panel evidence west fyans-fyans street precinct structure ... · pdf file3.5 examples of urban...

Panel Evidence West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan Amendment C205 – Greater Geelong Planning Scheme 22 June 2010 Prepared by Rob Milner Dip T&CP LFPIA FVPELA

Panel Evidence West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan Amendment C205 - Greater Geelong Planning Scheme 22 June 2010 Prepared by Rob Milner Dip T&CP LFPIA FVPELA

This report has been prepared from the office of CPG 24 Albert Road PO Box 305 South Melbourne 3205 T 9993 7888

Issue Date Revision No Author Checked Approved

June 22nd 2010 1 Rob Milner / Erica Birchall

Rob Milner Rob Milner

© CPG

The information contained in this document is intended solely for the use of the client identified on the report cover for the purpose for which it has been prepared and no representation is made or is to be implied as being made to any third party. Other than for the exclusive use of our client, no part of this report may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of CPG.

Contents

1 Statement of Expertise 4 1.1 Name and address of expert 4 1.2 Qualifications and Expertise 4 1.3 Statement of Expertise 4 1.4 Previous involvement 4 1.5 Significant Contributions 4 1.6 Instructions 4 1.7 Reference Documents 4 1.8 Summary of evidence 5

2 West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan 7 2.1 Proposed Amendment 7 2.2 The Strategic Role of the Precinct 7 2.3 Strategic Assessment of the Structure Plan 9

3 Implementation of the Structure Plan 11 3.1 Tools for implementation 11 3.2 Clause 21.17 – West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan Area 11 3.3 Chosen Zones and Overlays 12 3.3.1 Zones 12 3.3.2 Other zoning controls which could have been used 13 3.3.3 Overlays 14 3.4 Strategic Assessment Guidelines 14 3.5 Examples of Urban Renewal in Melbourne 15

4 Submissions 17 4.1 Amendment Staging 17 4.2 Impact of using the mixed use zone 17 4.3 Extension of Anne and Rutland Streets 18 4.4 The relationship between DDO25 and Clause 21.17 18

5 Conclusions 19

6 Attachment 1: Zones Matrix 20

7 Attachment 2: Rob Milner’s CV 24

West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan Amendment C205 - Geelong Planning Scheme

G:\13\133748\PL10 004 final panel evidence WF PSP.doc

Page 4

1 Statement of Expertise

1.1 Name and address of expert Robert Milner General Manager of Planning CPG Australia Pty Ltd 24 Albert Road South Melbourne

1.2 Qualifications and Expertise − First Class Honours Diploma in Town and Country Planning − Life Fellow of Planning Institute of Australia − Refer Curriculum Vitae in Attachment 1

1.3 Statement of Expertise

I have experience in land use and development matters extending over 30 years, which includes work for and within the private and public sectors. I have a broad range of experience in Victorian planning matters, including urban, regional and growth area planning.

1.4 Previous involvement

CPG Australia was engaged by the City of Greater Geelong to research and prepare the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan. The final draft was prepared in conjunction with the officers of the City of Greater Geelong. I provided some strategic advice during the conduct of the study. This evidence is advanced having regard to this earlier involvement.

1.5 Significant Contributions I have been assisted in the research forming the background to this evidence by Erica Birchall, an Urban and Regional Planner and Nicole Donnison – Senior Associate: Planning with CPG Australia.

1.6 Instructions I have been instructed in this matter by the City of Greater Geelong. Instructions have been written and verbal. I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and that no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Panel.

1.7 Reference Documents In preparing this expert evidence I have reviewed relevant State and Local planning policies and strategies and studies referred to in the body of this text. I have also familiarised myself with the precinct.



Page 5

The following documents have also been reviewed in preparing this expert evidence: − Melbourne 2030 and Melbourne @5 million − Housing Diversity Strategy 2007 − Industrial Land Study − Amendment documentation associated with Amendment C205. − Submissions received during exhibition of the amendment.

1.8 Summary of evidence The proposed amendment seeks to implement the findings and recommendations of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan. The analysis of this report shows that the West Fyans – Fyans Street Structure Plan is a timely, if not overdue, piece of strategic work addressing an area of Greater Geelong that offers a special and unique opportunity to create a different and highly sought after living and working environment proximate to the Barwon River, the CAD and other local activity centres. The Structure Plan is the culmination of an extended period of strategic work in which a range of technical studies and community engagement events have drawn together the strategic rationale and justification for the strategies set out in the relevant documentation. The work is consistent with the procedure and processes expected of a planning authority undertaking this type of work. The outcomes recommended are similar to those for other areas in Victoria and broader where older style industrial areas are proposed to be redeveloped and revitalised for a broader mix of use. The amendment uses the correct range of policy, zone and overlay tools to give effect to the recommended strategic framework and having considered the alternatives available to Council I am satisfied that the recommended amendments to the scheme will be effective in their intended role. Mixed use development areas have an inherent element of change and are often seen as a threat by businesses that have a long and established association to an area when the predominant role of the area was industrial. Resistance and rejection of the change on the basis of perceived threat is not useful if a broader community perspective is taken. It is the responsibility of a planning authority to provide for the long term sustainable development and growth of industrial activity and this cannot be met in the more cramped and poorly served inner city areas where residential use is a near neighbour regardless of the proposed changes. The City of Greater Geelong has identified substantial tracts of land, which will have the highest standards of infrastructure to



Page 6

meet the needs of local industry and the economic potential of the region. In the meantime the structure plan provides transitional arrangements to enable existing industries to either adjust, adapt or relocate as the changes occur. A Strategy and program that provides for the orderly transition of the older industrial areas to a new, vital and more vibrant mixed use future is a responsible planning strategy that will create more diverse housing and a range of suitable job opportunities close to the heart of the city. For the above reasons I endorse both the strategy and the amendment that will facilitate its delivery.



Page 7

2 West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan

2.1 Proposed Amendment Amendment C205 seeks to implement the recommendations of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. The amendment involves the introduction of policy, zones and overlays.

2.2 The Strategic Role of the Precinct The revisiting, redevelopment and renewal of many of Australia’s earliest inner city industrial precincts provides some of the most exciting and challenging opportunities for vital and vibrant urban spaces over the forthcoming decades. Across the country there is clear evidence of both public authorities and the community recognising that in these historic economic heartlands there are opportunities to be realised through a range of new uses, to create special and distinctly different living and working environments. These opportunities are in the nature of spaces and synergies; diversity of activity; greater density and energy and an amenity that is comfortable for both living and employment, while different to that associated with conventional residential areas. Many of those earlier industrial areas were located close to the river, which served as both a source of water and as a drain for industrial waste and discharge. The environmental degradation that typified that era is past but in its place the river environs creates another special opportunity and amenity. In Melbourne the evidence of this trend is apparent in areas such as Richmond, Collingwood, Abbotsford and the old western industrial suburbs proximate to the Maribyrnong River. Given Geelong’s role in Victoria’s industrial history it is to be expected it would have its similar set of circumstances. West Fyans performed such a role. A fundamental question for this evidence is to clarify the strategic future role of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct within the wider Geelong area. This is done with reference to its policy, social, economic and locational context. The precinct is located to the immediate north of the Barwon River to the south and south west of the Geelong Central Activities District and within walking distance of the Pakington Street Neighbourhood Activity Centre. The precinct is one of the earlier industrial areas of Geelong but has emerged as a mixture of land uses. Those uses range from older style and period housing to industry of a diverse scale with strong associations to the wool industry. In essence its development over time has created a genuine mixed use area characterised by an agglomeration of built forms and uses. Its location by the Barwon River; proximity to the CAD; distinctive and different ambiance; abuttal to significant areas of recreation opportunity and elevated position provides the precinct with a high level of visual amenity and a special place in the living and working environment of the city.



Page 8

The precinct has been noted in a number of studies as a key area for redevelopment. The Housing Diversity Study1 set a vision for the area as “to accommodate a diverse range of quality living and working environments”. It has also been noted that the area’s feature heritage buildings are underutilised (Industrial Land Study2 ) and it is evident that the type and scale of industrial activity is changing to cleaner, non offensive, service and administration based employment with stronger associations with the tertiary than the secondary industrial sector. This pattern and theme of change to older inner city industrial areas is a consistent theme within Victoria and nationally and should be expected, facilitated and planned. More traditional forms of industrial use, particularly those that require larger sites; buffer distances; allowance for off site impacts; access for larger and longer vehicles and the higher standards associated with modern industrial / business activity are being directed to other peripheral areas of Geelong which are more effectively located and geared to meet these needs and accommodate the appropriate built form. These areas include the Armstrong Creek North East Industrial Precinct (Amendment C207), and the Breakwater and Heales Road industrial areas. This is provided for in and consistent with local planning policy (Clause 21.07) which seeks to provide for a diverse range of appropriately located, well serviced industrial land which meets diverse needs and minimises land use conflicts. Given the opportunity and preference to direct industrial growth and major industries to other areas within the regional city, a change in the role of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct is both appropriate and timely and should foreshadow the progressive retreat of major industry as a principal land use component. The foregoing has alluded to the historic role and development of the precinct. While change in land use is appropriate it should also be sensitive to the constraints of the physical and social infrastructure that underpinned the area’s original development. Clause 11 of the SPPF recognises and provides strategic direction on this matter indicating that the redevelopment of settlements should be planned in a manner that allows for the logical and efficient provision and maintenance of infrastructure with a focus on the use of existing urban infrastructure. Thus while a change in role should be facilitated and the precinct is a prime location for redevelopment, this should occur in a manner that is responsive to the ability, opportunities and constraints of the utility and community services and movement networks in the area.

1 Housing Diversity Study (2007) City of Greater Geelong. 2 City of Greater Geelong Industrial Land Study: Land Audit (2001) Macro Plan with Hansen Partnership, Ove Arup, Jones Lang Lasalle and Biosis.



Page 9

Directions within Melbourne 2030 ( and at Clause 12) also seek to facilitate sustainable development by maximising use of existing settlement patterns and infrastructure as well as increase the proportion of housing in existing areas. Development is to consider its existing context and protect key area characteristics. As such, I consider that the strategic role of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct is that of a mixed use area with higher density development of both a commercial (including light industry) and residential nature. This is articulated by the proposed vision for the Structure Plan:

Accommodate a diverse range of quality living and working environments, in a way that reconnects the precinct with the Barwon River and celebrates its industrial heritage.

2.3 Strategic Assessment of the Structure Plan

The strategic justification behind the structure plan is contained within the background research that underpinned the plan. For the sake of brevity I do not reproduce that justification in this evidence but address the key points. The land use and development conditions of the West Fyans area are not uniform and this has been respected and articulated through the approach and framework of the structure plan. The structure plan for the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct utilises a precinct-based approach to appropriately guide future land use and development based on the attributes, opportunities and constraints presented by sub areas or precincts within the study area. The designation and reliance upon a range of precincts with defined and different roles and objectives is the most appropriate way to achieve the stated vision for the area. It allows a sensitivity and responsiveness to the specific, different and detailed conditions found throughout the area. The use of individual precinct typologies to guide certain use and development outcomes within an area is consistent with structure planning best practice and guidance as provided for by the Department of Planning and Community Development. The individual precincts have been identified, defined and designed to enable a balance to be achieved in the area between increased residential development, employment uses and more accessible recreation spaces while respecting the strengths and constraints of the existing land use and built form context. The designation of higher density residential areas is consistent with the policy directions of Melbourne 2030 and Clause 12. Furthermore the use of design guidelines to direct the more intensive development to specific locations is consistent with these consolidation principles and will provide a framework for enhancing the quality and character of built form in the area.



Page 10

The use of residential interface areas (Precincts 3a and 3b) will ensure an appropriate transition to surrounding areas while maximising the visual prominence of West Fyans Street through appropriate development. The designation of specific areas for a business precinct, commercial node, open space, and a business park is also an appropriate response as it protects and retains key uses and encourages their consolidation into appropriate locations. This also provides an effective transition over time for land which is currently used for intensive industry and allows for the benefits of highly visible and accessible locations to be strategically maintained and developed. The proposed structure plan seeks to encourage the relocation of some industrial development to other areas of Geelong and in due course the amendment would result in the loss of industrially zoned land in part of Geelong. On one view this might be seen as inconsistent with the State Planning Policy Framework at Clause 17.03 to protect the availability of industrial land. However the planning policy framework is concerned with considering and balancing competing policy objectives in the interests of a net community benefit. In this case the loss of industrial zoned land is not great and its loss is more than compensated by the recent rezoning and identification of new large estates at Armstrong’s Creek. The proposals for West Fyans may entail a net loss of industrial zoned land but they do not foreclose upon a longer term employment and economic role for the area within a mixed land use framework. I therefore consider that the structure plan is consistent with other adopted planning strategies to locate industry to more appropriate and accessible locations; create high quality environments and encourage urban mixed use consolidation, and combined these strategies will result in a greater net community benefit. Furthermore, the proposals of the structure plan seek to relocate industrial uses, rather than remove them entirely from the municipality. This is an acceptable and well considered outcome in achieving orderly planning and development.



Page 11

3 Implementation of the Structure Plan This section of the evidence reviews the appropriateness of the tools identified for the implementation of the Structure Plan.

3.1 Tools for implementation The strategic scope and change of planning policy / strategy direction contained in the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan warrants the utilisation of the full spectrum of planning tools advanced by the Victoria Planning Provisions including additional strategic policy within the Municipal Strategic Statement (Clause 21), as well as new and amended zone and overlay provisions. The Greater Geelong Planning Scheme is note worthy for the manner in which it has built upon a considerable body of place based strategic work and structure plans so that users of the scheme can consistently and effectively review and utilise location specific advice in the exercise of opinion and discretion on land use and development matters. The approach applied in this matter is consistent with this approach and warrants the support of the Panel.

3.2 Clause 21.17 – West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan Area The succinct summary of the structure plan’s objectives and a brief statement of precinct based strategies, complemented by relevant implementation measures, is a logical and orderly distillation of the larger body of work into the framework of the planning scheme. The inclusion of the spatial boundaries of the precincts in map form, removes any reasonable doubt or ambiguity regarding the intent for each precinct. The proposed new strategic statement lays out objectives based on the vision and findings of the Structure Plan, including a range of objectives at proposed clause 21.17-2 that fairly encapsulate the scope of land use and development outcomes envisaged for the area and addressed in the reference document.

Furthermore, the reference to the adopted Structure Plan within the proposed clause provides the users of the scheme with clear transparency as to the source of the policy direction and additional reference material and detail to ensure that the full intent of the plan is capable of implementation. Following submissions, minor changes have been made to the proposed policy by Council to provide greater clarity and direction for the precinct. In my opinion these changes improve the articulation and intent of the policy and will assist in its application of the objectives of the Precinct Structure Plan. Overall, I consider that the policy, its objectives and strategies provide strong strategic direction for the precinct and its future development. In conjunction with the proposed overlays and zoning, this addition to the MSS, at Clause 21, is an appropriate tool for implementing the Precinct Structure Plan.



Page 12

3.3 Chosen Zones and Overlays The amendment uses a range of zones and overlays to direct and guide future development within the area. These are detailed and assessed below.

3.3.1 Zones The precinct is currently covered by a range of land use zones including the Industrial 1 and 3 Zones, Business 4 Zone and the Residential 1 Zone.

Amendment C205 proposes to retain some existing zones and rezone a number of sites within the precinct under a two stage process. The following matrix at Attachment 1provides a commentary on the chosen zones and their effectiveness in achieving the specified vision for the precinct. Other zones, which may have been used, are also analysed in the matrix. From the analysis provided in the matrix, the following observations about the appropriateness of the selected zones are relevant. The broad application of the Mixed Use Zone is consistent with the explicit vision and intent for the area and those precincts where it is proposed to be applied. Its flexibility will enable an effective transition towards the desired outcome. Furthermore, its flexibility facilitates the reuse and protection of key heritage properties and enables an appropriate interface to surrounding uses. The retention of the Business 4 Zone is considered appropriate given its locational context, the suitability for bulky goods type development and existing uses in the area to be covered by the proposed zone. The use of the Business 3 Zone to encourage a ‘business park’ centred on Lambert Avenue is also considered appropriate as it will allow for a greater focus on a diversity of commercial uses in the precinct enabling an effective and efficient transition of the area away from more intensive industrial uses while retaining significant employment opportunities. The retention of the Industrial 1 Zone over a portion of the site is appropriate in protecting existing key industrial areas and uses in the short term. This is seen as a transitional tool with an expectation that on further review in a five year timeframe the circumstances may have matured to warrant a rezoning of the area to achieve the vision of the Precinct Structure Plan. The application of the Industrial 3 Zone as a buffer between the proposed higher density mixed use precinct and existing industrial uses, to the east of Swanston Street, is the proper and intended application of this zone. The retention of a mix of public land zones is the appropriate zoning response given the ownership and functions of the relevant land and will enable the continued protection of the river corridor and key public infrastructure.



Page 13

Retention and extension of a small area of the Residential 1 Zone along Price Street is appropriate as it will ensure the neighbourhood character of this well established area is protected from insensitive development.

3.3.2 Other zoning controls which could have been used The net outcome of the above approach is that the area will be covered by a range of zones reflecting the opportunities and constraints of the land use context and provide clarity by zone provision, to the intended role of specific precincts. There were alternative approaches to be considered in the choice and application of zones including the wider application of the Mixed Use Zone over the whole area or the application of either the Comprehensive Development Zone or the Special Use Zone. The wide use of the Mixed Use zone has some theoretical appeal given the flexibility and discretion advanced by the zone but its inference is that there is intended to be a uniform outcome over the whole study area. As is made evident by the reference document and the policy for inclusion at Clause 21.17 this is not the expected outcome. A further weakness would be the residential based nature of the zone. It would be threatening to existing and lawfully established industrial activity to an extent not intended by the policy. The Comprehensive Development Zone is better suited to integrated development proposals on large sites that are to be redeveloped over a relatively short period of time by one or a small group of parties. The inclusion of an incorporated plan, as required by the zone, provides certainty in-terms of a development outcome but seriously compromises opportunities for change and flexibility except by a further amendment to the planning scheme. The circumstances of West Fyans bear little resemblance to these conditions. It is an area of diversity of ownership and subdivision, where redevelopment will occur in a disjointed way, emerging over an extended period of time. There will be a need for discretion and a degree of flexibility if the planning objectives for the area are to be realised. The Special Use zone was a further choice. There is no value in applying the SUZ if there are zones within the planning scheme that already serve the intended purposes, as is the case in this matter. The application of the zone would have also seen the precinct purposes replicated in the zone provisions, a clumsy and inefficient application of the VPP tools.



Page 14

3.3.3 Overlays The application of the Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to sites which are to be rezoned to enable more sensitive uses is entirely appropriate and consistent with Ministerial Direction Number 1 on potentially contaminated land. This overlay should be applied consistently with the Practice Note. The exhibited amendment also applies a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) over a portion of land to create a future east-west road, to improve traffic and pedestrian movement. The PAO is the most appropriate tool for a public authority to acquire land and ensure consideration of the link in the use and development of adjacent land. Where a larger tract of land exists with broader development opportunities it may be possible to secure a link through design negotiations without the application of this overlay. Again no such tract of land is available and therefore this condition does not apply in West Fyans. The link will also create a more accessible and connected environment consistent with planning policy. It is noted however that there will still be a need to improve vehicle access and pedestrian movements in the area and this should occur through negotiated design outcomes. A new Schedule 25 to the Design and Development Overlay is to be placed over land within the precinct to guide future development. The DDO25 provides a number of objectives as well as requirements and consideration for development applications and specific precinct based criteria. I consider that the use of such a detailed Design and Development Overlay Schedule in conjunction with the policy guidance provided in the proposed new MSS clause will work together effectively to produce a built form outcome for the precinct in line with the vision and objectives of the Precinct Structure Plan. Furthermore, the DDO25 is the appropriate tool to manage the interface between uses and the transition towards a more mixed use precinct in line with the objectives.

3.4 Strategic Assessment Guidelines Minister’s Direction No.11 requires a planning authority to evaluate and discuss how an amendment addresses a number of strategic considerations which are detailed in the Strategic Assessment Guidelines for preparing and evaluating planning scheme amendments. In reviewing the proposed amendment against the pertinent considerations of these guidelines, I draw the following conclusions. The amendment is required to facilitate a strategic change of direction for the precinct in line with the precinct structure plan from a predominantly industrial area to a mixed use precinct with medium to higher density residential development and a mix of employment opportunities. The amendment is consistent with the objectives of planning in Victoria as set out in the Planning and Environment Act and the State Planning Policy Framework and will provide sustainable and orderly development of the precinct for the future.



Page 15

The amendment recognises the changes occurring in industrial areas throughout the region and provides use and development guidance within this context. The amendment also consolidates land and provides increased housing choice in a well located and high amenity area. The amendment will potentially improve the environmental health of the precinct by reducing industrial activity and will advance community benefit through amenity improvements. While there are potentially some further restrictions and economic effects for existing industrial operations, these are outweighed by the benefits of facilitating more intensive development; a greater range of uses and maximisation of the linkages with the Pakington Street Neighbourhood Activity Centre to the north. The proposed amendment is consistent with the objectives of the State Planning Policy Framework as it provides for the sustainable development of land in line with consolidation and intensification principles for well located sites. It will also protect existing heritage places and assets and increase the quality of urban design in the precinct. It is consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework as it encourages the appropriate relocation of industry and the introduction of higher density development within this high amenity and accessible location. The amendment is also consistent with its identification as a key development area for housing. As detailed in the analysis provided above, the amendment is considered to make proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions through the use of a mix of zone and overlay provisions supported by strong policy. It also complies with all relevant Ministerial Directions.

3.5 Examples of Urban Renewal in Melbourne The proposed amendment provides for the urban renewal of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct. Similar examples of urban renewal are available within the historic inner area industrial precincts of metropolitan Melbourne. The experience of these examples and how they have transitioned to more mixed use environments is instructive in the consideration of Amendment C205. Amendment C63 to the Maribyrnong Planning Scheme rezones a large area of land known as the Bradmill Precinct at Francis Street, Yarraville from industrial zones to a mix of the R1Z and the B1Z to facilitate both commercial and residential development on the site. The issue of the loss of industrial land caused by the rezoning was addressed by the Panel considering the Amendment which indicated that fringe industrial areas with greater accessibility located away from existing residential areas was more viable for industrial operations. Given this context, the site’s location and direction provided by urban consolidation policy, it was considered that the rezoning was appropriate. I consider that the MUZ could also have been used to achieve the same outcome of a mixed use environment.



Page 16

Amendment C99 to the Yarra Planning Scheme relates to an area of Richmond known as the “Doonside Precinct” and sought to rezone the precinct from the IN3Z to the MUZ and land adjoining the precinct to R1Z. The land was rezoned using the strategic justification that the MUZ would achieve a transition in uses and provide an appropriate interface for the nearby R1Z land. Furthermore the MUZ would allow for a mix of uses in response to objectives encouraging residential development near activity centres, create a transition in built form and land uses in the precinct, and ensure existing businesses can continue to operate while allowing new uses to establish. The Panel while fully supporting the use of the MUZ over the precinct noted that a development framework would also be needed to safeguard existing operations. This experience is particularly relevant to Amendment C205 as it shows that the MUZ when backed by policy and design guidance is an appropriate tool in enabling the effective transition of a precinct without severely impacting existing uses. Amendment C41 to the Maribyrnong Planning Scheme is of relevance to the consideration of Amendment C205 and sought to rezone an area of former industrial land at Hampstead Road, Maidstone to a mix of the MUZ and the R1Z to facilitate residential development at a diversity of densities. The Panel in its deliberations looked at potential alternative zoning controls which may have been applied including the B2Z and CDZ. In regards to the B2Z the Panel noted that while this zone would achieve the desired mix of uses it could potentially lead to a very different outcome for the site and was therefore inappropriate. The CDZ on the other hand, was considered appropriate for an area requiring a more integrated planning outcome for the site. The mix of the MUZ and R1Z was supported by the Panel as it implemented objectives which sought to direct residential development to the surrounding area and the site was in proximity to necessary services. Given that the locational and policy context for the West Fyans-Fyans Street precinct is quite similar, it can be surmised that the application of the MUZ to the majority of the precinct is appropriate.



Page 17

4 Submissions A number of submissions were received by Council in response to exhibition of the proposed Amendment C205 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. Council has grouped these submissions into four main themes which I think are appropriate to this discussion. These themes are: − Amendment staging; − Impact of using the mixed use zone; − Extension of Anne and Rutland Streets; and − The relationship between DDO25 and Clause 21.17.

4.1 Amendment Staging It is proposed to undertake the rezoning in two stages to allow the area to appropriately transition to a mixed use and more residential area. As such, a portion of the precinct with significant existing operations is proposed to be rezoned following a review of the plan in five years. The decision to stage the amendment is a transitional and economically prudent course that while limiting the ability of the relevant precincts to achieve the vision of higher density, mixed use development in the short term, will ensure the established industrial uses are given adequate time to review their operations and prepare for the change in land use that will emerge around them. By choosing to retain a large area of land in the IN1Z, the adverse effects from the operation of existing industry upon the development of nearby residential uses would be minimised. Further segmenting this existing industrial area within the next five years, by rezoning individual blocks, would negate the benefits of retaining the zoning. Furthermore, the short term retention of the IN1Z enables a staged transition of the area while ensuring the desired overall precinct’s mixed use character and the long term vision for Precinct 4 can be achieved through a future rezoning.

4.2 Impact of using the mixed use zone Submissions received during exhibition of the amendment raised concerns about the implications of the use of the mixed use zone on both existing businesses and adjoining residential development. Particular concern was expressed about the introduction of more sensitive uses which may conflict with existing business operations and the affects of higher density development on individual properties. The purpose of the mixed use zone is essentially to encourage a range of uses which complement the mixed use function of the locality and respect neighbourhood character. The use of this zone simply updates the planning controls for the area to reflect the type and mix of development that is already occurring. While it was conceived in the VPP’s as a residential based zone it still



Page 18

allows for commercial and industrial development to occur and implies a standard of residential amenity that is different to that expected in areas zoned residential. Furthermore, existing industrial uses within the precinct are covered by the existing use rights in the scheme at Clause 63. Provided that the use and development was lawfully established and complies with the prevailing State and Local environmental policies for the operation of commerce and industry the ability to continue existing operations is protected. In addition the impact of new uses on existing uses and development is to be appropriately recognised and controlled through the new policy (Clause 21.17) and DDO25.

4.3 Extension of Anne and Rutland Streets Following additional traffic assessment and the review of community submissions, the proposed link between Anne and Rutland Streets has been reduced to a shorter section between Fernleigh and Rutland Streets only. This reduced section will still provide strategic access within the precinct making the area more accessible, connected and pedestrian friendly in comparison to its current constraints. It is considered that the revised shorter future road linkage will be sufficient in improving accessibility in this area and that no significant negative effects will be evident. The introduction of this future link is consistent with metropolitan and state planning policy in so far as it seeks to create more sustainable and connected neighbourhoods. Furthermore it is noted that additional access connections in the area may be able to be established in negotiations for development of larger sites or a cluster of sites in common ownership in the area. This can be facilitated through references in the Structure Plan and new policy provisions.

4.4 The relationship between DDO25 and Clause 21.17 The provisions of DDO25 and the policy direction provided in Clause 21.17 work effectively together to guide the future development of the West Fyans-Fyans Street Precinct Structure Plan. It is appropriate to utilise both policy and overlay schedules to implement the findings and objectives of a structure plan for the area.



Page 19

5 Conclusions The West Fyans-Fyans Street Structure Plan is a timely, if not overdue, piece of strategic work addressing an area of Greater Geelong that offers a special and unique opportunity to create a different and highly sought after living and working environment proximate to the Barwon River, the CAD and other local activity centres. The Structure Plan is the culmination of an extended period of strategic study in which a range of technical studies and community engagement events have drawn together the strategic rationale and justification for the strategies set out in the relevant documentation. The work is consistent with the procedure and processes expected of a planning authority undertaking this type of work. The outcomes recommended are similar to those for other areas in Victoria and broader where older style industrial areas are proposed to be redeveloped and revitalised for a broader mix of use. The amendment uses the correct range of policy, zone and overlay tools to give effect to the recommended strategic framework and having considered the alternatives available to Council I am satisfied that the recommended amendments to the scheme will be effective in their intended role. Mixed use development areas have an inherent element of change and are often seen as a threat by businesses that have a long and established association to an area when the predominant role of the area was industrial. Resistance and rejection of the change based upon the perceived threat is not useful if a broader community perspective is taken. It is the responsibility of a planning authority to provide for the long term sustainable development and growth of industrial activity and this cannot be met in the more cramped and poorly served inner city areas where residential use is a near neighbour regardless of the proposed changes. The City of Greater Geelong has identified substantial tracts of land, which will have the highest standards of infrastructure to meet the needs of local industry and the economic potential of the region. In the meantime the structure plan provides transitional arrangements to enable existing industries to either adjust, adapt or relocate as the changes occur. A Strategy and program that provides for the orderly transition of the older industrial areas to a new, vital and more vibrant mixed use future is a responsible planning strategy that will create more diverse housing and a range of suitable job opportunities close to the heart of the city. For the above reasons I endorse both the strategy and the amendment that will facilitate its delivery.

Attachment 1: Zones Matrix


G:\13\133748\PL10 004 final panel evidence WF PSP.doc Page 21

Zone Purposes Implementation Strengths Weaknesses Mixed Use Zone Range of residential, commercial,

industrial and other uses which complement the mixed use function of the locality and respect neighbourhood character.

A zone previously not applied in this area. Introduced by the amendment to the vast majority of the area including Precincts 3, 4 and 7.

Reflects the existing mixed use nature and development history of the precinct. Allows for a transition from the existing predominantly industrial uses to a mix of uses including the desire for higher density residential uses.

May create a level of land use conflict between existing and new uses – design consideration will be required to minimise this conflict.

Business 3 Zone

Integrated development of offices and manufacturing industries and associated commercial and industrial uses.

New zone applied to the study area. Introduced to existing industrial area (Precinct 2)

Allows for industrial, warehouse and office uses as of right. Application of this zone in Lambert Avenue area only will allow for the effective transition of the area to less industrial type uses over time. Facilitates the development of the area as the ‘business park” of the precinct.

Is more restrictive than the previous IN1Z which may cause some issues for existing uses seeking to expand.

Business 4 Zone

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

Existing zone retained in Precinct 5 and applied along West Fyans Street, west of Pakington Street.

Provides for the utilisation of land adjacent to the higher order and more exposed roads for bulky goods style development. Enables the retention of these uses on key visible locations within the precinct.

Residential 1 Zone

Residential development at a range of densities that respects neighbourhood character. Allow other uses to serve local needs in appropriate locations.

Existing zone retained and extended along Price Street.

Provides for residential development in the area and protects amenity and existing neighbourhood character. Provides the flexibility to achieve the higher density objectives of the policy Use of the R1Z over land fronting Price

Restricts the ability to introduce other uses into the area which may impact on the amenity of sensitive uses.



Street will ensure the use and character of this predominantly residential street is retained.

Industrial 1 Zone

Manufacturing industry, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses in a manner which does not affect the safety and amenity of local communities.

Existing zone retained south of Rutland St subject to review of the plan in five years.

Provides for a wide range of industrial uses and protects existing uses within the area. Allows for the retention of existing uses in the area which may be difficult or costly to relocate, for the immediate future.

Uses provided for or existing may have adverse impacts on the more sensitive uses anticipated for the area. Restricts office and retail uses. Delays achieving the vision from Precinct 4 in the short term.

Industrial 3 Zone

Enables industry in areas where specific consideration of the impact of uses is required to avoid inter-industry conflict. A buffer between local communities and other industrial zones where uses do not affect the safety and amenity of adjacent sensitive uses.

Existing zone removed from soil site and applied to Precinct 6.

Provides a buffer between the proposed mixed use and more intensive residential areas and neighbouring industrial areas, reducing potential conflict. Provides greater control of uses that may impact on amenity.

PPRZ Public recreation and open space. Conservation of areas of significance. Commercial uses where appropriate.

Existing zone retained. Designates and protects land for recreation and open space, providing greater amenity for the area.

Can restrict the potential for some tourism/recreation uses.

PCRZ Protect and consider the natural environment. Provide facilities which assist in education and interpretation of the natural environment. Appropriate resource based uses.

Existing zone retained. Protects the natural environment along the Barwon River from inappropriate development.

Can restrict the potential for some tourism/recreation uses associated with the river and surrounding environment.

Public Use Zone Recognise public land use and to Existing zone retained Protects public land uses and infrastructure Nothing is prohibited which may lead



1 provide for associated uses.

Service and Utility Schedule in the area from inappropriate development. to conflicts with other uses.

Comprehensive Development Zone

Range of use and development of land in accordance with a comprehensive development plan incorporated into the planning scheme.

This zone has not been utilised but was an alternative choice to the mixed use zone.

Useful for large areas requiring a specific transition and direction such as activity centres.

The incorporated plan provisions associated with this zone did not suit the flexibility for individual responses required by the policy

Special Use Zone

Use and development of land for special purposes.

This zone has not been utilised but was an alternative choice to the mixed use zone

Useful for specific land uses such as quarries.

The existing specific zones of the planning scheme adequately addressed the challenge. The application of the SUZ over the whole area as a uniform provision would have been too insensitive to the precinct approach. A different clause for each precinct would merely have reproduced the provisions of the policy

Attachment 2 Rob Milner’s CV

knowledge into value

page 1

Profile

Rob Milner has an established reputation as an urban and regional planner and leader in the planning profession in Victoria, developed over more than three decades of experience. He is equally competent in statutory and strategic planning and is regularly retained as an expert witness on the broadest range of planning related matters as well as a facilitator and project manager.

Rob has been both the State and National President of the Planning Institute of Australia and has taken an active role in the development of the profession throughout his working life. He was a member of the Minister for Planning’s Local Government and Planning Advisory Council in the 1990’s and in 2009 has served as Deputy Chairman of the Minister’s Future Farming Expert Group.

Employment Summary

1999 – Present Senior Principal / General Manager – Planning, CPG Australia Pty Ltd – Coomes Consulting Group became CPG in May 2009.

1995 – 1999 Director/Partner, Rob Milner Planning P/L and Savage Milner1991 – 1995 Project Director, Collie Planning and Development Services1988 – 1991 Manager Town Planning Services, Jones Lang Wootton1980 – 1988 City Planner, City of Box Hill1977 – 1980 Perrott Lyon Mathieson Pty Ltd

Qualifications

Diploma Town and Country Planning (First Class Honours), Liverpool UK

Affiliations

Life Fellow of the Planning Institute of Australia

Fellow of the Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association

Rob MilnerDipT&CP(Hons) LFPIASenior Principal – Planning, CPG

knowledge into value

Curriculum Vitae Rob Milner

Specific Experience

Strategic Studies and Policy DevelopmentRob has had extensive experience in the leadership and conduct of a broad range of Strategic Planning Studies that have lead to the preparation of State and local planning policy for clients that include the Departments of Planning and Community Development, Justice, DIIRD and Municipal Councils. These projects have spanned urban, rural and regional issues and a diversity of themes.

Recent projects have included

Modelling Melbourne’s housing capacity 2009 –Reviews of planning and liquor legislation 2009 –The development of gaming policy 2008 –Municipal housing strategies 2009 –Rural living and settlement policies 2009 –Structure plans for Wonthaggi, Inverloch, Cobram and Cowes 2007-2009 –Victoria’s future farming 2009 –Review of the Rural and Green Wedges 2008 –Policy, Structural and Statutory advice on Melbourne’s activity centres and zones 2007–2009 –

Land Use and Development Approvals/AdviceRob has thirty years experience in development approvals work including site planning, outline development planning, development design, advocacy, negotiation and consultation on a vast range of projects in the residential, industrial and commercial sectors, working for planning authorities, developers and as a consultant to councils. He has been exposed to the widest range of projects both in terms of location and type of planning issues.

Appeals and PanelsRob Milner is frequently retained to review planning matters and appears before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Independent Panels, hearings and cases before the Supreme Court and Liquor Control Commission. He is equally accomplished as an advocate or expert witness, but only acts in matters that concur with his professional opinion and integrity. His experience in these matters extends over thirty years and includes hundreds of cases covering most facets of planning, land use and development as well as compensation and highest and best use issues.

Communication, Consultation and FacilitationRob Milner has a wealth of experience as a public speaker and is regularly called upon to present papers or comment on current planning issues. As well as the preparation of technical reports, he writes regularly for professional newsletters and journals. He contributed to Planning News from 1979 to 1985 and acted as the Editor on a number of occasions. He has also regularly contributed to AustPlan, the quarterly national publication of the Royal Australian Planning Institute. He has presented papers or chaired numerous planning conferences.

Organisational ChangeRob works regularly with Councils and government agencies, in a facilitator role assisting them in business planning and specification writing, workplace reform, tender evaluation and process reforms and structural change. He has been retained by more than 25 Councils in this regard and is a leading practitioner in this type of work as it applies to Statutory and Strategic Planning.

Professional Associations and DevelopmentRob has a commitment to the practice and development of the planning profession and has been a highly active participant with the Planning Institute of Australia. He has held a number of senior positions with RAPI including being the State and National President. He is currently a member of the evaluation panel on the National Awards for Planning Excellence. For his services to the profession Rob was made a Fellow of the Institute in 1995 and the Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association in 2007.