Inquiry report shows variety of views on planning

In tabling the Select Committee report in the Legislative Council, Chair David Ettershank highlighted the importance of the amendments.

“ ‘This is a once in a generation opportunity to get it right.' ”

David Ettershank, Select Committee Chair

The six-week Upper House probe examined planning provision amendments VC257, VC267 and VC274 and their ability to uphold the aims of planning in Victoria. 

The purpose of the amendments include increasing housing supply and the implementation of Victoria’s Housing Statement.  

While the Committee’s report was accompanied by three separate minority reports, there were some common findings and recommendations, including a consensus on the need to act on the state’s housing affordability and supply crisis.  

‘The Committee found widespread support for the Government’s objectives of increasing housing supply and affordability in well located areas,’ Mr Ettershank said. 

Labor’s minority report echoed this.

‘The status quo that existed prior to these planning amendments is not delivering the housing that Victorians need,’ Committee Member Ryan Batchelor said.

‘These changes are a step in the right direction, are designed to build more homes for more Victorians and will ensure that more Victorians can live in the communities they want to.’

A minority report from Liberal Party members called for the removal or substantial change to the amendments.

‘We need changes to our planning system, but these need to be particularised for each area,’ Committee Member David Davis said.

‘You cannot have one size fits all across the whole of Melbourne, because you will see the destruction of large parts of our Melbourne suburbs, our beautiful suburbs on which the ambience and history of our city is built.’

The Committee’s report and the minority report delivered by members of the Greens, found changes made through VC267 could have impacts on environmental aspects of future developments.  

‘There are deep concerns about the outcomes of these reforms, including the effective lowering of energy efficiency standards for new developments in the most populous local government areas covered by the 27 Council Alliance for a Sustainable Built Environment councils, loss of tree canopy and vegetation, and the overriding of key local considerations around flood and fire risk,’ Committee Member Sarah Mansfield said.

The Greens said the Government missed an opportunity to deliver more affordable housing.

‘Why hasn’t the government looked to introduce a mandatory affordable housing and social housing requirement in these changes, something countless housing advocates, unions and support services have long been calling for,’ Ms Mansfield said.

“ ‘We cannot afford to continue to leave it to the market to solve the housing crisis.’ ”

Sarah Mansfield, Select Committee Member

A perceived lack of community consultation in forming and implementing the planning provision amendments emerged as a key issue during the inquiry.

‘Many community groups and councils felt strongly that they were not adequately consulted and that their concerns were not taken into consideration,’ Mr Ettershank said.

The report concluded the process ‘should have been significantly more accountable, orderly, transparent and informative’. 

Liberal Party MPs agreed with the lack of community consultation. 

‘The arrogant way the government proceeded with these planning amendments, the lack of consultation and the ignorance with which they proceeded are a great concern,’ Mr Davis said.

‘Even the Activity Centres Standing Advisory Committee was ignored; its specific recommendations were ignored.’

Based on public hearings in which the Select Committee heard from local councils, government departments, planners, academics and community groups, the government is being urged to reconsider the makeup and rollout of the amendments.  

'At a minimum, modification of planning scheme amendments should be undertaken after a round of genuine consultation with councils and communities,' Mr Ettershank said. 

Another issue reported by members of the Committee was the Government’s reluctance to release modelling and supporting documentation.  

‘No substantive evidence was advanced that the Government’s plan would with certainty provide additional affordable housing,’ the report’s findings indicated.  

Crucially for the Committee, supporting documentation that influenced the government’s decision was not provided to the Committee and modelling regarding the effect of the amendments on housing supply and house prices, was not provided. 

‘Without that modelling, the Committee was reluctant to downplay the many unintended consequences arising from the new planning provisions that were identified by users of the planning system,’ Mr Ettershank said.

The full report, including all recommendations and findings is on the Committee’s website.