Mel Yuan for Brunswick

The state government continues to erode ratepayers’ rights to object to inappropriate development. Residents need jargon-free explanations of planning changes that impact them.

There are many benefits to the State Government’s housing planning scheme changes. But along the way, some important changes reduce the influence of local councils, and especially, residents rights.

In general, these clauses make changes such as:

• the permit application being exempt from review
• allowing the responsible authority to waive or vary building height or setback requirements, or for residential developments only, waive any minimum garden area requirement or condition opposite a use in Section 2 in a zone or schedule to a zone
• the Minister for Planning is the responsible authority (rather than the relevant council).

Ref: https://www.holdingredlich.com/a-new-era-for-planning-in-victoria

Merri-bek was ahead of these changes with Amendment C190.

But increasingly, fast-track development is the norm with reduced or removed ability for residents to object. Probably of greatest concern is the growth of the “scorecard” approach where local planning schemes, traffic impacts, social outcomes, environmental outcomes, or assessment of amenity impacts are not just secondary, but completely forgotten.

Analysis and scrutiny of these state-wide policies with local impact is severely lacking and residents will find themselves even further out in the cold on consultation.

While pro-planning and development advocates criticise “NIMBYism”, the truth of the matter is that all the residents’ outrage in the world does not shift the needle – even when it is agreed by residents and councils that developments are inappropriate.