Download - Casey C50 Panel Report
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
1/102
PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987
PanelReport
CaseyPlanningScheme
AmendmentC50
New Municipal Strategic Statement and replacement of Local Planning
Policies.
3April2014
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
2/102
PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987PanelReportpursuanttoSection25oftheActAmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningScheme
SuePorter,Chair PeterNewman,Member
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
3/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page1of100
Contents
Page
1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 41.1 TheAmendment......................................................................................................4
1.2 Exhibition.................................................................................................................4
1.3 ThePanel.................................................................................................................4
1.4 Hearingsandinspections........................................................................................4
1.5 Requestforfurtherinformation.............................................................................4
1.6 Submissions.............................................................................................................5
2 BackgroundtotheAmendment.................................................................................. 6
2.1 Panelcomments......................................................................................................6
3
RevisedMSS
Structure
................................................................................................
8
4 StrategicPlanningContext........................................................................................ 10
4.1 Policyframework...................................................................................................10
4.2 PlanningSchemeProvisions..................................................................................10
4.3 MinisterialDirectionsandPracticeNotes.............................................................10
5 Agencysubmissions.................................................................................................. 11
5.1 DepartmentofPrimaryIndustries........................................................................11
5.2 SouthEastWaterLimited......................................................................................14
5.3 VicRoads................................................................................................................14
5.4
Departmentof
Sustainability
and
Environment
...................................................
15
5.5 MelbourneWater..................................................................................................17
5.6 CardiniaShireCouncil............................................................................................23
6 CranbourneEastNeighbourhoodActivityCentre......................................................26
7 HuntClubNeighbourhoodActivityCentre................................................................28
8 ErnstWankeRoadActivityCentre............................................................................ 32
9 MintaFarm............................................................................................................... 33
10 860BallartoRoad,BotanicRidge/JunctionVillage....................................................37
11
3945
Cyril
Beechey
Lane
(formerly
Stevensons
Road),
Cranbourne
..........................
40
12 DevelopmentopportunitiesintheGreenWedge......................................................44
13 110GricesRoad,Berwick.......................................................................................... 48
14 Designationoffloodaffectedland............................................................................ 49
15 RoyalBotanicGardensCranbournemappinganomalies...........................................51
16 PEETsubmission....................................................................................................... 52
17 1010ThompsonsRoad,CranbourneWest................................................................66
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
4/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page2of100
18 ChangesbetweentheexhibitedandrevisedAmendmentdocumentation...............68
18.1 PolicyneutraltranslationoftheRevisedAmendmentdocumentation...............74
19 IssuesidentifiedbythePanel................................................................................... 75
19.1Consistency
between
the
Strategic
Framework
Plan
and
the
Local
Area
Maps......................................................................................................................75
20 ConclusionsandRecommendations.......................................................................... 76
AppendixA PanellettertoCouncil,2January2014
AppendixB CouncillettertoPanel,7February2014
AppendixC Listofsubmitters
AppendixD Listofdocumentssubmittedatthehearing
ListofTables
Page
Table1 PartiestothePanelHearing....................................................................................5
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
5/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page3of100
ListofAbbreviations
C21
CHMP
DPCD
DPI
CaseyC21Strategy
CulturalHeritage
Management
Plan
DepartmentofPlanningandCommunityDevelopment
DepartmentofPrimaryIndustries
DSE DepartmentofSustainabilityandEnvironment
DTPLI DepartmentofTransport,PlanningandLocalInfrastructure
EPA
ESO
EnvironmentProtectionAuthority
EnvironmentalSignificanceOverlay
EVC
EcologicalVegetation
Class
GAA GrowthAreasAuthority
GWMP
LAM
GreenWedgeManagementPlan
LocalAreaMap
LPPF
LSIO
LocalPlanningPolicyFramework
LandSubjecttoInundationOverlay
MAC MajorActivityCentre
MPA MetropolitanPlanningAuthority
MSS
MW
MunicipalStrategicStatement
MelbourneWater
NAC
PCRZ
PPRZ
PSP
PUZ
RBGC
SEWL
NeighbourhoodActivityCentre
PublicConservationandResourceZone
PublicParkandRecreationZone
PrecinctStructurePlan
PublicUseZone
RoyalBotanicGardensCranbourne
SouthEastWaterLimited
SPPF
UFZ
StatePlanningPolicyFramework
UrbanFloodwayZone
UGB UrbanGrowthBoundary
VPP VictoriaPlanningProvisions
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
6/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page4of100
1 Introduction1.1 TheAmendmentAmendment
C50
to
the
Casey
Planning
Scheme
proposes
to:
IntroduceanewMunicipalStrategicStatement(MSS)whichlinkswiththestrategiclanduse objectives and actions articulated in Casey C21 A vision for our future and
introduces17LocalAreaMaps(LAMs);
IntroduceanewClause22which rationalises thenumberofpolicies,updatesexistingpolicyandmakesminortextandformattingchanges;and
Makes consequential changes to three overlay schedules, being the SignificantLandscapeOverlaySchedule1(CaseyFoothills),DevelopmentPlanOverlaySchedule
16(HeathertonRoadMixedUsePrecinct)andDevelopmentPlanOverlaySchedule17
(CommercialDevelopment55KanganDrive,Berwick).
1.2 ExhibitionAmendmentC50wasexhibitedduringFebruaryMarch2011.
A totalof24 submissionswere received in response to theexhibition,with twoof these
beinglatesubmissions.
Thedecision to refersubmissions toaPanelwasmadebyCouncilon18September2012
(andatasubsequentmeetinginrespectofthetwolatesubmissions).
1.3 ThePanelThe
Panel
comprising
Sue
Porter
(Chair)
and
Peter
Newman
(Member)
was
appointed
under
delegation fromtheMinister forPlanningonthe11September2013pursuanttoSections
153and155ofthePlanningandEnvironmentAct1987.
1.4 HearingsandinspectionsADirectionsHearingwasheldon9October2013. Following theDirectionsHearing, the
Panelundertookaninspectionofthesitesreferredtoinsubmissionsandtheirsurrounds.
ThePanelHearingwasheldatCouncilsNarreWarrenCommunityLearningCentreon18
and19November2013andattheofficesofPlanningPanelsVictoriaon2December2013.
1.5
Request
for
further
information
Subsequent to the Hearing, the Panel identified a number of differences between the
exhibitedAmendmentdocumentation and the revisedAmendment documentationwhich
hadnotbeenbroughttothePanelsattention.
Byletterdated2January2014,thePanelwrotetoCouncilseekingacomprehensivelistofall
suchchanges,alongwithanexplanationofwhyeachchangehadbeenmade. Acopyofthis
letterisincludedatAppendixA.
TheCouncilrespondedtothePanelsrequestbywayofletterdated7February2014,acopy
ofwhichisincludedatAppendixB.
Thesechanges
will
be
discussed
later
in
this
report.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
7/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page5of100
1.6 SubmissionsThePanelhasconsideredallwrittenandoralsubmissionsandthematerialpresentedtoitin
connectionwiththismatter. AlistofallsubmittersisincludedatAppendixC.
ThePanel
heard
the
parties
listed
in
Table
1,
while
alist
of
all
the
documents
submitted
at
theHearingisincludedatAppendixD.
Table1 PartiestothePanelHearing
Submitter Representedby
CityofCasey Mr Michael Pollard, Planning Scheme
Amendment Coordinator supported by
MrTomAnderson
HuntClubCommercialPtyLtd Mr Mark Bartley, Barrister, HWL
Ebsworth
Lawyers
MaclawNo10PtyLtd Mr Tom Callander, Barrister, Rigby
CookeLawyers
DuranInvestmentsPtyLtdaka860BallartoRoadPtyLtd Mr Tom Callander, Barrister, Rigby
CookeLawyers
Noel&KathBroatch MrTimBroatch
MarshallBaillieu(theMintaFarmlandowners) MsJulietForsyth,Barrister,whocalled
JustinGanly,ManagingDirector,Deep
EndServicesPtyLtd,topresentexpert
economic
evidence
ARequesttoHeardwasreceivedfromMrGarryPage,however,attheHearinghedeclined
theopportunitytobeheard.
ThePanelnotesnosubmissionshavebeenmadeinrelationtotheLocalPolicies(otherthan
RetailPolicyanddeletionof theExtractive IndustryPolicy)or theamendedoverlays. On
thatbasis,thePanelhasmadenocommentontheseaspectsoftheAmendment.
In reaching its conclusionsand recommendations, thePanelhas read and considered the
submissionsandothermaterialreferredto it. This includeswrittensubmissions,evidence
andverbalpresentations.
Thefollowing
chapters
of
this
report
discuss
the
issues
raised
in
submissions
relating
to
the
Amendment,withthePanelsconsolidatedrecommendationsprovidedinChapter20.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
8/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page6of100
2 BackgroundtotheAmendmentTheCaseyC21Strategy(C21),whichAmendmentC50seekstogiveeffectto,ismorethana
land
use
or
development
strategy,
it
seeks
to
provide
community
leadership
to
achieve
a
future for Casey and its residents that is more ecologically sustainable, liveable and
economicallyprosperous;and itseeks tooutlineavision thatwillshape the futureof the
municipality for the next 5, 25, 50 to 100 years ahead. C21 is intended to be an inter
generational strategy and seeks to provide a holistic framework to guide the future
developmentofCasey. Thespatialcomponentofhowthisistobeachievedisonlyonepart
ofthisstrategy.
Preparation of C21 commenced in 1998 and it was finally adopted by Council on 3
September2002. DevelopmentoftheStrategyinvolvedextensivecommunityengagement.
AlthoughCouncilresolvedtoprepareandexhibitAmendmentC50in2004,theAmendment
wasnot
exhibited
until
2011.
Council
emphasised
the
delay
in
getting
the
Amendment
to
thatpointwasnotdue toa lackofCouncilor community support,but rathera rangeof
otherunavoidableexternalfactors,including:
TherequirementforCounciltoobtaintheAuthorisationoftheMinistertopreparetheamendment (not given until 14 October 2009), and the need to comply with the
Ministersconditionsforauthorisation.
ThedevelopmentoftheCaseyCardiniaGrowthAreaFrameworkPlanandmorerecentlytheSouthEastGrowthCorridorPlan.
The release of bothMelbourne 2030 and the subsequent release ofMelbourne@ 5million(December2008)whichupdatedtheMelbourne2030strategy.
The tasking of the Growth Area Authority (GAA), now the Metropolitan PlanningAuthority (MPA) tocoordinate theplanning, infrastructureandserviceprovision in the
CaseyCardiniagrowthareasthroughthePrecinctStructurePlanning(PSP)process.
TheneedtorestructuretheexistingMSStomakeitconsistentwiththerevisedthematicformatof theSPPF introducedbyAmendmentVC71approvedon20September2010;
and
The need to further revise the proposed MSS to ensure consistency with otheramendments(StateandLocal)approvedintheinterveningyears.
Giventhesedelays,inordertokeepC21current,Counciladoptedashortenedandrefreshed
version
of
the
Strategy
titled
Casey
C21
Building
a
Great
City
in
2011.
This
Strategy
was
notthesubjectofacommunityconsultationprocess.
Asan intergenerationalstrategy, it isnot intendedC21willbereviewedevery35years;
rather it isunderstood the strategywhichwill be comprehensively reviewed every1015
years,recognisingoccasionaltweakingmayberequired.
2.1 PanelcommentsThePanel recogniseCasey is a challengingplanningenvironment given themunicipalitys
rapidgrowth rate;andaccepts that for this reasonCouncilhaschosen todevelopamore
aspirational strategy to guide the future development of themunicipality, rather than a
morespecific
land
use
strategy.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
9/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page7of100
Concern has been raised that this Amendment is based on out of date strategic work,
however these concernshave largelybeen raised in relation to the specific sites and the
RetailPolicy rather thanC21or theoverallapproach itself. In fact,no submissionswere
received which challenged the overall direction of the Amendment, the adoption of an
intergenerationalapproach
or
the
introduction
of
Local
Area
Plans
through
this
Amendment.
WhilstCouncilsubmitted ithasupdatedC21,thePanelnotesthisupdatehasnotbeenthe
subjectoffurthercommunityconsultationtotestwhetherthedirectionsoftherevisedC21
arestillvalidand supportedby thecommunity. For this reason thePaneldoesnotplace
muchweightonthisrevisedversioninconsideringsubmissionstothisAmendment. Having
said that, the Panel recognises there does not appear to be any fundamental change in
directionbetweenthetwoversions.
Whilst C21 is intended to be aspirational, the Amendment seeks to introduce specific
directionabout
future
land
use
and
development
through
the
inclusion
of
aStrategic
FrameworkPlan(Clause21.024)and17LocalAreaPoliciesandMaps(Clause21.04)which
arebasedontheoriginalC21Plan. ThePanelnotestheStrategicFrameworkPlanandLAMs
havebeenamendedtoreflectstrategicworkundertakensincethecompletionofCaseyC21,
andarethereforequitedifferenttotheC21Plan. ThePanelconsiders it isappropriateto
amendtheStrategicFrameworkPlantoreflectthefinalisedstrategicwork.
GiventheaspirationalnatureofC21andthetimeithastakentogettothispoint,thePanel
considers this Amendment is the starting point for a wide range of planning future
initiatives. ItisthereforeimportanttheMSSandlocalpoliciesaresoundenoughtoprovide
sufficientfuturedirection,whilstbeingflexibleenoughtorespondtoissuesastheyarisein
responseto
more
recent
data.
The Panel considers the limited number of submissions is indicative of widespread
acceptance for the general intent of the Amendment, however notes some submissions
have been very detailed in relation in certain aspects of the Amendmentwhichwarrant
furtherconsideration.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
10/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page8of100
3 RevisedMSSStructurePriortoconsideringsubmissionstotheAmendment,thePanelconsiders it is importantto
first
address
the
issue
of
the
revised
Amendment
documentation,
particularly
the
revised
MSSstructure,asthishasasignificantbearingontherecommendationsofthisreportgoing
forward.
As outlined in Chapter 1.5, following the Hearing the Panel identified a number of
differencesbetweentheexhibitedandrevisedAmendmentdocumentation,whichhadnot
beenbroughttothePanelsattention.
It had been the Panels understanding the differences between the two versions were
limited to structural changes to Clauses 21.01 21.03 to accordwith the State Planning
Policy Framework (SPPF), to reflect material introduced through other Amendments
approvedaftertheexhibitionofAmendmentC50,changestotheAmendment inresponse
tosubmissions,
as
well
as
some
minor
editorial
matters.
The
Panel
was
of
the
understanding
allchangeswerepolicyneutral,orstrategicallyjustified. Upon review, itbecameevident
therewereotherdifferencesbetweentheexhibitedandreviseddocumentationwhichhad
not be brought to the Panels attention, which the Panel considered may not be policy
neutral.
In response to thePanels request for further information,Council responded stating the
changesweremadeatthesuggestionofthe(then)DepartmentofPlanningandCommunity
Development (DPCD) to provide better linkages with the SPPF themes. The Panel was
advised the revised version is policy neutralwith the intent ofmaking itmore succinct,
removing
superfluous
content,
including
updated
factual
content,
as
well
as
to
align
more
closelywith thePlanningPracticeNote4WritingaMunicipalStrategicStatement. The
Amendment had also been revised to take into account strategic work which has been
completed,particularlyPrecinctStructurePlans(PSPs).
ThePanelhasnotattemptedtoundertakeadetailedcomparisonoftheMSS/localpolicies
betweentheexhibitedandrevisedversionstodeterminewhethertherevisedversion is in
factpolicyneutral,asthisnottheroleofthePanel. ThePanelhas,however,identifiedsome
specific differences between the exhibited and revised documentation and thesewill be
discussedlaterinthisreport.
Onthisbasis,andinanattempttoassistwiththeprogressionofthisAmendment,thePanel
hasbeen
very
specific
about
what
changes
it
recommends
in
response
to
submissions,
and
will refer to the numbering adopted in the revised Amendment documentation to assist
(unlessstatedotherwise).
Intermsoftherevisedstructure,thePanelagreesthisisanimprovementontheexhibited
versionandsupportsit. ThePanelhasanumberofspecificcommentsinrelationtothenew
structure,theseare:
ThediscussionofthethematicapproachadoptedinClause21.023CaseysMunicipalStrategicStatementissuperfluous.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
11/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page9of100
Clause21.03ThematicApproachwouldbebetterstructuredasindividualclausesforeach theme, rather than all grouped under this head clause, to achieve greater
consistencywiththeSPPFandthePracticeNote.
Clause21.04LocalAreaApproachwouldbebetterstructured ifeach localareaplanwas
included
under
this
head
clause,
rather
than
an
individual
clause.
TherelevantReferenceDocumentswouldbemoreappropriately locatedattheendofeachtheme,ratherthanoneentirelisttoenablereaderstounderstandwhatReference
Documentshavehelpedinformthepolicy.
TheFurtherStrategicWorksectionsthroughouttheAmendmentshouldspecificallyrefertowhatworkisproposed,ratherthanreferencetoC21.
ThesecommentsaremadeasPanelobservationsonlyandarenotnecessarily includedas
recommendationsofthisreport.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
12/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page10of100
4 StrategicPlanningContextThePanelhasreviewedthepolicycontextoftheAmendmentandmadeabriefappraisalof
the
relevant
policy
framework
and
Ministerial
Directions
and
Practice
Notes.
4.1 PolicyframeworkAs thisAmendmentseeks torewrite theMSSandrationalise thenumberof localpolicies,
theentireStateandLocalPlanningPolicyFrameworksarerelevanttothisAmendment.
4.2 PlanningSchemeProvisionsThemunicipalwideAmendmentsdonotaffectzones,overlays(otherthanthosewhichare
the subject of thisAmendment) or general provisions in the Schemes. Where Particular
Provisionsarerelevant,theseareidentified.
4.3 MinisterialDirectionsandPracticeNotesThefollowingMinisterialDirectionsandPracticeNotesarerelevanttothisAmendment:
MinisterialDirections
MinisterialDirectionTheFormandContentofPlanningSchemes MinisterialDirection11StrategicAssessmentofAmendmentsPracticeNotes
PlanningPracticeNote4WritingandMunicipalStrategicStatement PlanningPracticeNote8WritingaLocalPolicy PlanningPracticeNote13 Incorporatedandreferencedocuments PlanningPracticeNote46StrategicAssessmentGuidelines
ThePanelhasconsideredthesedirectionsandpracticenotesandconsidertheAmendments
aregenerallyconsistentwith them. Specific issues relevant to thedirectionsandpractice
notesareconsideredinspecificsectionsbelow,wherenecessary.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
13/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page11of100
5 AgencysubmissionsSubmissions were received from a number of agencies. Whilst none of the agencies
opposed
the
Amendment,
they
sought
specific
changes
to
the
Amendment
documentation.
Where other submissions relate to these comments, they will also be discussed in this
Section.
5.1 DepartmentofPrimaryIndustries(i) IssueWhethertheMSSprovidessufficientrecognitionoftheneedforbuffersbetweenextractive
industriesandothersensitiveuses;andwhetherthereisaneedtorecognisetheextractive
industryuseat950BallartoRoadwillcontinueforthelifeoftheresource.
(ii) SubmissionsWhilsttheDepartmentofPrimaryIndustries(DPI)(Submission1)acceptsthedeletionofthe
ExtractiveIndustry localpolicyonthebasisthatthesemattersaresufficientlydealtwith in
theSPPF,concernwasraisedthenewMSShasomittedreference to thepotentialconflict
betweenextractive industryandurbandevelopment,whichwas included in theoldMSS.
DPIrecommendedchangestothewordingofClause21.017toinclude:
There isalsothepresenceofanumberofextractive industries,suchasclay,
sandandrock. It is importanttomaintainappropriateseparationdistances
betweenthese industriesandothersensitiveusestohelpprotectresidential
amenityandensurethatvaluableresourcesarenotsterilised.
DPI also submitted that Clause 21.074 (not 21.09 as stated in the submission) makes
referencetotheneed for furtherstrategicworktoidentifyfuture landuseanddevelopa
rehabilitationplanfortheextractiveindustryat950BallartoRoad. Howeveritneedstobe
recognisedthisisanapprovedcurrentlandusewithanapprovedrehabilitationplanandthe
futureuseofthissitewillbedeterminedby,amongstotherthings,thelifeoftheresource.
Inresponsetothefirstpoint,CouncilsubmitteditagreeswiththeDPIsubmission,however,
insteadof including this reference inClause21.017 (exhibited version), thiswordinghas
beenaddedasastrategy intheClause21.033Theme3:EconomicDevelopment(revised
version).
In response to the secondpoint,Council respondedbyagreeingwith this submissionand
advisingchangeshavebeenmadeinthetextandtheLAMtobetteracknowledgethestatus
ofthisextractiveindustrysite.
MrPage(Submission11)raisedconcernaboutthedeletionoftheExtractiveIndustrypolicy
submitting it shouldbe retained because of the requirement for a500metre buffer and
otherprotections.
In response toMrPagessubmission,CouncilnotedDPIsupport fordeletionof thepolicy
andsubmittedthesemattersarealreadyadequatelyaddressedintheexistingprovisionsof
theCaseyPlanningScheme,theSPPFandtheParticularProvisionsatClause52.09. Council
didaccept,
however,
that
it
would
be
appropriate
to
strengthen
the
MSS
to
reflect
the
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
14/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page12of100
bufferrequirementsof thepolicyas theyrelateto theHallamRoad landfill/batchingplant
and Taylors Road Landfill in Dandenong South. Accordingly, Council recommended the
inclusionofarrowsdepictingthebuffersontherespectiveLocalAreaMaps(LAM).
(iii)
Discussion
In relation to theproposedwordingbyDPI, thePanelnotesandsupports the inclusionof
thiswordingintherevisedversion.
Inrelationto950BallartoRoad,thePanelhasconsideredthewording includedwithinthe
revised amendment and is satisfied this addresses the issues raised by DPI. The Panel,
however, consider the reference to the existing quarrying operation should be further
qualified by the addition of the word approved (i.e. so the reference reads approved
extractiveindustry).
In relation to thedeletionof thepolicy, thePanelagreeswithDPIandCouncil that these
issuesare
adequately
dealt
with
in
the
existing
SPPF
and
Particular
Provisions
and
therefore
thereisnoneedtoretaintheexistinglocalpolicy. ThePanelalsoagreeswithCouncilthatit
isappropriatetoshowwherethesebuffersapplyontheStrategicFrameworkPlanandthe
relevantLAMs.
ThePanelalsonotesMrPagequestionedwhethersimilarbuffersshouldbeshownonthe
BerwicklandfillsiteinQuarryRoad. MrPollardrepliedthatlandfillisaformerbasaltquarry
anddoesnotpresentthesameissueswithrespecttomethanemigrationasoccurredatthe
StevensonsRoadquarry. ThePanelacceptsCouncilsubmission.
(iv) RecommendationsThe
Panel
recommends:
1 AmendClause21.074BotanicRidge/JunctionVillage:a) Implementation Further Strategic Work to include the following
Undertaking a detailed strategic review of the triangular area south of
BallartoRoadandwestoftheRoyalBotanicGardensCranbournetoidentify
future land use opportunities following the expiration of the existing
approvedquarryingoperationsat950BallartoRoad.
b) LAMtoshowthearrowpointingto950BallartoRoadandthenotationtoreadInvestigatefuturelanduseopportunitiesfollowingthecessationofthe
existingapproved
extractive
industry
operation
through
a
detailed
strategic
review.
2 Include the following strategy in Clause 21.033 Theme 3: EconomicdevelopmentObjective2 Maintainappropriateseparationdistancesbetween
extractive industries and any sensitive uses toprotect residential amenity and
ensurevaluableresourcesarenotsterilised.
3 AmendClause21.18HamptonPark:a) Objectives to include the following additional objective To recognise
amenityconstraintsassociatedwithexistingindustrialuses.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
15/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page13of100
b) Strategies include the following additional Strategy Discourage theestablishmentofsensitiveuseswithin500metresoftheHallamRoadLandfill
andwithin100metresoftheadjoiningconcretebatchingplant.
c) LAMtoshow:- TheinclusionofBuffertoSensitiveUsearrowsaroundthelandfill
siteandconcretebatchingplant.
- An annotation which states Discourage the establishment ofsensitiveuseswithin500metresof theHallamRoad landfilland
within100metresoftheadjoiningconcretebatchingplant.
4 AmendClause21.19Lynbrook/Lyndhurst:a) Objectives to include the following additional objective To recognise
amenityconstraintsassociatedwithexistingindustrialuses.
b)Strategies
to
include
the
following
additional
Strategy
Discourage
the
establishmentofsensitiveuseswithin500metresoftheHallamRoadLandfill
andwithin1kilometreoftheTaylorsRoadLandfillinDandenongSouth.
c) LAM toshow:- TheinclusionofBuffertoSensitiveUsearrowsaroundtheHallam
andTaylorsRoadslandfillsites.
- An annotation which states Discourage the establishment ofsensitiveuseswithin500metresof theHallamRoad landfilland
within1kmoftheTaylorsRoadLandfill.
5 AmendClause21.21NarreWarrenSouth:a) Objectives to include the following additional objective To recognise
amenityconstraintsassociatedwithexistingindustrialuses.
b) Strategies to include the following additional Strategy Discourage theestablishment of sensitive uses within 500 metres of the Hallam Road
Landfill.
c) LAM toshow:- theinclusionofBuffertoSensitiveUsearrowsaroundthelandfill
site.
- an annotation which states Discourage the establishment ofsensitive
uses
within
500
metres
of
the
Hallam
Road
landfill.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
16/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page14of100
5.2 SouthEastWaterLimited(i) IssueWhether
changes
are
required
to
place
greater
emphasis
on
reticulated
sewerage.
(ii) SubmissionSouth East Water Limited (SEWL) (Submission 2) submitted that all new development
createdasaresultofthisAmendmentwillbeprovidedwithreticulatedsewerageservices,
and any shortfall in capacity in theexisting system,asdeterminedby SEWL,needs tobe
upgradedbythedeveloper.
Councilsrespondedthesearematterswhichwouldbeincludedinapermitandnochangeis
neededtotheAmendment.
(iii) DiscussionThe Panel note that SEWL were not seeking changes to the Amendment and this
commentarywasprovidedinformationpurposesonly.
ThePanelagreeswithCouncilthesematterswillbeappropriatelydealtwithattheplanning
permitapplicationstageandthatnochange totheAmendment isrequired inresponseto
thissubmission.
(iv) ConclusionNochangeisrequiredtotheAmendmentinresponsetothissubmission.
5.3 VicRoads(i) IssueWhethertheMSSshouldbeamendedtoreinforcetheroleofarterialroads.
(ii) SubmissionsVicRoads(Submission3)submittedthewordingofClause21.035 Theme5:MakingCasey
anaccessiblecityStrategies dotpoint1undertheheadingDevelopanarterialgridthat
maximises roadbased transport accessibility throughout Casey should be amended to
includeareferencetomayratherthancan.
VicRoadsalsosubmittedanadditionalstrategyshouldbeaddedwhichreads:
Facilitate safeandefficientmovementofpeopleandgoodswith integratedsolutionsspanningthevarioustransportnodes:
o Plannetworkstoprovideprioritytospecifictransportmodesonarterialroads in accordance with VicRoads SmartRoads Network Operating
Plans.
o Develop capacityof keyarterial roads ingrowing suburbsand identifyandsecurereservationsforfuturetransportcorridorsalignedwith land
useplans.
o Maintain the safeandefficientoperationofarterial roadsbyensuringthat access to these roads is planned in accordance with VicRoads
AccessManagement
Policies.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
17/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page15of100
Councils responded that this is addressed in the revised Clause 21.034 Theme 4:
Transport.
In relation to theuseof may rather than can,Council submitted can isgrammatically
correctinthiscontext.
(iii) DiscussionThePanelhas reviewed theSPPFand the revisedMSS,andwhilst it isagreed thegeneral
principlessuggestedbyVicRoadsaretouchedonbytheSPPFandtherevisedClause21.034,
thesedonotprovidethelevelofspecificitysuggestedbyVicRoads. Giventhisisasignificant
growtharea,thePanelconsidersthereisvalueinincludingthisadditionalstrategy.
Inrelationtothetermsmayandcan,thePanelacceptsCouncilsubmissionsandsupports
theretentionofcan.
(iv) RecommendationThePanelrecommends:
6. Include an additional strategy in the Clause 21.03 Theme 4: Transport StrategiesTransportSystem whichreads:
1.7 Facilitatesafeandefficientmovementofpeopleandgoodswithintegrated
solutionsspanningthevarioustransportnodes:
Plannetworkstoprovideprioritytospecifictransportmodesonarterialroads in accordance with VicRoads SmartRoads Network Operating
Plans.
Developcapacityofkeyarterialroadsingrowingsuburbsand identifyand
secure
reservations
for
future
transport
corridors
aligned
with
land
useplans.
Maintainthesafeandefficientoperationofarterialroadsbyensuringthat access to these roads is planned in accordance with VicRoads
AccessManagementPolicies.
5.4 DepartmentofSustainabilityandEnvironment(i) IssueWhether the Clause 21.08 Casey Coast LAM should be amended to recognise future
environmentalrisks. Inaddition,whethersometermsusedshouldbeamended.
(ii) SubmissionsThe Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) (Submission 4) submitted the
followingchangesshouldbemadetoClause21.08:
AmendObjectivedotpoint6torefertonaturalresourceratherthanresource. Includeastrategyrequiringa10metredesigndevelopmentsetbackfromthePublicPark
andRecreationZone(PPRZ)orPublicConservationandResourceZone(PCRZ);
Amendtheimplementationmeasurestoincludeacoastalerosionmanagementoverlay. Amend Other action: dotpoint 3 to refer to locally indigenous coastal vegetation,
ratherthanindigenous.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
18/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page16of100
Council responded that it supports the first suggested amendment and has accordingly
amendedthisobjective.
Inrelationtothesecondmatter,Councilrespondedbyadvisingthatitisbeingproactivein
terms of reviewing predicted flood plains and planning controls in the coastal areas in
conjunctionwithMelbourneWater,andtheimportanceofthisisemphasisedintherevised
MSS intheClause21.032Theme2:Environment. CouncilsubmittedtheDSEsubmission
takes this to thenext leveland thissomethingmoreappropriatelyaddressed in theCasey
CoastalStrategy.
Inrelationtothethirdmatter,Councilsubmittedphysicalmappingof thecoastalareasea
level rise hazard and shoreline erosion risk areas is required before planning tools like
ErosionManagementOverlaysareappliedornewplanningtoolsdeveloped,inlinewiththe
Ministers response to the Coastal Climate Change Advisory Committee report. Further,
Counciladvised ithasbeenworkingwithMelbourneWaterwitha view toextending the
LandSubject
to
Inundation
Overlay
(LSIO)
to
reflect
sea
level
rises
along
the
Western
Port
coastline. Asaconsequence,nochangestotheamendmentareproposedbyCouncil.
InrelationtothelastmatterCouncilhadnoobjectiontosuggestedwordchanges.
(iii) DiscussionInrelationtothesuggestedwordingchanges,thePanelagreeswiththesuggestedchanges
supportedbyCouncil.
Inrelationto thesuggested10msetback, thePanelnotesDSEprovidednoexplanationor
justification for the suggested 10m setback and what this figure was based on. Whilst
Councilhas interpreted thisasbeing climate change related, thePanel considers thishas
potentialwider
implications.
Without
aclear
understanding
of
the
rationale
or
justification
forthissuggestion,thePaneldoesnotconsideritisappropriatetorecommendinclusionof
thisadditionalstrategyatthistime.
Inrelationtothesuggestedreferencetoa coastalerosionzoneoverlay,thePanelconcur
with Council that it is essential these matters are considered in a coordinated manner
throughtheCoastalStrategy,andthatitwouldbeprematuretoincludespecificreferenceto
theapplicationofthisoverlayuntilthisworkhasbeencompleted. ThePanelnotestheMSS
identifies reviewing theCaseyCoast Strategy and the Land Subject to InundationOverlay
and other relevant planning provisions to reflect the vulnerability of coastal areas to the
impacts
of
climate
change
as
Further
strategic
work.
The
Panel
is
satisfied
the
opportunity
toexplore thisoptiononce furtherstrategicwork iscompleted issufficientlyaddressed in
theMSSandnofurtherchangeisrequired.
(iv) RecommendationsThePanelrecommends:
7. AmendClause21.08CaseyCoast:a) ObjectivesDotpoint6 torefertonaturalresourceinsteadofresource.b) ImplementationOtheractionsDotpoint3 torefertolocallyindigenous
instead
of
indigenous.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
19/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page17of100
5.5 MelbourneWater(i) IssueWhether the vision, objectives and strategies in theMSS should be amended to provide
greaterclarity
in
terms
of
waterways,
stormwater
quality
and
enhancement
of
the
natural
environment.
(ii) SubmissionsMelbourne Water (MW) (Submission 5) welcomes the emphasis on waterways and
stormwater quality in the MSS and the overlay schedules and has made detailed
recommendations regarding suggested text modifications to local area policies. The
recommendations have been made with regard to a memorandum of understanding
enteredintobetweenMelbourneWaterandtheCityofCaseyinJanuary2011. Melbourne
Watersrecommendationsare:
1. Clause21.0106Environmentalcontextshouldbeamendedtoread Themajorwaterways of the City include Cardinia, Dandenong, Eumemmerring and Troups
Creek, theHallam ValleyMainDrain andWestern Port itself. There is a need to
preventand reducestormwater impactsonwaterways,whileopportunitiesexist to
develop a series of green corridors and recreational linkages along them. These
objectivesaresupportedbytherequirementsofclause22.05.
2. Clause21.06 BerwickSouthernAreaLAMshouldshowacontinuousopenspacecorridoralongCardiniaCreek (i.e. forthesectionofCardiniaCreekthat fallswithin
theClydeNorthPSPareaandnotjustthesectionthatfallswithintheC21Business
Park PSP area). The Panel notes this issuewas also raised by the Cardinia Shire
Council.3. Clause21.07 BotanicRidge/JunctionVillage thestrategyofdevelopingwildlife
corridors that incorporate stormwatermanagement functions shouldbealtered to
provideforthiswherepossible.
4. Clause21.10 CaseyFoothillsequestriantrailobjectivesandstrategiesrelatingtowaterways should be qualified by the use of words if appropriate and where
feasible. ThisappliedtoClause21.1002Objectivesdotpoint7,Clause21.1003
StrategiesGeneraldotpoint5,Clause21.1003 Harkawaydotpoint2.
5. Clause 21.13 Cranbourne North the strategy of developing the Hallam ValleyFloodplain(CaseyValleyParklands)aspassiveparklandaccessiblebythepublicbe
modified
to
reflect
the
need
for
further
investigation
of
opportunities
and
consultationwithMelbourneWater,andwith respect for itsprimary functionasa
floodplain,andrecommendedthefollowingwordingbeadopted:
Explore,with relevantpublic land owners andmanagers, opportunities to
develop the Hallam Valley Floodplain (Casey Valley Parklands) as passive
parklandaccessibleby thepublicwhile respecting itsprimaryfunctionasa
floodplain.
MW also recommended the annotations on the accompanying maps should be
changedaccordingly.
6. Clause 21.15 Doveton/Eumemmerring Strategy dotpoint 15,which relates toenhancing
Eumemmerring
Creek
should
be
modified
to
reflect
this
needs
to
be
in
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
20/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page18of100
consultation with relevant public land owners and managers. MW aIso
recommendedtheannotationsontheaccompanyingmapshouldbechangedinline
withthesuggestedchangeinthewordingofthestrategy. Similarly,Clause21.154
Otheractionsdotpoint3whichrelatestoundertakingrevegetationprogramsshould
includeIn
consultation
with
relevant
public
land
owners
and
managers,
7. Clause21.16 EndeavourHillsstrategydotpoint6shouldbeamendedto includereferencetoInconsultationwithrelevantpublic landownersandmanagers In
addition,Clause21.164 FurtherStrategicWorkdotpoint3shouldbeamendedto
includereferencetoMWandthePortPhillipandWesternportCatchmentAuthority.
AlsoClause21.164OtheractionsshouldincludereferencetoInconsultationwith
therelevantpubliclandownersandmanagers MWalsocalledforgreaterclarity
astowhethertheareaalongEumemmerringCreekshownasfutureopenspacewill
alsoretainitspublicutilityfunctionaswellasopenspace.
8. Clause 21.17 Hallam Strategy dot point 7 should include reference to Inconsultation
with
relevant
public
land
owners
and
land
managers
at
its
commencement.
9. Clause21.18HamptonParkObjectivedotpoint5should includereference toInconsultation with relevant public land owners and land managers at its
commencement. Inaddition,Strategiesdotpoints5and6shouldincludereference
towhile respecting itsprimaryfunctionasafloodplainat theircompletion. MW
also called for Implementation Other actions dot point 2 to include In
consultation with relevant public land owners and land managers at its
commencement.
10.Clause 21.20 NarreWarrenObjectivesdotpoints7and8 and Strategiesdotpoints
15
and
16
to
include
reference
to
In
consultation
with
relevant
public
land
owners and land managers at its commencement and while respecting its
primaryfunctionasafloodplainattheircompletion. Thisshouldalsobereflected
ontheLAM.
11.Clause21.21 NarreWarrenSouthObjectivesdotpoint6andStrategiesdotpoint8shouldincludereferencetoInconsultationwithrelevantpubliclandowners
and land managers at its commencement and while respecting its primary
functionasafloodplainat theircompletion. Thisshouldalsobe reflectedon the
LAM.
12.Clause22.09NonagriculturalusesinGreenWedgeAreasPolicyalargeretardingbasin
is
currently
being
proposed
for
an
area
of
agricultural
land
and
this
is
a
matter
whichshouldbe identified intheMSS. MWexpressedconcern thewordingofthe
MSSdoesnotappearcompatiblewith theuseof the landasaretardingbasinand
MWwouldliketodiscussthismatterfurther.
13.Clause 21.22 Reference documents should cite theMelbourneWater RegionalRiverHealthStrategy.
14.All Local Area Policies should include best practice stormwatermanagement as astrategyforenhancinglocalopenspace,waterways,andenvironmentaloutcomes.
15.Clause22.051StormwaterPolicyPolicybasisparagraph2shouldbeamendedtoread Thesevaluesaredependent,andinsomeinstances,arelargelydependent
on
the
nature
of
the
water
passing
through
them.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
21/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page19of100
Councilresponded that itsupports thevastmajorityofthesechanges,however, itdidnot
supportthefollowingsuggestedchangesforthereasonsnoted:
1. Whilsttheamendedwordingwassupported, it isnotappropriatetorefertoClause22.05 StormwaterPolicy in the EnvironmentalContextas thisprovidescontext
only.
3. AlthoughCouncil submitted it agreedwith the submission, itdeleted this strategyfromtherevisedamendmentinresponsetothesubmissionbyPEET(Submission15).
5. Inadditiontothesechanges,CouncilhasappliedanewFloodplaindesignationtoallfloodplainareasthroughthemunicipalityincludedinUrbanFloodwayZoneorPublic
UseZoneunderthecontrolsofMelbourneWater.
15.InclusionofreferencetobestpracticeStormwatermanagementisnotsupportedasCouncil considers this is adequately addressed in Clause 21.032 Environment
Catchmentmanagementwhichappliesacrossthemunicipality.
(iii) DiscussionThe Panel agreeswith the recommendedwording changeswhere agreement is reached
betweenMWandCouncil.
Inrelationtotheareasofdisagreement,thePanelmakesthefollowingcomments:
1. The Panel agree with Council that it is not appropriate to cross reference theStormwaterPolicyintheEnvironmentalContextasthisisunnecessary.
3. Whilst Council submitted it agreeswith the submission yet no change is requiredbecause this strategy has been deleted in response to a submission from PEET
(Submission15), thePaneldoesnotagree it isappropriate todelete this strategy.
This strategy directly corresponds to land shownwithin the Botanic Ridge PSP as
Waterwayon
Plan
2
Future
Urban
Structure
Plan
and
Precinct
Open
Space
Network (Plantedwith indigenous&native species tomaximisehabitatvaluesand
potential)onPlan4Image&Character,andincludesanassociatedobjective3.1.1
which reads To reestablish localenvironmentalelementsafter construction. On
thisbasis,thePanelconsiderstheoriginalstrategyisconsistentwiththeintentofthe
PSPinthislocationandshouldberetained,howeverthewordingshouldbeamended
as suggested byMW. The Panel considers this should only apply to those areas
identified intherelevantPSPsthatwillservethat functionandtheassociatedLAM
should be amended to correspondwith the PSP. The Panel also notes there is a
discrepancy between the strategy and the notation on the local area plan as one
refersto
Devon
Road
whereas
the
other
refers
to
Craig
Road.
15.ThePanelagreeswithCouncilthatit isnotappropriateto includereferencetobestpracticeinallLocalAreapolicies,asthisisamunicipalwideissue,howeverthePanel
doesnotconsiderthisissueissufficientlyaddressedintherevisedClause21.032as
submitted byCouncil. Whilst this Clause certainlymakes reference to a range of
issuesrelatingtostormwatermanagement,itdoesnotemphasisetheseshouldbein
accordance with best practice. Given the development to occur within the
municipality, thePanelconsiders this isanappropriateaspirationand isconsistent
with the C21 vision. On that basis, the Panel considers this reference should be
includedwithintheClause21.032Theme2Environment.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
22/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page20of100
ThePanelnotesCouncildidnot respond to Issue9which seeks to includeanotation for
furtherconsultation intheobjectivesforClause21.18. ThePaneldoesnotconsiderthis is
an appropriate reference in an objective and note the requirement for consultation is
adequatelyaddressedinthestrategies. Thesamecommentsapplytosuggestedchangesto
Clauses21.20
and
21.21
2.
Similarly, thePanelnotesCouncildidnotrespond to Issue12,whichseeks to identify the
need forapotential regional retardingbasin in theGreenWedgearea inMSS. ThePanel
agrees this is an important issue that should be identified, however the Panel does not
consider Clause 22.09Nonagricultural uses inGreenWedges Policy is the appropriate
Clause for such a reference, rather it should be identified as Further strategicwork and
otheractionsinClause21.032Implementation.
(iv) RecommendationsThePanelrecommends:
8. Amend Clause 21.0106 Environmental context to read The majorwaterwaysoftheCityincludeCardinia,Dandenong,EumemmerringandTroups
Creek,theHallamValleyMainDrainandWesternPortitself. Thereisaneedto
preventandreducestormwaterimpactsonwaterways,whileopportunitiesexist
todevelopaseriesofgreencorridorsandrecreationallinkagesalongthem.
9. AmendClause21.032Theme2:Environment:a) Objective2StrategiesCatchmentManagementtoincludeanadditional
strategy which reads Enhance local open space, waterways and
environmental outcomes by adopting best practice stormwater
managementpractices.
b) ImplementationFurtherstrategicworkandotheractions to include thefollowing Investigate the need and appropriate location for a regional
retardingbasininconsultationwithMelbourneWater.
10. AmendClause21.06 BerwickSouthernAreaLAM toshowacontinuousopenspacecorridoralongCardiniaCreek.
11. AmendClause21.07 BotanicRidge/JunctionVillage:a) Strategies to reinstate the following Develop wildlife corridors that
incorporatestormwater
management
function,
linking
the
Royal
Botanical
GardensCranbournewithotherareasincludingtheextractiveindustrysiteon
DevonRoad,wherepossible.
b) LAM to reinstate the following annotation Develop a wildlife corridorlinkingtheRoyalBotanicalGardensCranbournewiththeextractive industry
siteinDevonorCraig(tobeconfirmed)Road,wherepossible.
12. AmendClause21.10CaseyFoothills:a) Objective dotpoint 7 to read To upgradepublic spaces and community
facilities to meet changing needs and, where possible, link them with a
networkof
trails
reflecting
the
strong
equestrian
heritage
of
the
area.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
23/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page21of100
b) StrategiesGeneraldotpoint5toreadFacilitatethecreationofpubliclyaccessible linksalongwaterwayreservesandtrailsthat linkpublic landand
formpartofawidertrailnetwork,wherepossible.
c) Harkawaydotpoint2toreadRecognisethekeyroleofequestrianlinksinthearea,includingonroadlinksandalongwaterwayswherepossible,aspart
oftheCaseyTrailNetwork.
13. AmendClause21.13 CranbourneNorth:a) Strategydotpoint7toreadExploreopportunitiestodeveloptheHallam
ValleyFloodplain (CaseyValleyParkland)aspassiveparklandaccessibleto
the public, whilst respecting its primary function as a floodplain in
consultationwiththerelevantpubliclandmanagers.
b) LAM annotation to read Explore opportunities to develop the HallamValley
Floodplain
as
passive
open
space
to
form
part
of
the
future
Casey
ValleyParklands,whilstrespectingitsprimaryfunctionasafloodplain.
14. AmendClause21.15Doveton/Eumemmerring:a) Strategydotpoint15toreadEnhancetheEumemmerringCreekwaterway
to highlight its parkland attributes and to take full advantage of the
environmentaland recreationalopportunities itoffers, in consultationwith
relevantpubiclandmanagers.
b) Implementation Other actions dotpoint 3 to read Undertaking localrevegetation programs, particularly along the Dandenong and
EumemmerringCreeks
in
consultation
with
relevant
land
managers.
c) LAM annotation to readIn consultationwith relevantpublic landownersand other managers, enhance the Eumemmerring Creek to highlight its
parklandattributesandenvironmental/recreationalopportunities.
15. AmendClause21.16 EndeavourHills:a) Strategydotpoint6toreadDevelopEumemmerringCreekandenvironsas
a community, environmental and recreation resource in consultation with
relevantpubliclandmanagers.
b) FurtherstrategicworktoreadDevelopingastrategy, inconjunctionwithParks
Victoria,
Melbourne
Water
and
the
City
of
Greater
Dandenong,
for
the
enhancement of Dandenong Creek as an active and passive community
recreationarea.
c) Other actions to read Undertaking local revegetation programs,particularly along Dandenong and Eumemmerring Creeks, in consultation
withrelevantpubliclandmanagers.
d) LAM to include an annotation which reads Developing EumemmerringCreek and environs as a major community environmental and recreation
resource,whilstretainingitspublicutilityfunction.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
24/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page22of100
16. AmendClause21.17Hallam:a) Strategydotpoint7 to readEnhance theEumemmerringCreekwater to
highlight its parkland attributes and to take full advantage of the
environmentaland recreationalopportunities itoffers, in consultationwith
relevantpubliclandmanagers.
b) Implementation dot point 2 to read Undertaking local revegetationprograms,particularlyalong the Eumemmerring Creek in consultationwith
relevantpubliclandmanagers.
c) LAM annotation to read Enhance the EumemmerringCreekwaterway tohighlight its parkland attributes and to the take full advantage of the
environmentaland recreationalopportunities itoffers, in consultationwith
relevantpubliclandownersandmanagers.
17.Amend
Clause
21.18
Hampton
Park:
a) Strategydotpoint6toreadEstablishRiverGumCreekasextensivepassiveparkland extending from Hallam Road to the future Hampton Park Hills
Parkland(CurrentlytheHallamRoadLandfill)andtheOakgroveCommunity
Centre,inconsultationwiththerelevantpubliclandmanagers.
b) Strategy dotpoint 7 to read Maintain and enhance the Hallam ValleyFloodplain (Casey Valley Parklands) as an interurban break between
HamptonParkandHallamandprogressivelydevelop itaspassiveparkland
accessiblebythepublic,whilerespectingitsprimaryfunctionasafloodplain,
inconsultationwiththerelevantpubliclandmanagers.
c) Implementation dotpoint 2 to read Undertaking a local revegetationprogramalongtheRiverGumCreekinconsultationwithrelevantpublicland
owners/managers.
18. AmendClause21.20 NarreWarren:a) Strategy dot point 15 to include . accessible by the public whilst
respecting its primary function as a floodplain, in consultation with the
relevantpubliclandowner/manager.attheend.
b) Strategy dotpoint16 to includeandHallam, in consultationwith therelevant
public
land
owners/managers.
at
the
end
19. AmendClause21.213 NarreWarrenSouth:a) Strategydotpoint9to include.accessiblebythepublicwhilstrespecting
itsprimaryfunctionasafloodplain, inconsultationwiththe relevantpublic
landowner/manager.attheend.
b) Strategydotpoint11toinclude.CommunityCentre,inconsultationwiththerelevantpubliclandowner/manager.attheend.
20. AmendClause21.22ReferenceDocumentstoincludereferencetothePortPhillip and Western Port Regional River Health Strategy, Melbourne Water
Corporation,2007.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
25/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page23of100
21.AmendClause22.051StormwaterPolicyPolicybasisparagraph1toreadCulturalsignificance. Thesevaluesaredependentand,insomeinstances
largely dependent, on the nature of the waterpassing through them.
Whiletherehavebeen.
5.6 CardiniaShireCouncil(i) IssueWhethertheAmendmentsufficientlyrecognisestheenvironmentalvaluesofCardiniaCreek
andsurroundingareas;and the importanceof CaseyFarmasGreenWedgeand for food
production. In addition, whether the Amendment sufficiently recognises important
connectionsandlinksbetweenthemunicipalities.
(ii) SubmissionCardiniaShireCouncil(Submission7)submittedtherearecloselinkagesbetweentheCasey
andCardinia
municipalities
and
it
is
important
these
are
recognised
in
this
Amendment.
Specifically,CardiniaCreek isan importantopen spaceofhighenvironmental significance
andtheAmendmentneedstoprovideadditionalstrategicdirectiontoensuredevelopment
does not compromise the environmental values of the area, specifically the creation and
maintenanceofhabitatlinks. ThismatterwasaddressedinChapter5.5.
Inaddition,CouncilalsorecommendedthefollowingspecificchangestotheAmendment:
1. Clause21.01MunicipalProfile RegionalContextMaptoshow:a) thecontinuationofthePrincesHighwayintoCardiniaShire;andb) theexistingandproposedactivitycentresandOfficer.
2.Clause
21.01
3
Environmental
context
make
reference
in
the
municipality
to
threatenedspeciesincluding(butnotlimitedto)theSouthernBrownBandicootand
Dwarf Galaxias and the important role creeks and biolink corridors play for the
movementofplantandanimalspecies.
3. Clause21.02Visionshouldshow theextensionofThompsonRoadandGrices/GlasscocksRoadintoCardinia.
4. Clause21.03(revisedTheme2:Environment)includethefollowingstrategyWherecreekcorridorsandbiolinksexists,extendandimprovetheseenvironmentalhabitats
throughencouragingregenerationandrevegetationusingindigenousvegetation.
5. Clause21.03 Thematicapproach (revisedTheme4:Transport)needstorecognisetheimportanceoflinkstotheeast,bothexistingandproposed,whicharecriticalto
theestablishmentof theCardiniaEmploymentCorridorand implementationof the
CaseyCardiniaGrowthAreaFrameworkPlan.
6. Clause21.05 BerwickNorthernAreaand21.03BerwickSouthernArearecognisetheeconomic,recreationandtrafficlinksbetweenBeaconsfieldandBerwick.
7. Clause21.09CaseyFarm should recogniseagricultural landwithinCaseycouldhaveagreaterroletoplay in future foodproductionwhich isbeing investigatedas
partoftheWesternPortGreenWedgeStrategyandtheBunyipFoodBeltprojectin
conjunctionwithnearbymunicipalitiesandagencies.
In response, Council submitted it agrees with the majority of these comments and
recommendedchanges
and
has
amended
the
revised
Amendment
documentation
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
26/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page24of100
accordingly,howeversomehavebeenadequatelycoveredandthereforenofurtherchange
isrequired,theseincludematters4,5and7above.
(iii) DiscussionThe
Panel
supports
the
recommended
changes
where
agreement
has
been
reached
betweentheparties,butnotestheagreedchangein1(b)hasnotbeenmade.
ThePaneldoesnotagree,however,withthepositionadoptedbyCouncilinrelationtoItems
4,5and7.
Item 1(b) the Regional ContextMap has not been amended to show the existing and
proposedactivitycentres includingOfficerassuggested,anddoesnot identifytheCardinia
Employment Area which is a significant employment focus for both municipalities. The
Panel considers these areworth identifying. The Panel also notes the legend has been
deletedbetweentheexhibitedandtherevisedversions.
Item4
whilst
Council
submitted
this
strategy
is
adequately
dealt
with
elsewhere
in
the
PlanningScheme,thePanelisnotconvincedtheemphasisofthecitedClausesisthesame,
asthisproposedstrategyfocusesnotonlyonextensionand improvementofcorridorsand
linkages,butalsoencouragestheirregenerationandrevegetationwith indigenousspecies.
ThePanelagreeswiththesubmissionofCardiniaShireCouncilandsupportstheinclusionof
thissuggestedstrategy.
Item 5whilst the Panel agrees this is largely addressed in the Amendment, the Panel
considersthereismeritinrecognisingthelinkageswiththeCardiniaEmploymentCorridorin
additiontoGippsland.
Item6
the
Panel
considers
this
is
sufficiently
covered
by
the
Municipal
Profile
with
the
amendmentssuggestedinItem5above.
Item7WhilstCouncilsubmittedthis isadequatelycovered, thePaneldoesnotconsider
the potential of theGreenWedge for future food production is adequately covered the
Amendment. The Panel considers this is an important issue which should be explored
further through the Green Wedge Management Strategy and included in the planning
schemeviaaseparateAmendmentatalaterdate.
(iv) RecommendationsThePanelrecommends:
22. AmendClause21.01MunicipalProfile:a) RegionalContextMaptoshow:
- the continuationofthePrincesHighwayintoCardiniaShire;- the existing and proposed activity centres, including Officer and
theCardiniaEmploymentCorridor;and
- reinstatementofthelegend.b) paragraph 5 to include the following It is expected the role of these two
centres inproviding highlevel regional serviceswill increase over the next
decadeas linkswiththeCardiniaEmploymentCorridorandGippslandalong
thetwo
highway
corridors
continue
to
grow.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
27/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page25of100
c) Environmentalcontextparagraph5toincludereferencetoOfparticularimportance is the protection and enhancement of biolink corridors that
providecritical linkagesforthesurvivalofthreatenedspecies inCasey,such
astheSouthernBrownBandicootandtheDwarfGalaxias.
23. AmendClause21.024 CaseysStrategicFrameworkPlantoshowtheextensionofThompsonRoadandGrices/GlasscocksRoadintoCardinia.
24. AmendClause21.032Theme2: EnvironmentObjective1Biodiversity toinclude the following additional strategy Where creek corridors and biolinks
exist, extend and improve these environmental habitats through encouraging
regenerationandrevegetationusingindigenousvegetation.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
28/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page26of100
6 CranbourneEastNeighbourhoodActivityCentre(i) IssueWhether
the
MSS
should
provide
clearer
definition
of
the
role
of
the
Cranbourne
East
NeighbourhoodActivityCentre.
(ii) SubmissionsGrahamDicksonPartnersPtyLtd,onbehalfofFederationCentres,madeasubmissionwhich
supportsthefollowingaspectsoftheAmendment:
TheLocalApproach inClause21.04and inparticular itsexpression inClause21.12 forCranbourneEast.
Thepolicyobjectivesforretaildevelopment,includingtheretailhierarchy. ThedesignationofNeighbourhoodActivityCentres(NAC)forthosecentresaroundthe
CranbournePrincipal
Activity
Centre
which
are
supermarket
based
and
serving
only
the
daytodayandweeklyshoppingneedsoflocalresidents,includingCranbourneEastand
CranbourneWest.
Theuseofastructureplanningprocesstoachievefloorspaceallocationthatachievesanetcommunitybenefit,and inparticulartoensurecentresservetheir intendedrole in
thehierarchy,anddonotprejudicetherolethatothercentresaredesignedtoachieve.
Theestablishmentofperformance standards fordevelopmentproposals thatmaynotmeet the designated hierarchy, and identification of specific net community benefit
considerations.
The thrust of Clause 21.12 Cranbourne East which provides for strong links toCranbourne
with
afocus
on
the
town
centre.
In respect of the Cranbourne East strategies at Clause 21.123, Federation Centres has
requestedthewordingofthestrategyrelatingtothenewNACberewordedtomakeitclear
thiscentreistoprovideadiverserangeofgoodsandserviceswhichmeetsthedaytoday
andweeklyshoppingneedsofthelocalcommunity.
FederationCentresalsosoughtconfirmationwhethertherecentlyadoptedActivityCentres
Strategywouldbe implementedasareferencedocumentthroughthisAmendment,noting
theexistingActivityCentresStrategyreferredtoisoutdated.
Councilrespondedsubmitting itdoesnotsupporttherequestedchangeofwordingtothe
strategyon
the
basis
that
the
MSS
only
seeks
to
articulate
ahigh
level
strategic
framework
for activity centres,with theRetailPolicy atClause22.01 being themeansbywhich this
framework will be implemented. To this end, Council submits the Retail Policy clearly
articulates the role of all activity centreswithin the retail hierarchy, includingNACs, and
states Neighbourhood centresprovide attractive locations tomeet the daytoday needs
andmostweekly shoppingfunctions of households at locations that are convenient and
provideeasyaccess to thecommunity Therefore thepolicyalreadyprovides thesurety
FederationCentresisseekingandthisdoesnotneedtoberepeatedintheMSS.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
29/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page27of100
(iii) DiscussionThePanelagreeswithCouncilthattheroleofNACsisadequatelyspelledoutatintheRetail
Policy and it is unnecessary to further describe their role in the strategies relating to
particular
LAMs.
The
Panel
also
notes
the
role
of
particular
activity
centres
has
been
dealt
with inAmendmentC157and furtherrefinementoftherolesofparticularactivitycentres
maybeamatterforfuturestrategicwork.
In regards to the request for clarification aboutwhich Activity Centres Strategy is to be
implemented as a reference document in the scheme (which was not responded to by
Council),thePanelnotesthePolicyreferstotheexistingActivityCentreStrategy. The2012
adoptedstrategywillneedtobeintroducedintotheschemebywayofafutureamendment.
(iv) ConclusionNochangeisrequiredtotheAmendmentasaresultofthissubmission.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
30/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page28of100
7 HuntClubNeighbourhoodActivityCentre(i) Issues
Fiveissues
were
raised
on
behalf
of
the
Dennis
Family
Corporation,
these
are
as
follows:
The strategic work required to properly support the Amendment has not beenundertaken.
TheMSSdocumentationisnotuptodate,containserrorsandtheretailpolicyreliesonoutdatedstrategicwork.
The Amendment as it relates to the Hunt Club fails to have regard to the approveddevelopmentplanthatappliesto itand isnotsufficientlyflexibletoserviceanticipated
futuredemand.
TheAmendmentas it relates to theHuntClub isoverly restrictiveand includesdetailthatiscurrentlyandbetterincludedinaDevelopmentPlan.
There is anover relianceon theCranbourneTownCentre (CTC) toprovide a regionalretailroleandnoregardgiventotheconstraintsthatimpactthatcentre.
(ii) Submissions
TheHuntClub(submission17)wasrepresentedattheHearingbyMarkBartley. MrBartley
submittedtheAmendmenthasanumberofdeficienciesinsofarasitrelatestoretailingand
theHuntClubland.
TheHuntClubandtheCranbourneTownCentre
MrBartleyoutlinedtheimportantroletheHuntClubwillplayintermsofsupplementingthe
retailfloor
space
provision
of
the
CTC,
which
he
notes
faces
significant
physical
constraints.
HesubmitteditiscriticalthatthefloorspaceregimetobeimplementedbythisAmendment
adequatelyaccountsforbothcurrentandfuturelevelsofdemandforretail,commercialand
community facilities at a regional level, and that attempts to constrain or limit retail
expansionwithoutanyrecentretailjustificationshouldnotbeallowed. It isimperative,he
submitted, that nothing in this Amendment should serve, either directly or indirectly, to
preventorhindertheHuntClubrespondingto futurepopulationgrowthandtheresulting
retaildemandinthefuture.
Deficienciesinpreparationoftheamendment
MrBartley
submitted
that
in
preparing
the
Amendment
Council
has
failed
to
undertake
the
strategicworkrequiredtoproperlysupporttheamendment,includingthefurthereconomic
work (assessmentof future retailand commercial floor spaceneedsbasedonpopulation
growth) Council told the Panel inAmendment C1571 itwould carry out. Specifically, he
arguedtheAmendmentreliesonreportsknowntobeoutofdateincludingtheCityofCasey
1 AmendmentC157proposes to implement thestrategies,objectivesandguidelinesof theadoptedCranbourneTown
CentrePlan(August2011). Amongotherthings,itintroducestheActivityCentreZoneintotheSchemeandappliesthis
to theCranbournePark ShoppingCentrewith scheduled requirements (Schedule1 to theACZ). It alsodeletes the
DevelopmentPlan
Overlay
from
the
shopping
centre
land.
The
Panel
report
for
C157
was
submitted
to
Council
on
3June2013.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
31/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page29of100
Activity Centres Strategy 20062 and theActivityAreas andNonresidential Uses Strategy
2012 (which relieson the2006 report),and thatC21containsa sectionwhichdealswith
Cranbourne East but does not reflect the scale of the Hunt Club Centre based on the
approvedDevelopmentPlan. MrBartleysubmittedtheAmendmentshouldbeamendedto
addressthese
shortcomings,
or
alternatively
it
should
be
abandoned
on
the
premise
that
it
bereexhibitedoncetheappropriatebackgroundworkhasbeencarriedout.
DevelopmentPlan/FloorSpaceRequirements
MrBartleysubmittedthatashortcomingoftheMSSisthatitgiveseffecttoarigidhierarchy
whenthereisaneedforflexibility,includingtheneedtoacknowledgetheflexibilityinherent
intheDevelopmentPlanapprovedfortheHuntClub. Hesubmitteditisnotappropriatefor
theMSStoincludespecificprovisionsofthekindfoundinaDevelopmentPlan,andthatthe
inclusionofsuchprovisionsinthecaseoftheHuntClubmightbeusedbyCounciltoargueit
isrestrictedorpreventedfromconsideringanychangestotheHuntClubDevelopmentPlan
whichmight
be
said
to
be
in
conflict
with
it.
Mr Bartley submitted that to the extent the policy vision includes the development of
activity centres which (among other things) are capable of evolving to accommodate
changingneeds,akeyconsideration iswhethertheamendmentmakesadequateprovision
togiveeffecttothis. Inthisregard,hesubmittedtheMSSasitrelatestotheHuntClubdoes
notacknowledgetheopportunityforadiscountdepartmentstoredespitethisbeingallowed
forunder theDesign andDevelopmentOverlayand incorporatedplan, andhenoted the
HuntClubhastheabilitytoaccommodatefurtherincreasesinretailfloorspacethatcannot
easilybeaccommodatedattheCranbourneTownCentre(formerlyCentro)site.
MrBartley's
submission
included
aschedule
setting
out
the
proposed
alterations
which
shouldbemadetotheAmendmenttoaddresstheconcernsraisedbytheHuntClub:
Clause21.024Casey'sStrategicFrameworkPlan beamendedtoremovethedistinctionbetween Principal, Major and Neighbourhood Activity centres, to ensure there is
sufficient flexibility for the Hunt Club, and other centres, to respond to anticipated
populationandretailgrowth.
Clause21.037Implementation theimplementationmeasure"UsingtheRetailPolicyat Clause 22.01 to consolidate the role of the Fountain GateNarreWarren CBD and
CranbourneTownCentreasPrincipalActivitycentresandthehierarchicaldevelopmentof
allotherdesignatedactivitycentres isoutdated,andthisclauseshouldgofurtherand
notethe
significance
of
centres
located
outside
the
CTC
which
have
the
capacity
to
have
afluidroleintheretailhierarchytorespondtodemand.
Clause21.123 CranbourneEast Strategydotpoint2 beamendedtoread"Providefor the development of a new activity centre (Cranbourne East) on the southeastern
corneroftheintersectionofNarreWarrenCranbourneRoadandLinsellBoulevard".
Clause21.124ImplementationSeconddotpoint bedeletedandreplacedwith"Usetheappropriate retailpolicyfollowing the reviewandupdatingof thepolicy regimeas
proposedbyCouncil";andundertheheadingApplicationofzonesandoverlays,change
2 WhichhasbeensupersededbytheActivityAreasNonResidentialUsesStrategy.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
32/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page30of100
the reference to Business 1 to Commercial 1 and delete the reference to
'Neighbourhood'.
Clause 22.013 Retail classifications flexibility should be incorporated into thesedefinitions,particularly for the lowerorder centres to allow them tobe dynamic and
respondto
demand.
Clause22.014 RetailPolicydotpoint2 referenceto 'floorspace' (as in floorspacecaps)bedeleted,anddotpoints4and5bedeleted.
Clause 22.016 Policy references delete references to C21 and the Activity CentresStrategy.
Councilsubmittedthatasfaras issuesrelatingtothefutureroleoftheCTCareconcerned
(intermsofitsrelationshipwiththeHuntClub),thesemattershavealreadybeendealtwith
by theC157Panel, and are thereforematterswhich arenotopen tobe revisitedby this
Panel.
Asto
the
adequacy
of
the
strategic
work
underlying
this
amendment,
Mr
Pollard
submitted
there was a need to draw the line as far as further strategic work is concerned. He
submittedCouncilacceptstheRetailPolicyneedstobereviewed,andiscommittedtodoing
this. However forthepurposeofAmendmentC50,theproposedRetailPolicy isaneutral
translationoftheexistingpolicy. Inresponsetoanysuggestiontheamendmentshouldbe
setasideuntilthe2006ActivityCentresStrategyisupdated,hesubmittedthiswouldsimply
meanthestatusquowouldbemaintainedanyway. Hesubmittedthatanyfuturereviewof
thecurrentpolicywouldneedtobesubjecttothesamerigorousprocessthecurrentpolicy
hadbeensubjectedto.
Intermsofthedetail included intheCranbourneEastLocalareapolicywithrespecttothe
HuntClub,
Mr
Pollard
sees
no
reason
why
guiding
principles
should
not
be
included
in
the
MSStoassist,andconsidersthisbetterthanjusthavingtheminaDevelopmentPlanwhich
can be amended (at any time). He noted similar guiding principles are included in the
clausesrelatingtoalltheothercentres,andthatCouncilhasbeenconsistentinthisregard.
TheguidingprinciplesguidethedevelopmentofDevelopmentPlans,buttheDevelopment
Plansthemselvescanincludemoredetail.
Asfarasanyconsiderationoffloorspacerequirementsisconcerned,MrPollardsubmitted
thatthedesignationswillneedtobechangedanywayduetoPlanMelbourne(expectedto
be approved early in 2014). However there is nothing to preventCouncil from having a
hierarchyofcentresinplaceinordertoprovideclarity.
(i) DiscussionThePanelacceptsMrBartleyssubmissionthatsignificantchangehasoccurred inCasey in
termsofpopulationgrowthandasa result there isaneed for furthereconomicwork to
assess the future retail and commercial floor space requirements (as identified in
AmendmentC157);andthereforetheRetailPolicyisoutofdateandinneedofreview.
ThePanelalsonotesthatCouncilhascommittedtoundertakethereviewonthebasisofa
recognitionthattheRetailPolicyandActivityCentreStrategyareoutdated,butacceptsMr
PollardssubmissionthatCouncilhashadtodrawthe lineas farasthestrategicworkthat
could
be
completed
prior
to
exhibition
of
this
Amendment.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
33/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page31of100
The Panel agrees with Council the appropriate way forward is therefore to include the
existing policy (as a policy neutral translation) in this Amendment, recognizing itwill be
subjecttoreview.
The Panel is satisfied there is nothing in thisAmendmentwhichwill serve to prevent or
hindertheHuntClubfromfulfillinganappropriateretailandcommunityrole inthefuture,
andconsiderthefactthatDevelopmentPlanshavebeenapprovedwhichprovideforalevel
of development over and above what might be expected according to a centre's
classification under the Retail Policy is evidence the system is sufficiently flexible to
accommodatetherealitiesofrapidbutplannedchangeasreflectedinPSPs.
In relation to the new Commercial Zones (introduced as part of Amendment VC100
approvedon15/07/2013), thePanelnotes these havebeen introduced since the revised
Amendmentand that floor space limitations imposed through thePSPs canbe scheduled
into theCommercial1Zoneandcomplement theclassificationsandpolicydirectionsofa
futureRetail
Policy.
The Panel does not recommend any change to the Amendment in response to the
submission,howeverconsiderClause21.033EconomicDevelopmentFurtherStrategic
Work should be amended to specifically identify the need to review the Activity Centre
StrategyandtheRetailPolicy. ThePanelalsoconsiderstheClause21.124Implementation
shouldbeamendedtorefertotheCommercial1Zone.
(ii) RecommendationsThePanelrecommends:
25. Include the following action in Clause 21.033 Economic Development Further
Strategic
Work
Review
the
Clause
22.01
Retail
Policy.
26. Replace reference to Business 1 Zonewith Commercial 1 Zone inClause21.124 Implementation.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
34/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page32of100
8 ErnstWankeRoadActivityCentre(i) IssueWhether
the
Ernst
Wanke
Road
Activity
Centre
should
be
aConvenience
Activity
Centre
or
a
NAC;andwhetherthispotentialchangeinstatuscanbeaffectedbythisAmendment.
(ii) SubmissionEnvironmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd (ERM) (Submission 19) made a
submissiononbehalfofColesGroup,theowneroflandatthecornerofErnstWankeRoad
andNarreWarrenNorthRoad,NarreWarren. Thesite is identifiedinClause22.01 Retail
PolicyasaConvenienceActivityCentre.
ERMproposethestatusofthecentrebeupgradedtoaNAC,butacknowledgethiswouldbe
moreappropriatelydealtwiththroughthereviewofCouncilsActivityCentresStrategyand
asubsequent
planning
scheme
amendment
process.
ERMhasnoobjectiontoAmendmentC50ontheunderstandingthattheRetailPolicywillbe
furtherrevisedaspartoftheActivityCentresreview.
Council submitted the designation of the Ernst Wanke Centre was considered in the
development of the new Activity Areas and NonResidential Uses Strategy adopted by
Councilon18December2012. In thenew strategy, thecentrehasbeendesignatedasa
Proposed Medium NAC. A separate planning scheme amendmentwill be prepared by
CouncilwithaviewtorevisingtheexistingRetailPolicyandanyassociatedcomponentsof
theLPPFtogiveeffecttothenewstrategy.
(iii) DiscussionThePanelconcurswithCouncilthatchangetothestatusoftheErnstWankeRoadActivity
CentreintheRetailPolicyisnotamatterforthisamendment.
(iv) ConclusionNochangeisrequiredtotheAmendmentasaresultofthissubmission.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
35/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page33of100
9 MintaFarm(i) TheissueWhether
Minta
Farm
should
be
developed
solely
for
business/industrial
purposes
or
a
combinationofbusiness/industrialandresidential. Therearealsoseveraleditorialissues.
(ii) EvidenceandSubmissionsMs Forsyth represented theMinta Farm Landowners (Submission 14) and submitted the
ownersareconcernedtheAmendmentdoesnotreflectthefurthersignificantstrategicwork
thathas takenplace,and isongoing, in relation to theCaseyCardiniaGrowthArea. She
submittedthefutureofthesiteshouldbeacombinationofresidentialandbusiness.
Inhersubmission,MsForsyth (atpara11)summarisedthereasonsthedesignationof the
landsolelyasabusinessparkisinappropriatearethatit:
doesnotappropriatelyrespondtotheopportunitiesandconstraintsofthesite; isnotsupportedbytheavailableeconomicevidence; is inconsistentwith the strategicwork undertaken since C21was adopted byCouncil
over10yearsago;
isinconsistentwiththeSouthEastGrowthCorridorPlan,whichhasbeenadoptedbytheMPA and is highly likely to become a reference or incorporated document in the
planningschemeinthenearfuture;and
unreasonablypreemptstheoutcomeofthePSPprocessforMintaFarm.MsForsythacknowledgedPlanMelbournedesignatesMintaFarm,alongwiththeadjoining
OfficerPakenham
Industrial
precinct
as
State
Significant
Industrial
Precinct
Future,
however,submittedthisdesignationinsofarasitaffectsMintaFarmappearstobeanerror.
Leaving aside Plan Melbourne, the landowners submission as far as Amendment C50 is
concernedissummedupinpara39ofMsForsythssubmission:
39. The Minta Farm owners submission is simple: the amendment is
inconsistentwith the strategicwork thathasbeenundertaken since
theamendmentwasdrafted, thusfailing tosatisfy theobjectivefor
planning scheme amendments that proposals be strategically
justified. The result is that the proposal fails to result in a net
communitybenefit.
MsForsythnotes thePSPprocess is informedbyboth theStateandLocalplanningpolicy
framework,andtheMintaFarmownersareconcernedCouncilmayusethebusinesspark
tagasa reason tooppose residentialdevelopment through thePSPprocess. Thevarious
changestotheAmendmentthathavebeenrequestedbyMsForsythseek to facilitatethe
futuredevelopmentofMintaFarmasanintegratedbusinessandresidentialprecinct.
Economicevidencewascalled fromMrGanlyofDeepEndServices. His report setouta
chronologyofthestrategicworkundertakensincethepreparationoftheC21 in2002. His
analysisof thatwork led tohim toconclude thatAmendmentC50shouldbeamended to
show Minta Farm designated as Business with Residential, rather than as Minta Farm
BusinessPark
as
proposed.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
36/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page34of100
MrGanly notes the C21 recommendation thatMinta Farm be set aside for employment
purposeswasnot informedbymarkettestingorconsiderationofthetopography,andthat
subsequentstrategicwork,3with theexceptionofPlanMelbourne,hasacknowledged the
importanceof residentialdevelopmentatMintaFarm to support the futurebusinessand
employmentrole.
Accordingly, Ms Forsyth submitted the following changes should be made to the
Amendmentdocumentation:
1. TheStrategicFrameworkPlanshouldshowMintaFarmas FutureUrbanonlyanddeletereferencetoKeyEmploymentPrecinctFuture.
2. Undertake a number of amendments to the objectives and strategies in Clauses21.03 ThematicApproach andClause 21.06Berwick SouthernArea LocalArea
Plantorecogniseand identifyMintaFarmashighamenity integratedbusinessand
residentialprecinct.
In response,Mr Pollard submitted the Minta FarmBusiness Park designation is entirely
consistentwithPlanMelbournewhichdesignatesitasStateSignificantIndustrialPrecinct
Future and beingwithin an Investment and EmploymentOpportunity area. Mr Pollard
accepted thatwhilstPlanMelbournewasnotyetapproved, it isseriouslyentertainedand
nearfinalisation,andtoincludethissitewithinanyotherdesignationwouldbecontraryto
futureStateplanningpolicy.
MrPollardacceptedthathistoricallyMintaFarmhasbeenconsistentlyrecognisedinvarious
strategic documents as a site which has both business and residential development
potential,howevertheemphasishasbeenonbusinesswithsomeresidential,notresidential
withsome
business.
He
submitted
Council
is
not
opposed
to
aresidential
component,
and
is
not using the Business Park tag to oppose residential as this has always been seen by
Council as an essential component of an integrated development. He submitted the
Amendment, however, seeks to designate the land primarily for employment purposes
basedonPlanMelbourneandtodootherwisecouldmeanthesignificanceoftheareaasan
employmentprecinctandanareaofStatesignificanceisnotbeobvious,andpeoplecould
beexcusedforthinkingtheareacoulddevelopedforresidentialpurposesalone.
Intermsofthefuturedevelopmentofthe landandthequantumofbusinessvresidential,
MrPollardsubmitteditisnotforCounciltopreempttheStateoutcomeandthismatterwill
bedeterminedthroughthePSPprocess.
In response to concerns the data uponwhich the Amendment is based is outdated,Mr
Pollard submittedC21 Strategywasalways intended tobean intergenerational strategy,
andthereforethedataisnotoutdated.
Intermsofthesuggestedamendments,MrPollardadvisedCouncilhasagreedtochangethe
designationfromC21BusinessParktoMintaFarmBusinessPark. Furthermore,Councilis
agreeable to the fourth objective at proposedClause 21.062 being changed to read To
3 CaseyCorridorGrowthArea,EconomicDevelopmentandEmploymentAnalysis,DraftReport,24July2009
(Corridor
Report);
Employment
Planning
for
C21
Business
Park,
Economic
Input
to
Precinct
Structure
Plan,
27August2010(C21EmploymentReport);andtheSouthEastCorridorPlan,GAA,June2012.
-
7/21/2019 Casey C50 Panel Report
37/102
AmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningSchemePanelReport3April2014
Page35of100
createanewkeyemploymentprecinctthatcontributestowardsthecreationofajobrich
urbanenvironment.
MrPollardsubmittedtheAmendmentisconsistentwiththerequirementsofSection12A(3)
ofthePlanningandEnvironmentAct1987whichrequireaMSStoachievetheobjectivesof
planning and to be of benefit to thewider community. In this regard,Council has clear
objecti