The Determination Process

The Carlton Residents Association Inc. EastEnders Inc. The East Melbourne Group Inc.

Hardware Precinct Resident & Tenants Group Kensington Association Melbourne-South Yarra Group

North & West Melbourne Association Inc. The Parkville Association Inc. Residents 3000 Inc.

Southbank Residents Group

Improving the Determination of Planning Application Processes in the Melbourne Municipality

The Coalition of Residents Associations in the City of Melbourne has become increasingly concerned about developments in the municipality that conflict with local community goals as represented in the Melbourne Planning Scheme. Recent examples include 200 residential units in 36-96 Macaulay Road, North Melbourne, a 26 storey office and residential building at 420 Spencer Street, three 22 storey towers in East Melbourne called Eastside Precinct 35 and a 620 unit 11 storey Eastern Precinct development in Carlton. The Herald and Weekly Times building development in the CBD also caused great angst.

In all of these cases, local residents feel they have not been listened to or their interests respected. In our view there has been a disregard for neighbourhood character and the amenity of residents in the area. As our Members of Parliament we would like you to assist us toward achieving some of the Government’s priorities for communities as set out in the “State Planning Agenda – a sensible balance”. In particular the document emphasizes the forming of partnerships with local government to give “Victorians back their voice and influence by reinstating local government as a lead decision maker in planning. This will ensure that planning is reflective of community values in relation to neighbourhood character, local heritage and protection of the environment as well as desire for growth and need for infrastructure and services”. In our view there is some way to go before this balance is achieved in the determination of planning application processes for development projects in the City of Melbourne.

This is in part due to the municipality having both capital city and local community roles. We see the liveability of the municipality as a major positive aspect of the capital city role, with people and their social environment being critical for the community wellbeing of residents, workers and visitors alike. We also appreciate that there are capital city roles for our municipality that are not present in other municipalities. As this relationship is translated into processing planning applications there are many signs that the relationship between state and local roles is strained and in need of review. Signs of this imbalance include the number of cases heard at VCAT and community anger about the lack of consideration for local policies in cases for which the Department of Infrastructure is the responsible authority. Two aspects of the current situation appear to exacerbate the situation and account for the main conflicts between state and local government planning authorities. These are the lack of an agreed definition of “state significance” together with the inclusion of developments with gross floor areas exceeding 25,000 square metres in the list of projects for which the Minister of Planning is responsible.

We would appreciate if you could meet with us to discuss how to achieve a review of the sharing of planning responsibilities between state and local government for planning applications within the municipality in order to achieve a better balance between state and local interests.