An Open Letter To The Planning Minister
Australian Property Developers Association Inc
Championing the cause of the local development community since 2010.
Dear Minister Kilkenny,
Thank you for making the time to speak at the recent APDA lunch. The Association appreciates you taking the time out of your busy schedule, and it was unfortunate that your schedule did not allow you to stay longer to hear the Panel discussion that followed.
As promised, please find below a summary of the key matters raised and discussed in the Panel session.
1. There was overwhelming support for your policy announcement on a renewed emphasis of meeting the 70/30 target in Plan Melbourne.
2. As noted, with that split now at 56/44 it is a challenging proposition to get to that Plan Melbourne target.
3. However, there was caution expressed that, particularly as it is highly unlikely that this policy aspiration can be achieved in the short to medium term, growth area planning with a continued rollout of PSPs must continue to occur.
4. The reality is that the housing that will be required particularly in the light of the Federal Government’s announcement of an additional migration intake over the next four years requires both the growth areas to continue to provide the level of housing that they have and the challenge is for our established suburbs and particularly the middle ring suburbs to play a part in the provision of additional housing that, of recent time in particular, they have not.
5. The focus of the Panel discussion then turned to the measures that should be considered to achieve the policy of 70/30. In no particular order, the following suggestions were made;
6. At the time that the new residential zone provisions were introduced in 2017, our recollection is that the then Minister said that they should be reviewed every five years. That has not occurred and will not occur if left to individual Councils to do so. The initiative must be with the State government to undertake that review across all Municipalities. A review should be done potentially by the VPA with targeted consultation and potential consideration by a standing advisory committee.
7. Whilst Municipalities continue to lock up as much as 80% of their residentially-zoned land in a Neighbourhood Residential Zone underpinned by policies of minimal change, there is little to no prospect of the 70/30 policy being achieved.
8. The application of garden area requirements within the General Residential and Neighbourhood Residential Zones needs to be revisited. Its mandatory nature is a blunt tool and provides a significant constraint on land that otherwise can and should sensibly and appropriately be developed for additional housing.
9. The provisions of ResCode need to be revisited. Some of them are constraining factors.
Provisions that relate to overshadowing, overlooking, energy efficiency, and open space provision have been interpreted by decision-makers in a way that places unreasonable and unnecessary restraint on development.
10. The opportunity with the review of ResCode should be taken to look at introducing a code assessment model used in other states. This could provide more certainty to all stakeholders.
The difficulty with ResCode particularly in the objective of Neighbourhood Character is that it creates uncertainty, and that uncertainty leads to unnecessary and quite often expensive conflict between parties.
11. Specifically, consideration needs to be given to a code assessment for one additional dwelling so that if a proposal meets the requirements of a code, then potentially there would be no need for a planning permit and the proposal could proceed straight to a building permit process. If any one of the code requirements was not met, then an application to vary the code requirement could be made in the usual way but the inquiry by the decision maker is limited to whether that particular code requirement or requirements should or should not be varied.
12. Clearly, Councils are stretched in their resources and the housing required over the coming years as Victoria continues to grow will only exacerbate what is already a difficult situation. Accordingly, there is a case for an alternate pathway of assessment of planning permit applications with potentially different models depending upon the value, complexity or intensity of the proposal.
Recommended by LinkedIn
For example, with a typical townhouse development in the middle suburbs, there should be an opportunity for that application to be processed by a planner independent of the Council planner selected perhaps from a statewide register of accredited planners who would be responsible for processing the application to the point where he/she would make a recommendation to the ultimate decision maker on whether a permit should or should not be granted and if so on what conditions?
This model would not remove the present decision-maker from making that decision. It simply provides an option of an independent resource processing an application that would otherwise be processed by the Council planner.
13. We are aware that the government is considering varied approval pathways depending upon the location of a development proposal, its value or its intensity where potentially that approval process is outside of the usual Council process. Perhaps this is a clear indication that Councils are generally under-resourced, under-skilled and under-manned to deal with development and particularly housing that is occurring, and which is likely to occur at an even greater intensity moving forward.
14. The Planning and Environment Act is now almost 40 years old. It is in urgent need of review. There was a review a few years ago but nothing came of it. It’s time to dust that off and for the review process to be refreshed and finalised.
15. Also, what needs to be dusted off are the 27 recommendations made by the RedTape Commissioner, Anna Cronin whose recommendations were shelved when the government came into dispute with the development industry over the quantum and application of the proposed affordable and social levy. It is regrettable that this happened. In many ways, the planning system is a fundamental reason as to why we have a housing shortage and a void in the provision of affordable and social housing.
16. There must be an immediate reform to the Planning Scheme Amendment process. There are many sites within established suburbs that are underutilized and need to be repurposed for higher and better use.
However, to do so requires a Planning Scheme Amendment and if a Council says “no” or is dilatory, not interested or seeks to impose unreasonable requirements as a precondition of support for a rezoning there is no right of appeal.
We appreciate that the Minister can in those circumstances intervene, but the criteria that have been established to justify intervention and the past practices of your predecessors make this option unavailable in most circumstances.
In 2018, John Cicero was challenged by the then Minister to put before him a reform proposal that did not involve legislative change. He has kindly provided a copy of the memorandum that he provided to the then Minister as well as Steve Dunn and Stuart Moseley, but nothing has come of it.
There was a cheer from the room when this issue was tabled for discussion by the Panel. Clearly, it is a matter that needs to be addressed immediately as it will go a long way to assisting the government in achieving its policy aspiration of 70/30.
Once again, on behalf of the Association, we thank you for your attendance at the lunch. We would be happy to meet with you to further discuss these matters. The mood of the room was very strong in the need for immediate and meaningful reforms to our planning system.
The current system must bear a substantial responsibility for the problems that Victoria faces in delivering particularly the housing that is presently needed and will be required into the future.
Without substantial planning reform, it will be “more of the same” which will only compound our present problems. Thank you again.
Kind Regards,
(in collaboration with Best Hooper Lawyers & Guest Panelists)