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


2/102

PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987PanelReportpursuanttoSection25oftheActAmendmentC50totheCaseyPlanningScheme

SuePorter,Chair PeterNewman,Member


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


4/102


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


5/102


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


6/102


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.


7/102


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.


8/102


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.


9/102


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.


10/102


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.


11/102


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.


12/102


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.


13/102


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


14/102


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.


15/102


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


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


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.


16/102


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.


17/102


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.


18/102


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.


19/102


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


20/102


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.


21/102


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.


22/102


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.


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.


23/102


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.


24/102


Page22of100

16. AmendClause21.17Hallam:a) Strategydotpoint7 to readEnhance theEumemmerringCreekwater to

highlight its parkland attributes and to take full advantage of the



b) Implementation dot point 2 to read Undertaking local revegetationprograms,particularlyalong the Eumemmerring Creek in consultationwith


c) LAM annotation to read Enhance the EumemmerringCreekwaterway tohighlight its parkland attributes and to the take full advantage of the


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.


25/102


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


26/102


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.


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.


27/102


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.


28/102


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.


29/102


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.


30/102


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.


31/102


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.


32/102


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.


33/102


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.


34/102


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.


35/102


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.


36/102


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.


37/102


Page35of100

createanewkeyemploymentprecinctthatcontributestowardsthecreationofajobrich

urbanenvironment.

MrPollardsubmittedtheAmendmentisconsistentwiththerequirementsofSection12A(3)

ofthePlanningandEnvironmentAct1987whichrequireaMSStoachievetheobjectivesof

planning and to be of benefit to thewider community. In this regard,Council has clear

objecti

Casey C50 Panel Report

Documents

Transcript of Casey C50 Panel Report