise site specific

and retail issues that are relevant to the site.

3. The Geelong Gateway Precinct has been long established as a potential Homemaker

Precinct within the policy framework (including the MSS and GRS) and has

subsequently been developed for a range of Homemaker uses.

5.1.3. KEY ISSUES RELATING TO THE SUBJECT SITE

Fagg fundamentally consider that the rezoning of the Masters site and adjacent site to the south,

from Residential 1 Zone to BZ3, is not justifiable on planning grounds. The reasons for this

argument and our responses to the issues are outlined in more detail below.



MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL USES

The submission raises objections to the potential use of the site for ‘manufacturing or industrial’

land uses. Fagg considers that “…rezoning of the site to allow manufacturing and industrial

purposes would create an over-supply of land for industrial use…” [P.4]. This conclusion is drawn,

based on the following assumptions:

• The recently adopted Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct (“GREP”) is the main focus

for new large and small scale industrial development. It will also adequately fulfil all the

requirements of a business park and should have a higher strategic planning priority.

• There is significant industrial land, both within the structure plan area, to the east (around

the Port of Geelong) and at Armstrong Creek around Keystone Business Park which provide

adequate land for future industrial and manufacturing growth.

URBAN ENTERPRISE ASSESSMENT

The Fagg submission relies heavily on the assumption that the GREP will provide sufficient

industrial and employment floorspace. However, there are two key issues with this argument.

Firstly, land within the site, which is proposed for office, business park and restricted retail uses,

is not proposed for ‘manufacturing or industrial uses’, nor is this the aim of the rezoning proposal.

The B3Z allocation will seek to facilitate office and business development, alongside a restricted

retail development; and therefore, the two precincts will fundamentally offer a different product.

Secondly, land at the GREP is zoned as Industrial 1 Zone and Industrial 2 Zone. These zones

are tailored to accommodate more specific and often heavier manufacturing and industrial uses,

as opposed to business park or office uses. A high amenity business park would not be

appropriate in the GREP or other industrial areas, such as the Port of Geelong. The submission

quotes the Amendment C166 Panel Report and states that the GREP “…was not in view and

therefore not mentioned in the Panel Report…” [P.5]. However, the Report had taken the area

into consideration and noted its incompatibility with B3Z uses, stating that [P.24]:

“…In relation to the large area north of the Geelong Bypass, its industrial zoning does not allow

some of the uses that will be permitted in the Business 3 Zone. Also, the zoning of the northern

industrial area and the size of its lots is more conducive to larger industries, including those that

need to be well separated from residential and other sensitive uses.

On the other hand the purpose of the Business 3 Zone is to encourage a mix of business,

restricted retailing and those industrial uses that will not have adverse amenity impacts either on

other uses on the site and in the surrounding the park…”

In summary, in our view, the Fagg submission does not reasonably differentiate between the

objectives of Business 3 Zone and Industrial 1 or 2 Zone. The proposed business uses on the

subject site would not be appropriate in a primary industry or manufacturing zone, and require a

highly visible gateway location in order to attract high quality occupiers. B3Z also provides a land

use that is sensitive to surrounding residential uses and provides a buffer between these uses

and the MC Herd Abattoir.

OFFICE USES

The Fagg submission considers that office development on the site is contrary to policy that

seeks to locate office development in the Central Activities Area. Fagg assert that a similar office

development was rejected as part of Amendment C98 at ‘Quay Business Park’ on Princes



Highway, and that a similar conclusion should be reached on the subject site. Furthermore, the

Fagg submission considers that office or business facilities could be located within the GREP.


The Fagg submission relies on the Panel Report to Amendment C98 to support its objection to

office development on the site, stating that “…a similar conclusion would likely be reached in

relation to any office development on the subject site…” [P.6].

Following a review of the Report (see summary in Appendix A), we consider that the two sites are

fundamentally not comparable, for the following reasons:

• The Panel considered the C98 development to conflict with strategic planning objectives

primarily due to its location and impact on the Port of Geelong. The Panel concluded

that “…the policies in both the SPPF and LPPF give the port area primacy in this

Amendment proposal… …the Panel is of the opinion that future options for industrial or

port uses should be retained for the further development of this site…” [P.5]. As such is it

inaccurate to conclude that the site has similar issues to the subject site and, based on

this, assume that a similar conclusion would be reached.

• The site subject to amendment C98 was significantly larger than the subject site (circa

48,000m2) and was proposed for a mix of retail and office uses. The scale of the site

and its location resulting in the site triggering a range of additional issues in terms of

scale and impact.

• The Panel felt that there was a lack of supporting information to robustly justify the

proposal.

It is also considered that the office uses within this proposal would not be directly compatible with

the industrial nature of the GREP, as alluded to by Fagg, for the reasons outlined previously.

In addition, there is limited space for new office development in Corio, with the B1 zoned central

activity centre close to capacity. It is currently difficult to meet demand for any new small to

medium sized office development within the existing zoning structure and therefore new B3Z land

will help to alleviate this problem.

RESTRICTED RETAIL USES

The Fagg submission raises significant objections in relation to the potential use of the site for

restricted retail. In summary, the submission comments that:

1. If the subject site is rezoned as B3Z, it would automatically allow the use of the site for a

broad range of restricted retail premises.

2. Restricted retail is contrary to established retail hierarchy policy in the MSS (quoting

clause 21.07-3) and the proposal would impact upon the Corio Sub-Regional centre.

3. Amendment C253 states that policy supports the concentration of major retail

development within activity / town centres.

4. Corio and Norlane are well catered for in regard to the quantum of retail floorspace

provided in the study area, according to Essential Economics’ Report (2009), as quoted

in the Corio Norlane Background Report.



5. The ‘Oxygen’ Advisory Committee found that the North Geelong Proposal was not

consistent with the City of Geelong’s strategic direction. The submission asserts that a

similar conclusion would be drawn on the subject site.


Urban Enterprise has reviewed the above comments and addressed each, in turn:

1. The Fagg submission correctly notes that restricted retail premises would be a

permissible use under BZ3. It also states that “…a wide variety of retail uses would now

be possible, with a range of store size from very small to very large if the subject site

was zoned Business 3…” [P.8]. However, under B3Z, any restricted retail premises

would require a permit which provides Council with a control mechanism to guide the

type, size and amount of restricted retail use across the site.

2. Whilst the MSS has a preference for new retail development within activity centres, as

outlined in the strategic analysis in Section 3, if a retail need and community benefit can

be established for such a use and it can be demonstrated that there are no adverse

impacts on the operation of the retail activity centres hierarchy, then such uses could be

strategically justifiable.

3. As explained above, Amendment C253 also sets out the framework by which out-of-

centre retail can be considered, stating that: “…if establishing an edge-of-centre

development, a proposal must demonstrate that there will be net community benefit in

doing so…” Whilst it is acknowledged that the SPPF and LPPF encourage development

within activity centres, there can be strategic justification for out of centre development

where it satisfies need, does not detrimentally impact other centres and provides a net

community benefit. Additionally, the Masters proposal seeks to formally recognise the

subject site as a new Homemaker Precinct within the Retail Activity Centres Hierarchy.

4. Whilst The Draft Corio Norlane Structure Plan Background Report seeks to consolidate

the role of Corio Sub-Regional Centre, it also identifies capacity and scope for non food

retail development, stating that “…escape spending in non-food retail is relatively high,

especially in comparison goods…and…growth in the study area’s level of retail spending

will generate the potential for retail development in the non-food sectors..” [P.87]. The

background report does, however, only identify a demand for approximately 6,000m2 of

new non-food retail floorspace in the study area to 2019. As explained throughout this

report, proposals for significant new floorspace such as the Masters store, must

demonstrate how demand for such a product reaches a wider catchment and creates a

demand for floorspace beyond this level.

5. The Oxygen Committee found insufficient strategic justification accompanied the

proposal for a Homemaker Centre at Geelong. It found that the stand alone nature of

the development was contrary to strategic objectives. However, the Committee

accepted that the Masters stores were difficult to locate in existing activity centres and

that the sequential test should be applied to the development of such stores. Whilst the

North Geelong site did not sit in a strategically justifiable location, the Committee found

that “…there was no substantive evidence that the viability of recognised activity centres

would be severely compromised through the introduction of a home improvement

store…” and that the Committee was “…satisfied that the home improvement store

element of the proposal will result in a net benefit to the broader community…” [P.17].



5.2.5.2.5.2.5.2. UUUURBIS RBIS RBIS RBIS SSSSUBMISSION TO THE UBMISSION TO THE UBMISSION TO THE UBMISSION TO THE DDDDRAFT RAFT RAFT RAFT CCCCORIO ORIO ORIO ORIO NNNNORLANE ORLANE ORLANE ORLANE SSSSTRUCTURE TRUCTURE TRUCTURE TRUCTURE PPPPLANLANLANLAN

Urbis, on behalf of Masters, prepared a submission to the Draft Corio Norlane Structure Plan on

16 February 2012. The submission sought to:

• Support the Structure Plan as a “…generally well conceived framework to guide the

development of Corio and Norlane…”

• Support the subject site as a developing restricted retail and business precinct.

• Support the development of a Masters store on the subject site to provide momentum for the

development of the GREP.

• Support Business 3 Zone as an adequate zoning tool for the site, but seek a rezoning to

Business 4 Zone, in order to better “…reflect the Council’s Strategic objective to encourage

the use of land for restricted retail purposes…”

Our review of the proposed Business 3 zoning strategy is contained in Section 3. In summary,

we consider that:

• Business 3 Zone would an appropriate zoning mechanism to package together the Masters

proposal alongside office and business uses on the southern parcel of the land; and

• If Council wished, as Urbis suggest, Business 4 Zone could better reflect Council’s strategic

objectives to bring forward the specific Masters subject site for restricted retail development.

Proposed Business 3 Rezoning, Bacchus Marsh Road, Corio

Documents

Transcript of Proposed Business 3 Rezoning, Bacchus Marsh Road, Corio