VPELA Revue Spring 24

victorian / planning / environmental / law / association / volume

Copy deadline date for the Autumn

is Friday 14 February. A one page article is 800 words approx. including an image.

2024

STOP PRESS

Committee Results

VPELA would like to congratulate sitting Committee members Sarah Carlisle, Planning Panels Victoria, Jodi Kennedy, Bass Coast Shire and Marjorie Kennedy, City of Melbourne, who were all successfully returned in our recent election Warm congratulations to Val Gnanakone, onemilegrid, who was also elected and will join the Committee next month A full profile of our new member will be included in the March 2025 Revue.

Cover: Nick McKenzie, award winning investigative journalist with The Age at our recent conference in Lorne

VPELA acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of Country throughout Australia, their Elders and ancestors, recognising their rich heritage and enduring connection to Country and the ongoing sovereignty of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nations.

From the Editors Refections on another busy year

Time is flying and it’s hard to believe we are now deep into another year. Of course, much of the hum (or buzz) this year has been about housing or, rather, lack of it. Some might say that governments have been in overdrive trying to remedy the shortfall. In Victoria, the Allan Government is frantically working on a review of the Planning and Environment Act, advancing its Activity Centres Program and initiating amendments to planning schemes to prioritise significant economic development and contributions to Victoria’s supply of social and affordable housing.

Many amongst us are awaiting changes to residential development controls in Victoria, including amendments to residential development provisions which have been canvassed in the lead-up to publication of this edition of Revue. It seems that a Government under pressure has been availing itself of the collective real-world experience of those in the development sector. The sector has been very vocal about what it considers is needed to kick-start investment in Victoria.

While much maligned by the community at large, it must be acknowledged that the sector is key to making inroads to the supply of housing, and the environment and settings in which it operates need be freed of the many ‘handbrakes’ which have seriously slowed activity this past year and only added to the supply ‘crisis’. As many in the industry opine, it’s a bumpy road ahead for many in the planning and environment landscape as projects increasingly fall victim to red tape, more and higher taxes and statutory charges, the relatively high cost of money in a time of high interest rates and increasing costs associated with materials and labour (and scarcity of labour) – not to mention, the political vagaries that influence decision-making.

VPELA’s conference is done and dusted and was, from all accounts, a triumph of organisation and content by Anna Borthwick and the everdiligent conference committee. So, we’re pleased to be publishing articles emerging from the conference for those who weren’t able to attend and those keen to reflect on content, including the Minister’s presentation about the Allan Government’s focus on delivering more housing, articles from conference scholarship winners Bridget Goodear and Robyn Neal, as well the citation for the Paul Jerome Award recipient – a very worthy, Rob Moore.

VPELA’s North American Study Tour is also done and dusted. VPELA President, Mark Sheppard, was on the tour and writes enthusiastically about his experience in his President’s Column, and what’s happening in some Canadian cities to address housing choice and affordability.

The Moot Court Program is well advanced and is shaping up as another of VPELA’s 2024 many successful professional development initiatives. Nineteen participants from multiple public and private sector organisations are keen to develop their advocacy or expert witness skills. It’s a program that relies on the generosity of members of the Victorian Bar, VCAT, State and local government and the private sector – all keen to grow the careers of the next generation of professionals.

Sadly, this year, VPELA lost its founding president, Peter Barber. He was such an enthusiastic fellow, always engaging and interested in others. In this Spring edition of Revue, his daughter Jade kindly shares her eulogy which gives a very personal insight to Peter

including recollections only those especially close to him would have known. Tamara Brezzi, another of VPELA’s past presidents, has also provided Revue with her fitting Fellows Dinner tribute – written from a professional (yet personal) perspective, noting that Peter was her senior when she embarked on her career in the law. While it is always sad to learn of someone’s passing, age eventually catches up with us all, but Peter enjoyed a long and full life, including time for himself and family in retirement.

The passing of people in the prime of their lives, however, really brings one’s own mortality into focus – none more so than the all too premature passing of John Kiriakidis at the end of July. In various social forums, online and in person, many of John’s peers lauded his professional standing as a transport planner and engineer and his fine personal qualities including his infectious and distinctive laugh and corresponding big smile. In this edition, Chris Townshend KC provides a little insight into John’s premier reputation as an expert witness, amongst other of his professional and personal qualities. His reflections will ring true with many.

There are so many other contributions in this edition which remind us of the breadth of achievement and interest in the many fields of expertise represented by the membership. As we look to 2025, many will get to December feeling the effects of another busy year in one or other of the sectors and/or professions from which VPELA draws its membership. The festive season is always a good time to reflect on achievements, restore waning energy, and ring-in a New Year with the optimism and enthusiasm it deserves.

Finally, we take this opportunity to thank everyone who contributed to Revue this year, especially our regular contributors. We rely heavily on the mature membership to share its professional expertise and we always welcome contributions from the younger membership as they are the future of VPELA. We’ll look forward to seeing and speaking with readers at VPELA’s planned Christmas events and will return refreshed in 2025.

Amanda Ring and Holly McFall are part of the team at UPco BOOK NOW!

VPELA CHRISTMAS PARTY

3rd December 6.00pm ZINC Federation Square

Proudly sponsored by

Amanda Ring, UPco Holly McFall, UPco

Letters to the Editors

Dear Eds

Reading the article about the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore (Fragility of our Road Network, VPELA Revue Winter edition) and looking at the part plan of the West Gate Tunnel Project (WGTP) reminded me how irresponsible the Andrews Labor Government was to cancel the East West Link (EWL) project.

The WGTP does little more than provide a faster connection between the West Gate Freeway and CityLink, mainly resulting in motorists having to pay tolls quicker.

The EWL would have been an 18-kilometre freeway linking the Eastern Freeway with the western suburbs. It was recommended in the Eddington Transport Report (Sir Rod Eddington, 2008), which was commissioned by the Brumby Labor Government in 2006 and accepted under Transport Minister Pallas. At the request of Minister Pallas, VicRoads undertook the preliminary design and consultation with residents.

When the Liberals were elected in 2010, they decided to commence construction in the east. In an act of stupidity, the Labor opposition then decided the EWL was an unacceptable project – and later, Eddington’s recommendation was dead.

The EWL plans reveal an additional river crossing, reducing congestion on the West Gate Bridge, and a freeway link between Doncaster and the suburbs adjoining CityLink and Tullamarine Airport. The EWL also would have provided a connection to the Port of Melbourne. The connection to the Western Ring Road would have enabled traffic signal free connections between Geelong, Ballarat and the eastern suburbs.

To add more salt to the wound, the WGTP has experienced major cost overruns, primarily due to inadequate investigations prior to a tender being awarded or construction commencing. Instead of Transurban, the builder and operator, funding the cost overruns with the profits it will gain from the toll extension granted by the Andrews Government, the extra funds were provided by Victorian taxpayers.

The entire freeway connection as envisaged by Eddington 16 years ago would have been open to traffic by now. The EWL alignment would have provided much greater flexibility for all vehicles than the WGFP will, and the $1.5 billion in taxpayer funds would not have been wasted. Furthermore, it would have provided another option if the West Gate Bridge and Monash Freeway tunnels ever experienced a similar problem to Francis Scott Key Bridge.

Des Grogan

Leigh Furness

Carlo Morello

Ross Thomson Jodie

From the President Lessons from home and abroad

One of VPELA’s core purposes is to provide a range of professional development opportunities for our members. Our two flagship learning opportunities are our annual conference and international biennial study tours.

By all reports, this year’s conference was a huge success, headlined by Nick McKenzie and Anna Meares AO, and brought home by Oona Nicolson’s rendition of current world number one ‘breaker’ Raygun’s infamous Olympics routine. I’ve no doubt all who attended went home enriched with fresh insights about how to approach their work (and breaking). An enormous thank you goes to our hardworking and creative volunteer conference committee led by Anna Borthwick, and our outstanding operations team Anna Aughterson, Grace Hamilton, Katherine Yeo and Jane Power.

The winner of this year’s Paul Jerome Award for outstanding contribution to public service was announced at the conference. Congratulations to Rob Moore, urban design leader in the renowned

City of Melbourne City Design team and worthy winner of the award. Rob has been generous in sharing his experience around the world, and we have much to learn from his understated expertise in urban choreography.

I was fortunate to be able to go on this year’s study tour, which visited three cities with comparable contexts to Melbourne: Vancouver, Seattle and Toronto. All are facing similar challenges to Melbourne in terms of housing provision and affordability, and each offered different lessons in how to respond to these and other challenges.

Mark Sheppard, Director, Urbis

Museum of Pop Culture, Seattle

The Eaton Centre, Toronto

Amazon Spheres, Seattle

The Study Tour Group

Colleen Peterson and Marjorie Kennedy organised a comprehensive and insightful program, and the various organisations we met in each city were very generous with their time – a welcome reminder of the value our industry places on sharing knowledge.

Notably, it is apparent that detached housing is now officially ‘on the nose’ in Canada, with provincial governments requiring local councils to allow multi-unit development of 3-6 dwellings on all residential lots to address the housing and climate crises. This forms an interesting parallel with the mooted removal of neighbourhood character from ResCode.

In contrast with Victoria, we learnt that the planning provisions for build-to-sell and build-to-rent residential developments are quite different (at least in Vancouver), allowing build-to-rent to be incentivised through density bonuses and lower infrastructure contributions, and enabling less prescriptive internal amenity standards for build-to-sell (because the market is considered best placed to determine these outcomes).

The larger size of Canada’s central city municipalities appeared to offer benefits in terms of coordinated strategic planning, and the strength and independence of their professional teams in managing development. Successful public-private collaborations seemed to be more common in this context. We also heard about the advantages of partnerships between all three levels of government in ensuring stability for major urban precinct renewal.

The value of strongly enforced urban design standards was apparent, whether for view cones in Vancouver or new public domain in Toronto. And we learnt about innovative approaches to flooding (why not

design buildings to flood?) and older tower blocks (retrofitting can be feasible).

The organisations we met were keen to learn from us too, and we discovered that the City of Vancouver is looking in our direction, using the Central Melbourne Design Guide as a precedent for consolidating a myriad of design guidelines into a streamlined document with a ‘code assess’ flavour.

But the biggest takeaway for me was simply a reminder of how much there is to learn when we look beyond our border.

A big thank you to my fellow tourists for making the trip so much fun!

And finally…

It is board renewal season. Regular renewal of the board is critical for maintaining fresh and diverse thinking, and engagement with our members. Thanks to those who’ve put up their hand to contribute to the Association by joining the board, and my deep gratitude for the service of those board members who finish up this year.

We have prepared updated Rules of Association, partly to formalise our policy in relation to board renewal. The proposed changes are on our website and will be moved for adoption at the AGM on 24 October. Thanks to Arnold Bloch Leibler for their pro bono assistance with drafting the Rules.

If I don’t see you at the AGM, I look forward to seeing you at the Christmas party!

Mark Sheppard is President of VPELA and a Director at Urbis.

The Kathy Mitchell Award 2025 Award Nominations Open

VPELA is pleased to invite applications for this award which recognises excellence in a young or new professional working in the Victorian Public Sector. It is awarded to a young person, or mid/late career person following a career change, who goes above and beyond and demonstrates exceptional initiative and endeavour. The aim of the award is to reward outstanding contributions, foster a culture of excellence in the public sector, and contribute to public sector staff retention.

The winner will be awarded unlimited attendance at VPELA seminars and events for a whole year, and the opportunity to prepare an article in the Revue. The Award will be presented at our Summer drinks in February 2025. You can download the criteria and application forms here

Applications close on Friday 29 November

Sparrow sculpture by Myfanwy MacLeod, Vancouver

Seattle

People Remembering Peter Barber

On 22 July 2024, a zealously driven and enormously generous stalwart passed away peacefully. Peter Barber led a full, energetic life – leaving a distinctive stamp on his family, his industry and his community. Here, we share two tributes to Peter and invite Revue readers to reflect on the visionary that created VPELA.

Vale Peter Barber (AKA Dad)

Jade Barber generously agreed to share this deeply touching eulogy from Peter Barber’s funeral with the VPELA community.

I would like to say a few things about my dad, who unsurprisingly was one of the first people I ever met. More curiously, I haven’t met many people that have lived a more interesting life. It feels like Dad has lived two or three lifetimes with the amount he’s done. Dad was an enigma at times, but one thing’s for sure: he grabbed life by the horns.

Dad was one of ten children. After leaving boarding school early, he worked on a farm, sleeping in a tin shed on old potato sacks. Growing up in relative opulence, I struggle to imagine what this would have been like.

After this, Dad had various farm jobs: tractor salesman, chainsaw salesman, part time soldier. He then became a skilled welder and worked as a boilermaker, panel beater and eventually a foreman. He also loved cars, especially the really fast and really unsafe kind – most notably an Austin Healey 3000. Eventually, fate caught up to him when he broke his back in a nasty car crash. This ended his days of hooning, and would have been an extremely life-limiting injury for many. Somehow, though, Dad could bounce back in a way others could not. He was a machine that ran on determination and expired muesli bars.

And Dad was only just getting started. In his 30s, he went back to school, completed his HSC and studied Law.

When Dad told me about his Uni days, I can tell he had really developed a passion for Law and the written word. He told me stories about locking himself in the library so he could read books he wasn’t allowed to take home. Dad has given me many gifts but perhaps the one I treasure most is the power of language. He always used to tell me that you can convince anyone of anything if you use the right words. Typical dodgy lawyer.

Unsurprisingly, Dad excelled as a lawyer – despite exhibiting abysmal punctuality, a computer phobia and an air of charming eccentricity. He was so incredible at what he did, and he worked so hard. He received an Order of Australia for his legal work, and he started VPELA. Each year, the Peter Barber Lecture is held in his honour.

Dad was a really hard worker out of the courtroom, too.

He loved sports (not team sports!), from skiing Mt Buller to marathon running. If something was worth doing, he did it at 100% intensity. If you ever agreed to go on a “leisurely bike ride” with him, you’d better have been ready to clock up 40+ kilometres!

He was a great craftsman and had a careful eye for detail, sometimes to his detriment. This became immediately evident to anyone around him as soon as he had a tape measure in his hand. Dad loved measuring things. He would ask for your help on a project, then happily leave you standing there twiddling your thumbs while he proceeded to measure things for 45+ minutes.

Once a project was started, it would take as long as it took, regardless of its urgency or importance. Attempts at intervening or establishing a timeline were futile. When I was a teenager, he’d often ask me for “a minute” of help – and five hours later, we would still be toiling away. I will never forget the look of betrayal when I asked if I could go inside for dinner!

Earlier on, Dad was a bit more stoic and conversations about emotions were few and far between. He would show he cared by building, buying or fixing something for us. Later on, he learned to “let go” and express how he felt about us. What a gift – he must have trusted us immensely – it’s not an easy feat for a man with his upbringing.

Dad was one of the most caring and compassionate people I’ve met. He loved doing things for others, especially providing for his family and improving our lives. Mum and I would always joke that we couldn’t complain about his absence with any sincerity – we could have just as easily ended up with a Dad who was down the pub most nights instead. His shed and his projects kept him out of trouble… for the most part.

Dad’s passing has left a hole in our hearts. The world has lost such a kind and caring soul. I won’t allow myself to despair too greatly; Dad led an incredible life and did not go gently into that good night. He squeezed life for every drop.

Dad – I love you. Thank you for your care and protection. For your wisdom. Your softness and your hardness. Thank you for your patience, and your unconditional support. I’ll always remember you as a cheeky, dedicated and lovely man. As I go on through life, aided and guided by the support you’ve given me all these years, you will always be in my heart.

Jade Barber

People A toast to Peter Barber

Pete was the founding President of VPELA. Thirty-five years ago, he brought together a multi-disciplinary group of mates who were also finding business a bit tough during a deep recession, and he ran the first ever VPELA Board meeting.

At the time, Pete was a partner at Deacons (a predecessor to my law firm, Norton Rose Fulbright), having joined Sly & Weigall (another predecessor) in 1978 as an articled clerk to Matt Beazley’s father, Ron Beazley.

Like everything he did, he approached his life as a lawyer with drive, passion and ambition – occasionally bordering on the slightly

Ahead of the times, Pete naturally gravitated towards the concept of sponsorship rather than, or in addition to, mentorship. He comfortably introduced juniors in his team to clients, and gave opportunities to new people on the planning and environment scene – whether they be barristers, consultants, witnesses or junior solicitors. When you achieved something, he was quick to acknowledge the success and to remind you that success is a stepping stone to the next big goal.

I mentioned Pete’s occasionally slightly unhinged qualities, and I want to tell a story that demonstrates that.

Christmas Eve, 2004. Pete was about to take long service leave, and I had just been made Senior Associate. I was a 3rd year lawyer, and we were working on quite a lot of matters together.

He called me into the office and said, ‘Okay, mate. Everything is here. I’m not going to be contactable, but I’ll see you in two months. You can do it, superstar. You’ll be fine.’ He pointed to the files piled 50% higher than usual.

He’d given me no warning that this was the plan, and that he was leaving in 30 minutes. He would often set challenges for me long before I’d dreamed of having the confidence to achieve them.

Pete had a skiing accident that summer. He couldn’t fly home until much later. I’d never worked so hard nor been so challenged, but I was forever grateful for the sponsorship and the opportunity to grow up that summer.

While it would give this humble man no joy whatsoever to know we were gathered here tonight piling accolades on him, it would give him great joy to know that the VPELA family, who he very much th anniversary of the Association he created – now boasting over 1,200

We work with the public and private sector to source hard-to-find talent, from graduates through to director level roles.

On 24 July 2024 at the Fellows’ Dinner, Tamara Brezzi shared the story of Peter Barber’s inimitable place in VPELA’s history – and her own.

Tamara Brezzi. Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright

People Vale John Kiriakidis

Many VPELA members were taken by surprise when hearing of John Kiriakidis’ passing on 29 July 2024. Chris Townshend KC shares his observations of John as an outstanding professional who showed great promise early in his career, went on to realise it and, amongst other achievements, became a leading expert witness in his field.

One aspect of John’s professional life was appearing in cases to give evidence as an expert witness. This is not the chosen path for all, or even most, engineers but in John’s case it was an automatic decision and he gave evidence in hundreds of matters over the journey. This exposed John to many barristers and solicitors with whom he established trusting relationships over 20 or more years.

John’s preparedness to act as a witness emerged early in his career. John was employed by Des Grogan of Grogan Richards and, at the time, Des was one of the leaders in the witness field. Des saw something in John and had actually rung John’s mum to make sure John came in for an interview. When John left Grogan Richards for Greg Tucker and Associates after less than 2 years Des was disappointed and still describes John as “the one who got away”, but Des’ influence on John remained and before long John was a regular and dependable witness in matters at the VCAT and in Planning Panels.

As John’s experience grew so too did the size and complexity of cases in which he was asked to advise and give evidence. It would be an impressive exercise to list the sheer number of developments and neighbourhoods which have since been built with the influence of John’s evidence on traffic and parking issues.

John’s character as a witness was consistent with the person he was. He was a diligent professional, who would prepare rigorously for a case and he dreaded the possibility that he could be seen to have missed anything. He would settle on a point of view and could be pretty feisty if asked to depart from his opinion whether by those who had briefed him, or in cross examination by others.

John’s team building was evident in this aspect of his career. He would often encourage lawyers to use other people on his team who

he believed had what it took to do witness work. Many of his younger colleagues who now appear before the Tribunal and Planning Panels are grateful for his belief in their abilities and his advocacy for same.

As John matured, and as a leader at GTA and then Stantec, he preferred to be known as a Transport Planner, not only a Traffic Engineer, being firmly of the view that all transport planning and modes of transport exist within a regional network that must be managed, planned and improved over time.

During the last ten years or so John was sought after to the extent that he was engaged to independently assess and give evidence about the most major transport projects in the State, these included the West Gate Tunnel and North East Link, both of which are now under construction. It was no small task for a single expert to be across the sheer scale of these projects let alone the more micro issues that concerned other parties along the alignments, and about which he was available for cross examination. After 2 days or more in the witness box in the West Gate Tunnel matter, no one was unimpressed by John’s professionalism, manner, and command of the issues.

John and I were friends, and we caught up from time to time away from cases. As recently as a few months ago, John was on the opposing side in a case – working with a Best Hooper client who had very particular interests – which required John to go down a particularly detailed path. Bearing in mind John’s declining health (which was well disguised for so long), I chatted with him privately prior to cross examination to see if there was a short cut available; perhaps a couple of questions we could agree on so the matter might be over and done with in shorter time. But, true to himself and his lofty professional standards, John would have none of it and he dug in for the intellectual battle over the next hours. We later shared a smile at having one “for old times sake”. It is the last time I saw him face to face, and looking back I am so glad he dug in for the fight.

For all that worked with John in this space his popularity and appeal was more than just for his professionalism. John was a clear thinking, sensible person to have around the case, and a friendly and fun person to have around the team. His premature passing and now notable absence from the planning reviews landscape is a huge loss to all concerned.

John leaves behind his wife Michaela and children Hugo and Stella, being very talented twins currently getting on with the VCE years. Son Hugo is a carbon copy of his dad. I am sure I speak for all in wishing them well, and in expressing sorrow for their terrible loss.

Vale John.

Eukai’s directors, being some of John’s former close colleagues at GTA and Stantec, in consultation with John’s family, are establishing an annual scholarship in John’s name to honour his legacy. The scholarship will be awarded to a student in their penultimate year of studies in engineering or a planning-related degree and be based on criteria that best match John’s outstanding professional skills and attributes. It is intended that the award provide financial assistance to the student and an entrée to work experience at Eukai and other related firms and partners in the industry.

If you would like to know more about the scholarship feel free to contact tim.deyoung@eukai.com.au. Eds

Paul Jerome Award 2024 Award – Rob Moore

Rob Moore is an Architect and Urban Designer with 44 years’ experience in the public and private sectors. Rob has 23 years’ experience in executive roles at the City of Melbourne including 13 years as Manager, Urban Design and 7 years as Director, State Projects.

These teams formed part of the multi-disciplinary professional City Design studio headed by Professor Rob Adams. The studio included urban design, planning, architecture, landscape architecture, industrial design and project management.

City Design provided leadership for the strategic program of urban design and planning initiatives and interventions that have made significant contributions to the transformation of Melbourne’s central business district into a thriving, world-class mixed-use city centre. The work of the urban design team played an essential part in achieving this high status. The studio has been awarded over 100 state and national awards for its design achievements.

Rob played a key leadership role on behalf of the City of Melbourne in the first decade of the planning and development of Melbourne Docklands. The redevelopment of this 190 hectare “brownfield” site is led by Development Victoria, the State Government development agency that has attracted over $15 billion of private development on the edge of Melbourne’s CBD.

Over a 10 year period (2004-2014) Rob represented the City of Melbourne on all precinct development planning, master planning and design review panels. A detailed research project in 2011 led to the publication of a Public Realm Plan for Melbourne Docklands 2012.

Rob led the State Projects team (2015-2022) that provided advice and guidance to the State Government in relation to a number of major transport projects, most significantly the $10 billion Melbourne Metro Rail Project that will deliver a new underground rail link through the city including five new Metro stations, due to be completed in 2025.

Rob was a member of the Office of the Victorian Government Architect (OGVA) Design Quality Review Panel and advised on Victorian Major

Projects including redevelopment of Melbourne Olympic Park and the Sport and Recreation Precinct.

The presentation and promotion of good urban design is a key element in city making. Rob has presented papers at various local and international conferences and lectured in Urban Design at the University of Melbourne’s School of Design and at RMIT.

Rob has presented the City of Melbourne’s Urban Design program to Tokyo University, the City of Tianjin, China, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) UK, and the International Urban Design Conference 2015 in Port Alegre, Brazil.

Key published strategic documents include Places for People 2004, a critical review of the city’s urban design achievements prepared utilising Jan Gehl’s internationally recognised methodology. A follow up Places for People study was published in 2015. Ref: Places for People: Establishing a platform of evidence to shape Melbourne’s future – 2015 study (mvgaprod-files.s3.ap-southeast-4.amazonaws. com)

Like many world cities, by the 1980s Central Melbourne had taken itself to the very edge of anonymity as a functioning centralised metropolis. Private interests, poor planning strategies, the pull of suburbia, the dominance of the motor vehicle and the migration from the central area of key central city activities, such as retailing, had resulted in a city close to demonstrating the “doughnut syndrome” – a city without a strong central core. Forty years later, the semi-deserted central city of the 1980s has all but disappeared.

How has this come about? While one can point to the expected list of major projects such as Federation Square, Melbourne Museum, Crown Casino and the Melbourne Exhibition & Convention Centre, these alone could not account for the dramatic change in the city since the 1980s.

The change has been more subtle: the city is greener, more people live downtown, the footpaths are wider, paved with stone and featuring sidewalk cafes and public art. The central city since Postcode 3000 has become more vibrant. Residential accommodation, almost nonexistent in the 1980s, rose from 740 units to 10,000 by 2002. By 2022 the CBD population had reached over 65,000 residents and continues to grow. Bars, cafes and restaurants increased from 580 in 1988 to over 2000 in 2012. The daily influx of workers and visitors is more than 900,000 people.

It would be easy to imagine that these subtle improvements are part of the natural development of a city, and in fact one commentator in The Age newspaper noted of Swanston Street, “For years nobody knew what to do with drab old Swanston Street. Then, when no one was looking, it fixed itself”. However, this result and the public perception that things fix themselves lie at the very heart of the urban design strategy pursued by the City of Melbourne over the last 40 years.

It is the story of a local government as “urban choreographer”, mending the fabric of the city and delivering on the community’s expectations. This is the product of a design vision for the city, led by the City Design studio with both the Urban Design team and State Projects team playing a critical role within the studio. This is the legacy that Rob Moore leaves in his significant contribution to local government in Victoria.

People Response from Rob Moore

I am delighted and honoured to receive the Paul Jerome Award. I met Paul on a few occasions in the early 2000s in my role of Manager, Urban Design at the City of Melbourne. Having emigrated to Australia in 1999 I was on a steep learning curve as I grappled with the complexities of Victorian planning. I benefitted enormously from attending VPELA events and conferences. I was fortunate to work for City of Melbourne for 23 years prior to my retirement in 2022. I was given wonderful opportunities to contribute to public service during those years. Reflecting on this, it is now very clear to me that I was able to do this mostly through the generosity of other professionals that I interacted with and who, in many cases, became my mentors.

Through sharing knowledge we learn from our successes and our failures. I was fortunate to work for a City that is prepared to take risks, trial and test new strategies and plans for the future. My engagement with a broad range of professionals in both Local and State Government, the private sector and through professional bodies and academic institutions was vitally important to enable me to thrive.

I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the contributions of the highly skilled and dedicated teams that worked with me over many years. I believe one of the keys to success in promoting and delivering good urbanism is to know your own limitations as a leader

and build multi-disciplinary teams that work effectively together to manage the complexities that come with city shaping projects and programs.

My role as a senior public servant in Local Government working for and with our community in Melbourne was an honour and a privilege. I sincerely thank VPELA for this Paul Jerome Award.

Paul Jerome 26 February 1949 — 3 November 2004

A long time member and active supporter, Paul was elected to the VPELA Committee at the end of 2002 and served until his death in 2004

"The Structure Plan is a sound piece of strategic work underpinned by an appropriate level of technical assessment and analysis."

"Council is commended for the significant level of work undertaken to prepare a considered and comprehensive piece of strategic work that will support significant change for the Frankston MAC."

— Panel Report for Amendment C160 Frankston

Activity Centres

Tract’s expert Urban Design and Planning teams are leading the way in shaping Victoria's Activity Centres.

Over the last 10 years, we have delivered:

18 17 11

Our recent collaboration with Frankston City Council to develop the Frankston Metropolitan Activity Structure Plan and Activity Centre Zone paves the way for the revitalisation of this key centre.

People PlanningxChange

podcast series turns 10

Jess Noonan – People think that because you’re a podcaster, that you are an extreme extrovert. That couldn’t be further from the truth. PX has challenged me in so many ways, showing vulnerability, putting myself out there, inviting criticism, sparking debate and taking sides on an issue. But it has also provided me with some of the most amazing opportunities.

When Pete and I first started the podcast, safe to say we hadn’t a clue what we were doing but we fumbled our way through the days of a single microphone (shared between three), set questions that we did not dare to deviate from and interviewing those only from within our inner circle.

After 10 years and 124 interviews, you would think that we have a lot of this down pat, but the truth is that we are constantly learning. There is the sourcing of guests, the drafting of questions/themes, the communication with guests/publicists, the recording, the sourcing of sponsorship, the social media strategy, drafting social media posts, creating videos for social media to increase engagement, new logos, equipment maintenance. While I’m sure from the outside it looks like a well-oiled machine, the truth is that there is a lot that happens haphazardly behind the scenes.

We have had to work at making this podcast a success but also need to acknowledge that it’s our side hustle and we do a lot of the work ourselves. We have been so fortunate to have good people around us, incredible sponsors and an industry who always provides us with support and encouragement.

We are in a time of extreme change in our industry and it would be injudicious for us not to play a role in asking the tough questions and holding ourselves as planners to account for some of the issues we are now dealing with. We want to ensure that the industry does not become an echo-chamber of the same ideas, regurgitated time and time again. We also don’t need to reinvent the wheel, we can learn so much from other jurisdictions, other countries.

The best part of PX is the opportunity to hear so many different points of view and being able to soak up the opinions of some of the greatest minds in the built environment industry.

Jess Noonan, Senior Principal, Tract

Peter Jewell, Jewell Partnership

Peter Jewell – Jess has been a terrific fellow producer, underestimate her at your peril. She always brings her best to the game. PlanningxChange has become a beast. It is one of Australia’s longest running independent city podcasts with 124 episodes. We consistently rank well internationally for top urban planning podcasts. How naïve we were at the start (and remain!), the true amateur spirit. We muddle along, nothing too complicated, make mistakes, pivot, learn (copy) from others, carry on, publish.

Originally our interviews were with Melbourne based subjects, now most come from interstate or overseas. It is a thrill to interview someone I’ve heard in the mainstream media, or a writer I’ve read, or creator in whatever form. Likewise, from a largely unknown voice who has thoughtful insights. And what a broad array of topics we have covered, all on our website www.planningxchange.org.

Jess does indulge me. For example, I love magic, so we interviewed the creator/producer of the Melbourne magic festival who puts on an annual week of magic with no government support (it is not considered ‘art’). Wonderful perspectives on festival location selection and the myriad of things that go into making it work year after year. Another is I’m crazy about Japan (and I think Jess must get sick of me talking about the country). In Tokyo I met with senior academics from Tokyo University. This resulted in a wonderful interview where many topics were discussed, including the rapid depopulation of Japanese rural areas. Great stuff, we just go wherever our interests or curiosities take us. What a pleasure it is after all the prep to click ‘publish’.

One of our initial goals was to avoid the conventional planning narrative. Jess and I do have quite different perspectives on many issues which we navigate with good humour. A lesson I’ve learnt is to not let my views become too obvious. The listener wants to hear our guests talk, not us.

One doesn’t want to waste the subject’s time or opportunity, so getting the right questions is key. This involves homework and diving into areas of speciality that are unknown to us. As Jess mentioned, we do go off on tangents and our subjects are good natured enough to help us out. Our closing segment, ‘culture corner’, or ‘podcast extra’ is a buzz where our guest is invited to make a personal recommendation about anything they have recently enjoyed. At the interview conclusion there is almost always a high degree of goodwill and a great shared experience. We hope our audience feels the same emotion.

PX has aimed to improve the ‘planning commons’. The place where ideas are advanced, experiences contemplated and new ways of doing better, or simply ‘creating no harm’, are raised. This is a more fragile and smaller place than when I started in the profession. In this highly regulated and increasingly dour, humourless world, PX I hope, brings joy and wonder. Mount up and ride. Long live freedom!

Congratulations to Jess Noonan (Senior Principal at Tract) and Peter Jewell (Jewell Partnership) on their Planning Xchange podcast. Achieving a 10 year anniversary is significant (in any realm) and even more significant in the media space when the views expressed by the ‘broadcaster’ and their guests don’t always align with the views of listeners. – Eds

VPELA Small Business Collective

In mid-2023, VPELA launched a new initiative called the Small Business Collective (SBC). This was done in response to our member survey conducted in late 2022, whereby members supported more VPELA initiatives for professional development and networking. Increasing a sense of inclusion for newer members and members of small firms is also part of the Strategic Plan 2023-2028, adopted by the VPELA Board in late 2022. Small business Board members Adam Terrill (Cogency) and Ellen Tarasenko (Polis Legal) put their hands up to take this new initiative further.

A growing number of VPELA members would fall into the ‘small business’ category. While we do not have any strict definition on this, the SBC is seen as a way for sole practitioners and small business operators to connect and form a network amongst themselves, to support each other from very simple things like coordinating meet ups at future VPELA events to being able to ‘phone a friend’ to pick their brains over a tricky question.

The SBC now has over 30 members. We hold a lunch every quarter which is attended by a lot of enthusiasm in the room. The topics covered at our catch ups and over email are as diverse as the group, ranging from industry news, IT for small business, business development,

Ellen Tarasenko, Principal, Polis Legal

Adam Terrill, Co-Founder and Director, Cogency

invoicing, and professional contacts. SBC members find this a very valuable initiative that offers both personal and professional benefits.

Our catch ups are intended to be informal, no fees (pay your own way for food and drink) and a nice way to have a team bonding session. If you are interested in joining the SBC, please register your interest to come along! Contact ellen@polislegal.com.au .

Ellen Tarasenko is a Principal at Polis Legal and Adam Terrill is the Co-Founder and Director at Cogency

The VPELA Small Business Collective (SBC) meets quarterly and aims to bring small business members together to broaden their networks within the VPELA community and stay connected throughout the year and at VPELA events. If you would like to be part of this group and receive an invitation to the next informal catch please email Ellen Tarasenko ellen@polislegal.com.au who will add you to the mailing list.

SOUND THINKING

Noise guidance for the early stages of the planning process

Marshall Day Acoustics is pleased to offer donation-based noise guidance for developers and town planners at the early stages of the planning process.

Acoustic guidance at the preliminary stage of the planning process can save time and money, and lead to better design outcomes.

Liz Hui, a Senior Associate with extensive experience in the planning industry is the main point of contact for this initiative.

marshallday.com

People

VPELA’s Young Professional Award 2023

At the end of 2023, I was lucky enough to travel to Aotearoa in New Zealand, thanks to VPELA’s Young Professional Award. I spent 3 weeks learning about its planning system and visiting beautiful places and meeting with professionals and communities who have designed and cared for them. I also attended the State of Australasian Cities (SOAC) Conference in Wellington (Pōneke).

I want to begin this article by acknowledging that in Australia we all live, work, and play on unceded Indigenous lands. I pay my respects to Elders past and present and thank communities for continuing to care for Country. I live on Eastern Maar Country along the coast and I pay my respects to their Elders and ancestors. I also extend my respect and thanks to the mana whenua of Aotearoa; those who I visited, learnt from, and shared stories of place with me. I especially want to thank Carolyn Hill, Muna Wharawhara, Ed Wensing, Hirini Matunga, and the team from Boffa Miskell.

I went to Aotearoa seeking to understand the following four questions:

1. How does urban planning and design respond to Treaty?

2. What does co-stewardship of place look like in Aotearoa?

3. What could a contemporary, post-colonial city look and feel like?

4. What lessons can be learnt for Victoria?

In recognising that any de-colonial planning system must be inherently connected to Country and the Indigenous community of that Country, I contemplated these questions through a discussion of different places.

Settler-colonialism, and why we can learn from Aotearoa

It’s important to first explain why I chose to visit Aotearoa, and why in Victoria we can learn from their planning system.

A few months ago, in April, the Premier of Victoria went on the official Victorian public record at the Yoorrook Justice Commission saying that “sovereignty was never ceded and that the impact of dispossession and colonisation on Aboriginal peoples is still felt today.

Australia is a settler-colonial state, as is New Zealand. There are a few settler-colonial countries around the world: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. All these countries were settled by the British, and whilst the lands and on-the-ground impacts were different, the structuring of the colonisation was similar, as were the societies formed.

Settler colonialism is a theory to explain these events and structures, put forward by Patrick Wolfe. Settler colonialism is a colonisation where the settlers never leave, because this type of colonisation was about occupying new land and seeking to benefit and profit from that land. This foundation of taking over land becomes the structure of the new society, in Wolfe’s famous words “settler colonialism is a structure, not an event” (2006). “Understanding settler colonialism as a structure exposes the fact that colonialism cannot be relegated to the past” (Kēhaulani Kauanui, 2016).

Colonisation in Australia and Aotearoa is ongoing, and we need to reconcile with how we can move forward. This is especially crucial

for planners and urban designers, indeed all people who shape and influence place, as occupation of land is central to colonial structures. In Aotearoa, the sovereignty and importance of Māori culture and knowledge has been recognised in the planning system in a way that is much more in-depth than here in Victoria. In Māori, they talk of mana whenua, mana meaning authority, and whenua meaning land, in a way that we would say Traditional Owners/Custodians.

How does urban planning and design respond to Treaty?

The Te Ara Pū Hā (The Greenway) in Christchurch is a pedestrianfriendly green link that runs along the southern edge of the CBD in a city that is still recovering from the earthquakes. Walking along the Greenway, you are surrounded by natural elements, right in the centre of the city. Elements of stone are combined with plantings throughout the walkway, with information boards to explain the design rationale, the traditional uses of the plants, and the cultural significance of the stone elements.

The plants that were selected here are those that heal, that cleanse, that nourish traditionally for Māori communities. How appropriate it is to plant and replant a city with elements of that place, to heal that place. It is evident within the design of the Greenway that reference has been drawn from Māori design, planning, understanding, and knowledge.

Rechelle Brookes, Graduate, BA & MUP

In recognising the land as Māori land, the designers could work with Māori knowledge and values, and the resulting Te Ara Pū Hā is an interesting, inviting, pedestrian-friendly space. Understanding this through the lens of settler colonialism, what we see is a recognition of ongoing Māori connection to land, of a re-Indigenising of the urban, of a recognition of Māori knowledges, food, culture, design elements through urban planning and design.

What does co-stewardship of place look like in Aotearoa?

This mural, titled Waimapihi by artist Izzy Joy is located down a small street in the city of Pōneke, Wellington. Stu Farrant led a tour that visited this artwork as part of the SOAC Conference. This artwork adorns a building that sits on top of an underground river. The river is now covered by the concrete roads and paths of the city. This artwork is one of two examples within the whole centre of Pōneke that makes evident that a culturally important natural feature is below your feet.

The artworks celebrate the river, making the statement that it still flows and that the connection to cultural stories remains strong. The stream name Waimapihi comes from Māpihi, the name of a highranking member of the local iwi who would bathe in this stream. You can see the houses, the whare in this mural, reminding us that before this city, Māori villages were here. Moreover, Māori connection to place is still here.

The mural re-establishes, reignites, and re-educates Māori understandings of the place, and in doing so is a claim to continued sovereignty. Such a public work invites us newer visitors to engage in this cultural understanding, to step into a place of co-stewardship where important natural features and cultural sites are cared for, even when they lie hidden far underground.

What could a contemporary, post-colonial city look and feel like?

The building in this image is the Te Wharewaka o Pōneke, a modern event space that through its design and name tells the layering of stories that exist within this small inlet. Whare is house, and waka is canoe, so Wharewaka translates literally to a boat house. Traditionally

for Māori, before the city of Wellington, this was a spot where iwi would pull their boats ashore. The tracks leading from the water represent this place of a boat landing. The design of the building opens out to the water, encouraging connection with the surrounding environment, continuing a close relationship to the bay. Next door to this modern building is a historic, Western-style boathouse. These two buildings, sitting side by side, tell the layering of the history of Pōneke, and in doing so represent a cohesive future. The final layer to my experience of this place is the two all-female teams of Chinese dragon boat racing, indicating more recent waves of immigrant and cultural integration.

So, in this one place within a modern contemporary city, you can see the old, of the canoes being pulled ashore by Māori before Europeans arrived, which sits next to the European historic boathouse, which is next to a modern event space that incorporates public open space, all connected to the water and all placed in connection to each other.

What lessons can be learnt for Victoria?

These places are creative ways that demonstrate how urban planning and design can have respect for traditional Indigenous cultures. They are examples of city spaces that invite everyone to connect with the layering of stories that exist in settler-colonial cities. Whilst these examples show what can be done in Victoria, for me the biggest lesson was the role of planning and design processes and governance. Many of the professionals I met shared how the process of coming to these physical outcomes, as in the negotiations and the relationships behind them, are crucial tools in support of self-determination and recognising sovereignty. So, as we embark on Treaty in Victoria, I encourage us all to see it as an ever-evolving process, not just a final state that we arrive at.

I want to conclude by thanking Beverage Williams and VPELA for this opportunity to learn and, in turn, share what I have learnt from my scholarship experience.

Rechelle Brookes graduated with a Bachelor of Arts and Master of Urban Planning, she is now working in landscape management and governance

Would you like to advertise your business in the VPELA Newsletter?

Do you have a job you need to fill?

If you are interested in placing an advertisement in the VPELA newsletter or advertising a position on our website employment section, please contact the VPELA office admin@vpela.org.au or 9813 2801 A full schedule of advertising costs is available on our website www.vpela.org.au

People DCE Nexus Ball “When I Grow UP”

On Friday 18 October 2024, the young professionals of VPELA, PIA and UDIA came together for the annual Nexus Ball. The Ball is always a prime opportunity for junior professionals across the different industry groups to meet and enjoy a night of good music, great food, and new people. The event was held at the ever-popular Emerson for the second year running.

The theme for this year’s event – ‘When I Grow Up’ – was a helpful conversation starter across the board. The costumes sparked intrigue and hilarious nostalgia. We clearly didn’t all start out wanting to be engineers, planners or lawyers! Taking away the best costume prizes for the evening were Tamika Chikulin from Russell Kennedy (Audrey Hepburn, Breakfast at Tiffany’s) and Raji Samarasekara from Whiteman Property & Associates (Tom Cruise in Top Gun).

I was able to catch up with Tamika and Raji briefly during the event to ask them about their childhood dreams. They had this to say:

Tamika: Who wouldn’t want to be Audrey Hepburn? I was obsessed with her. Particularly her elegance and grace.

Raji: I loved Top Cruise’s character (Pete Mitchell) in Top Gun. He’s strong, confident, and not afraid of any obstacles.

In keeping with the event’s theme, part of the proceeds from ticket sales will go towards supporting The Mirabel Foundation. The foundation supports children whose families are impacted by drug use, and strives to help affected children rediscover laughter and fun through a range of different initiatives. You can have a read about the incredible work the foundation achieves here

Dani Davidovits, Minter Ellison & YPG Committee

A huge thank you to the various sponsors for the event, particularly our major sponsor Dalton Consulting Engineers – another success in 2024.

Conference

A new way forward

The Honourable Sonya Kilkenny, is the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Suburbs. She is considered one of the most influential people in Victoria, holding the prominent position of Planning Minister at a time of a national housing crisis. She is tasked with delivering the Allen government’s housing statement aimed at building 800,000 homes. This is an edited transcript of her presentation at our recent conference, Embrace the Chaos, held at Lorne on 30 August. It is wonderful to be here today. Can I start by acknowledging and paying my respects to the eastern Maya and Wadaurung peoples? As the traditional owners of the lands where we are meeting today, we pay our respects to elders, past and present. And of course, I extend that respect to all aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people here today. I recognise unbroken connection to country, celebrate their culture and history, and honor their rights as custodians for these lands.

What a wonderful opportunity to come together, to share ideas, experiences and to help chart a new way forward. I love the theme of this conference. I love the concept chaos. I have to say, sometimes I feel like that’s a bit of my life. And the veneer is this, you know, everything is in control and you dig a bit below and you see the chaos, but it presents so many opportunities. I’m going to start, I think,

swimming against the tide of today’s theme just a little bit. I don’t see a lot of chaos. I actually see a system that is pretty tired. A system that was perhaps designed for a really different time.

A system that supports the status quo, perhaps no longer balanced or fair. A system that may be exacerbating inequality, often at the expense of younger generations seeking affordable housing. I don’t see it as a system of hope, and perhaps it’s more a system that is too focused on restriction and regulation. And I think perhaps it’s even arguable that we are where we are today not because of chaos, but perhaps because of a lack of it. So we know that finding a home now is harder and harder than ever before. I know that rising house prices and rents are creating incredible insecurity and tension for so many people across Victoria. Average rent in Melbourne is now between 500 and $600 a week. Average mortgage repayments between $4000 and $5,000 a month.

We’re seeing growing infrastructure gaps in our outer fringe suburbs, and I see it all leading in one direction, and that is increased inequality. Of course, this hasn’t happened overnight. It has been decades in the making. And it’s not all because of planning. But I think certainly our planning system has had a role in this. So I see our planning system can and should be a catalyst for change. By leveraging the planning system

The Hon. Sonya Kilkenny, Minister for Planning

to prioritise affordability, accessibility, sustainability, our cities and our state can become more equitable. From housing, to jobs, to economic development, to environmental justice and climate resilience. This requires a very deliberate shift away from policies that operate to lock out people, from communities, towards policies that promote housing diversity and choice, economic opportunity, equity of access and social justice. From where I stand, and with the knowledge and information that I have, I see so many opportunities before us. I see planning as a story and an enabler of hope. So today I’d really like to talk to you about those opportunities before us. How we are already doing things differently and imagining a system where planning leverages disruption and enables a better future for a generation of Victorians to come.

I certainly hear from people about how the demands of the planning system are slowing projects down. I see that the true cost of a sluggish system is that when it finally comes to building, great design and great landscape outcomes are value managed out of projects to recuperate dollars lost to holding costs. So from this, I take away that our system, which is supposed to add value to people’s lives and make sure the community has a safety net for good outcomes, is actually doing the opposite.

I’ve been given the direction to prepare a new plan for Victoria, to do a full scale review of the Planning and Environment Act. This is significant because we’ve been given the really important, real opportunity to ask, is our system serving us? Is it achieving the outcomes we want? Last year, as you know, the Allen Labour government announced our housing statement, the decade ahead, 2024 to 2034. Really looking at the short term and some immediate term levers across government to enable 800,000 homes to be built over the next ten years. We looked at opportunities to streamline planning permit application processes for more homes, including expanding our development facilitation program. We’re proud of the fact that the DFP includes a minimum 10% affordable housing contribution. It also involves the Office of the Victorian Government Architect right from the start in the the pre application phase, meaning our expectations on good decisions made faster with excellent design outcomes are right at the heart of that process. As you know, small second dwellings can now be built without a planning permit.

We expanded our future homes program and we’re going to have more to say on this program to really support and encourage three to six story homes, good designed homes for infill projects right across the state. Last week. Last Thursday, we released draft planning controls for ten activity centres across metro Melbourne, including consideration of the walkable catchments, to help us deliver 60,000

new homes close to jobs, close to public transport or close to services in the kinds of locations we know Victorians want to live.

The housing statement also announced some longer term initiatives. We’re developing a new plan for Victoria and reviewing our Planning and Environment Act to make sure we have a vision, a clear spatial plan and a system that will serve us well into the future. Since our community consultation on the new plan for Victoria commenced in February this year, we’ve had tens of thousands of victorians engage with the plan and share their priorities for Victoria out to 2051, and we’re about to move into the key phase of the project, preparing our plan. As part of this, we’ve been working really closely with local government on draft housing targets so that we have a really clear picture of where new homes will be built over the next ten years and then out to 2051.

But to achieve our housing targets, our suburbs do need to change and that should not be scary. We should embrace this. I see value in changing the language we use to talk about new development. This will help our communities have better conversations about the things we really need to protect, like access to affordable, comfortable, safe homes, sunlight and green spaces. In fact, I tell my office and my department, I don’t want to hear the word density. I don’t want to hear development, I don’t want to hear growth. I want to hear about homes, I want to hear about people, I want to hear about communities. I want us to talk to the people who are going to live there, who are helping us to shape that vision, the people we need to bring along on this journey.

Rather than protecting character, our planning system should facilitate and protect good design and liveability. That’s why I’m aligning the codification of Res code with my existing commitment to implement stage two of the ESD roadmap. This will see new and amended environmentally sustainable design standards introduced concurrently and includes new or modified standards for waste and recycling and air and noise impact standards.

Another aspect of that future I’m excited about is Victoria’s energy transition and the important work we’re doing in the face of climate change. I can’t understate how important the role of planning is in our transition to energy, and I work very, very closely with Lily D’Ambrosio, our minister.

Our coal fired generators are closing up and leaving. Building the new replacement renewable energy generation is an absolute essential. We need to make sure that we get more cheap, reliable renewable energy into the grid.. We’re decarbonising at the fastest rate in the country. We have the strongest climate change legislation, along with our ambitious and achievable target of 95% renewable energy by

Our Melbourne team has grown exponentially in recent years. Meet our newest team member and Director Laura Murray.

Laura is a specialist in urban growth and renewal, and is excited about shaping the URPS growth in Melbourne and nationally.

2035, which will create 59,000 jobs. And we are embedding climate change at the very top of the planning framework through updates to the Planning and Environment Act, which will see climate action become an objective of the Victorian planning system. Over 38% of our energy came from renewables last year, nearly four times what we inherited in 2014. But there is much more to do.

We need to keep bringing new renewable energy generation and storage projects online. Earlier this year, I announced that renewable energy projects will be included as significant economic development projects under the DFP, just like other priority sectors such as advanced manufacturing, hospital, mining, education and health. Not only do these changes ensure that projects can be built quicker, it also helps increase investor confidence in Victoria, so that we can keep attracting the investment we need. Since we announced this plan change, renewable companies from across the country are telling us what a difference it makes. Just this week, we approved the largest renewable energy battery in the nation, the 350 megawatt Joel Joel Battery Energy Storage Project. It went through the DFP process from start to finish in just nine weeks.

The building and planning reforms I’m working on are very much about painting that picture for all victorians about where we’re going and why, how there can be hope for the future. It’s almost a social contract spelling out step by step how we are committed to a bright future for Victorians today and for generations to come.

I want to leave you today understanding beyond a shadow of a doubt. I’m committed to a fairer, more inclusive, more sustainable and more affordable state. I’m motivated by the legacy of the state that we will

leave our future generations. I’m emboldened by the current attitudes that there is strong appetite for reform in both building and planning.

I believe the planning system is one of the most influential, powerful systems that we have. It plays such a leadership role. It’s about joining the dots right across government, but most importantly, telling the story, the why, and bringing victorians along the way with us. To each of you, I strongly believe that you do what you do because you genuinely care about making a difference. But is that enough? I challenge you all to ask whether the limitations of our system have been accepted for too long. So now it means questioning whether the decisions we make are fundamentally improving people’s lives and interrogating where and whether planning is adding value to the built environment .

It means rebuilding a system that prioritises these things. I want you to think about how significant this moment in time is and how far we could go. I need your help to get us there. I need to hear more of your stories about what’s worked and what isn’t working. I said, I hear every day from people about great projects they have where they’re struggling to get buy in. Well, I’m telling you today, my door is very much open. Talk to me. Step it out.

We can make this system better. We can make this system work to achieve really good outcomes, not slow them down. So thank you for the valuable work that you do each and every day to improve the lives of so many Victorians.

The Hon. Sonya Kilkenny Member for Carrum https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/members/sonya-kilkenny

Conference Embracing the Chaos – Beyond the Buzzwords

The 2024 VPELA State Conference was insightful, not only for the assortment of topics from generous industry experts, but for the opportunity to demystify the complicated issues that trouble our cities. With planning discourse comes jargon. Think “inclusion”, “sustainability” and “resilience”. On the topic of housing, we hear words like “supply”, “affordability” and “targets”, woven with terms like “catchments”, “NIMBYs”, and “vacancy rates”. Often these words become so abstract that their practical implications can be lost.

I left the conference feeling empowered to break down these buzzwords, reflect on their meanings, and consider the discussions they inspired, all regarding this year’s theme, “Embrace the Chaos”

Inclusion

Day 1 asked us to think about the role of design in the context of inclusion. Through the lens of Professor Nicole Kalms, we explored the concept of gender-sensitive design, which emphasises the integration of gender considerations into urban space. This topic is becoming increasingly critical as cities strive to be more equitable. Reflecting on the session, it is clear that gender-sensitive design is not just about improving safety but about fostering environments where all genders can thrive.

At its core, gender-sensitive design theory recognises that urban spaces are experienced differently based on gender and aims to address these disparities. Traditionally, design of our urban spaces has overlooked the needs of marginalised people, producing spaces which can feel unsafe or inaccessible.

This discussion highlighted how gender-sensitive design goes beyond purely inclusion; it involves actively thinking about the specific ways in which urban environments impact different genders and designing with these considerations in mind.

As a woman living, working, and socialising in inner-Melbourne, I feel particularly connected to this topic and the experiences of other women and gender-diverse people as they move through my city. I left this session with a great appreciation for the research of Professor Nicole Kalms, XYX Lab, and the urgency fuelling the conversation around safety.

Affordability

The conference zeroed-in on the ever-present housing crisis; as our city grows, the availability, quality, and affordability of our housing have become critical, prompting an urgent call for solutions from our policy makers.

The panel revealed a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the issues, beyond the blame-game we see in the media. Sessions delved into various strategies, from prefabricated and modular homes to affordable housing mandates. The discussions also acknowledged the limitations of current approaches and the need for a shift in public attitudes.

The various speakers broke down facts on low- and middle-income earners in Australia and the reality for people experiencing the affordability gap – I was grateful for the opportunity to engage in honest dialogue on mortgage stress and the cost-of-living crisis.

Resilience

Bridget Goodear, Planning Consultant, SMEC

Another major theme was resilience; particularly in the context of climate change and creating communities where green practices become the norm to consider local needs and conditions.

On the surface, resilience might seem synonymous with adaptability or flexibility. Yet, the discussions emphasised that resilience is about more than just bouncing back from challenges. It involves building systems that can anticipate and recover from various stresses while also allowing for growth and other economic and social pressures; the focus is on creating robust infrastructure and communities. These traditionally bleak and doom-laden conversations about climate change were treated with aspiration and imagination.

Community Engagement

Conversations revealed a shared commitment to engaging the community. It became clear that no urban development initiative can be successful without genuine, continuous involvement of the community. Effective engagement goes beyond token consultation drop-ins or surveys; it involves building trust, understanding local needs, and incorporating diverse voices into decision-making processes. Panellists highlighted the value of fostering a sense of ownership by involving the community in the design, using examples ranging from road projects to activity centre development. This discussion set the stage for the Minister for Planning, Hon Sonya Kilkenny’s presentation on the housing crisis in Victoria.

Over the days spent at the Conference, I felt the importance of translating buzzwords into actionable, meaningful strategies that genuinely improve urban living and address the issues facing cities today.

I thank VPELA and the conference delegates for channelling this year’s theme; the conference was a testament to collaboration, research, and optimism. Our industry is learning, creating, and empathising to brace for the ever-changing challenges ahead. Let’s ‘watch this space’.

Bridget Goodear is a Planning Consultant at SMEC

We are dedicated to achieving exceptional outcomes for our clients and the broader community.

Angela Ash | www.boldurban.com.au

Our conference at Lorne on 29 & 30 August, kicked off with a smoking ceremony and welcome by Ebony Hickey, representing the Eastern Maar people, one of the traditional owner groups for the region. Ebony told us that the smoking ceremony provided healing and cleansing for everyone present and is a wonderful symbol of bringing people together. That togetherness was evident throughout the conference, as delegates connected with one another and our wonderful speakers. There were so many highlights including presentations by Nick McKenzie award winning Age journalist, who really embodied the ‘Embrace the Chaos’ theme; the Minds at Work team Jason Clarke & Lisa Smith, Professor Nicole Kalms who educated us on gender and the built environment, Angus Clelland, CEO , Mental Health Australia, Minister Sonya Kilkenny and of course Anna Meares former Olympian. This starstudded lineup was supported by some truly amazing panel and focus sessions. The program really did have something for everyone! And if that wasn’t enough, there were some fabulous networking opportunities and of course our Olympic themed Gala Dinner.

The photos say it all. Congratulations to Anna Borthwick our conference convenor and the dedicated committee that put this outstanding event together.

Our costume winners:

Alia Salmet

Luke Denham

Marcus Koorn

VPELA would also like to thank our amazing sponsors!

Embracing the Chaos

Embracing the Chaos

Conference –

Embracing the Chaos

Conference Maptivating the VPELA Conference

For the recent VPELA conference in Lorne, Maptivate was delighted to be a sponsor and provide one of its signature interactive maps for conference delegates.

Maptivate is an innovative interactive mapping platform that can transform the way information, visual content and strategies can be shared with end users in a much more powerful way. It can strengthen advocacy by bringing stories and connections to life. It has been jointly developed by marketing and strategy consultancy, Circ Consulting and VPELA member Tract’s GIS affiliate, OneMap.

Maptivate has a sound foundation in science. We now know from our innate biology and neuroscience that information linked to place is better retained and more engaging. With many complex planning projects involving multiple partners, laying content out on the single plane of a map makes it much more visible and relevant.

content. In addition, the live data generated by the site can actively track how users are accessing the information, providing a real engagement tool.

Facilitating a ‘strong, entertaining and sociable’ platform is exactly what Maptivate does with content that can often be detailed, informationheavy and challenging to engage with. This also ties in with VPELA’s stated strategy to ‘Connect professionals across different sectors and disciplines in the planning and environment industry’.

If you would like to know more about how Maptivate can bring your story to life, please…

Chris Bulford, Managing Director of Maptivate Email: chris.bulford@circconsulting.com.au

Planning

Environmental Approvals

Environmental Infrastructure

Sustainability & Circular Economy

dartmouthconsulting.com.au

Chris Bulford, Managing Director, Maptivate

Conference

Three weeks, three conferences

It’s well and truly conference season! Over the past month, I’ve attended a variety of conferences across Victoria, each offering its own unique experience and insights. It’s been several years since I last made it to a VPELA annual conference, and I feel fortunate to have attended this one – it was exceptional.

Nick McKenzie’s open discussion about his investigations into Ben Roberts-Smith, the defamation case, and the recent CMFEU corruption revelations was truly captivating. The way he tied it all back to urban development and decision-making was nothing short of brilliant. It was also a pleasure to connect with many of you again.

For the past 15 years, I’ve primarily focused on regional planning, which naturally led me into the renewable energy sector. At NGH, I continue to work across a range of projects, including large-scale wind, solar, and battery energy storage systems (BESS). From Lorne, I headed to Traralgon, where we proudly sponsored the Gippsland New Energy Conference. This community-driven event is embracing the clean energy transition for the region. Now in its third year, it brought together 800 delegates from a variety of sectors. The diversity of speakers, panels, and networking opportunities made it a conference well worth attending.

The final event was the Clean Energy Council’s Australian Wind Industry Summit, which had a more serious tone – and rightfully so. Despite the collective commitment in the room, we’re simply not advancing renewable energy projects fast enough in terms of approvals or implementation to meet our targets. I emphasised this in my presentation, “Gone with the Wind – an Epic Story of Planning Reform in Victoria.” A sobering statistic: since 2020, only four wind energy facilities have received planning approval in Victoria. Clearly, there’s still a lot of work ahead.

Environmental and planning professionals will play a critical role in driving the energy transition forward. As we tackle the challenges of scaling up renewable energy projects, it’s our responsibility to ensure that both the environment and local communities are well-considered, not only during the transition but also in the long-term outcomes. By working collaboratively, we can help shape solutions that meet energy targets while preserving the integrity of the environment, landscapes and communities we serve. There’s a lot to do, but with the expertise and dedication of our industry, I’m confident we can get there.

Fiona Cotter is a Principal Planner at NGH Consulting

Fiona Cotter, Principal Planner, NGH Consulting

Conference Mental Health Australia

Mental Health First Aid Australia is an organisation whose aim is to educate people about mental health issues. Angus Clelland is recognised as a highly trusted mental health leader and advocate. He has extensive experience in mental health and disability sectors and has held numerous government and advisory roles. This is an edited transcript of Angus Clelland’s conference presentation.

I’m delighted to be here today, a big thank you to the association for inviting me down here. I’ll start, of course, by acknowledging the real lived experience that is in this room today. I’d like you to look to your left and look to your right and count two people either side. So, you’re in the middle of a group of five, right? That’s important because we know that one in five people, and I can guarantee that one in five people in this room are currently struggling with a mental health issue or concern. I can guarantee you too, that if it’s not you, it’s a friend or a colleague that is facing difficulty at the moment.

Now the intention of this morning is not to talk really about crises or to focus on the negative, as there is an awful lot of good that is happening within the health and related sectors in terms of reform and investment. And I think the growing awareness of we as individuals, as professionals, as organisations, can do a hell of a lot to make a difference within the workplace, within schools, within families and communities. Given the nature of the work that you do, you’ve got an absolutely important role to play as well. If you take nothing else away from today, the message really should be that this is not a health issue, it’s a cross sector issue, a whole of community issue, a whole of profession issue that we need to deal with.

First of all, what on earth is mental health first aid? Twenty five years ago, a husband and wife team were walking the dog late one night and they were talking about rising concerns about mental health. The couple had a long conversation and Betty, the nurse, and Tony, the psychology professor, came up with a concept, or an idea, that we should be approaching mental health in the same way that we approach physical health or physical first aid. They came up with this simple but brilliant concept and the program was born here in Australia. It was around the same time that Beyond Blue was starting and there was a wave of

Angus Clelland, CEO, Mental Health First Aid Australia

early awareness starting to come into dialogue. But there was really nothing for communities and for individuals in terms of their education and certainly within the professions. There was next to nothing, even in the medical profession and nursing and allied health and very, very little around the issue of mental health. So Tony and Betty’s idea was really quite revolutionary at the time. It created an organisation, a health promotion charity, Mental Health First Aid International. And of course, the idea was so good it was picked up by colleagues overseas and it spread to the US, to Canada, to the UK, Europe and elsewhere, to the point that today we’ve got a network of more than 30 countries internationally that use the program noting that it is heavily tailored to local conditions to be culturally appropriate in different language. It’s all aimed at providing individuals with enough knowledge to understand what mental ill health is and to understand the signs that might be there in terms of someone who might be struggling and to give people the skills and know-how and confidence to be able to approach someone, have a conversation and importantly, encourage them to seek professional help.

It acts as a bit of a bridge in terms of help seeking. We as an organisation have trained about 1.4 million people here in Australia. It might be they are someone within a community group or within a workplace who delivers the training onsite and we provide support to them. The idea for us is to intervene early. I’ve spent way too long working within the mental health and disability sectors, focusing on the crisis side of things, running services like Lifeline, Men’s line, 1800 Respect and other state and federally funded services. We tend to focus within the service system on the sharp end. That’s sort of a side of the response when people have really got into a great level of difficulty and they need emergency support.

A coalition of organisations, including police, ‘ambos’, teachers, employers, unions, mental health organisations and hospitals, advocated for reform of the mental health system. And we’re really, really fortunate that the message was heard loud and clear back in 2018. We got a royal commission as a result, and not just a royal commission, but a commitment to implement all of its findings. And with that has come

billions of dollars of commitments going into the service system here in Victoria so that by the end of the decade, Victoria will be arguably the best resourced and best equipped system in the country – which is terrific. But we can’t continue to build inpatient units, we can’t continue to go on and on with the crisis side of the response. We have to respond to the demand for those services. We need to be able to get in early before people get into crisis, and that’s the key. Here, the principle is making sure that individuals get the help that they need early, very early, and that means that they don’t need to front up to an emergency department hospital or a crisis clinic.

Our intention is to do ourselves out of a job. We want to have the principles behind Mental Health First Aid incorporated into curriculum in schools, universities and TAFE, so that it becomes stock standard as part of what we teach young people. At the moment, we’re rolling the program out as a mandatory requirement for all medical, nursing and allied health students under an agreement with the Commonwealth, which is an awesome start. But the intent is to go much further and to make sure that Mental Health First Aid and the principles behind it, become stock standard.

I mentioned before, the one in five concept. We all know someone who’s struggling with, or has struggled with, mental ill health. We know that these figures have been fairly constant in Australia, but that’s changing and the figures are rising, particularly in the younger cohort. We’ve seen some fairly alarming trends in terms of the prevalence of mental ill health amongst the youth aged under 25. And that would include quite a number of people in this room. Way back in 2007, we were looking at around about 26% of young people having a diagnosable condition. The most recent survey that was conducted by the ABS in 2022 indicated a 50% increase – so from 26% to 39%. That’s a huge increase with a huge impact. And these are the folks that are

going to be coming into your professions. We need to be aware of that and to do everything that we possibly can to address it.

The idea for us is to make sure that we can get in nice and early so that we can provide the support that people need. It’s the right thing to do. Of course it is. And that’s the sort of argument that is often used within advocacy circles. There is also a very large economic argument as well. And sometimes that upsets people. In fact, I upset a certain Greens senator by raising the issue of the cost of inaction. And the response was, “But it’s the right thing to do. Don’t talk about the money”.

Mental ill health has a huge impact on our economy. The Productivity Commission undertook a brilliant inquiry in 2020 around the economics of mental health. Its calculations were that it costs the Australian economy around about $220 billion per annum in expense. That’s lost productivity. That’s the cost of the service system, the cost of disability and premature death. These are extraordinary figures. It’s 10% or more of gross domestic product.

The reality is that we can look at mental health and the response to it as an investment rather than an expense. The reality is that the treasurers and the treasury boffins are the ones that make many of the decisions around what to prioritise, and they need to be convinced that there is a return on investment (ROI). I know we’re talking about health and mental health, but there is a return there. If we were to save just 10% of that $220 billion per annum, we could easily pay for the blowout in the NDIS. If we set a low target of 10%, we’ll have a very large economic payoff. There are really high ROI figures associated with this form of investment. If we think about engagement with youth and getting in nice and early over a lifetime, there’s a really, really big payoff associated with that.

Fostering Change

We support growth through projects that shape

We need to do things differently in the workplace. Money spent on mental health is not a cost in the workplace, it’s an investment. A basic return on investment analysis conducted by Safe Work, New South Wales gave it an ROI of 4, not including productivity or the costs of retention and recruitment and all of those other things. So it makes a lot of sense from a financial perspective. And for those of you that think in terms of the dollars and cents, it is really important. It, of course, has much broader benefits. But let’s start using the economic argument as well as the social inequity one.

So what are some risk factors associated with mental ill health? There is a host of factors that come in play. Obviously, there are family and trauma related events. Social isolation and loneliness are also big factors and increasingly so within our society. Substance use, stress, bullying, poor workplace design are other factors and many of these can be dealt with within the workplace. For those of you running organisations, you’ve got an opportunity to make a really big difference. Your work in the planning and environment fields can influence and deliver well-planned environments including access to green space. Your work has mental health, welfare and wellbeing elements to it, and you should be thinking about that as part of the work that you do and be proud about it as well. There is so much that you as individuals can do within your organisations, within your families and your community groups.

Education is really important and, of course, we’re part of that push – domestically and globally. I’d encourage you all to have a bit of a think about this as you leave the conference and reflect on its content. We’ll be running lots of events in the coming year, particularly around

the 25th anniversary of the organisation, so look out for us, and get involved. And remember, the response to mental ill health within society has health and equity and justice and many other aspects to it. There’s a social and moral imperative but there’s also an economic imperative too. We need to take that message straight to the RBA and others that this is a really good opportunity for us. If you want to have policy intervention that is anti-inflationary, that has a big payoff – investment in good mental health and well being this is a really good one!

For more information about Mental First Aid Australia you can visit its website here

Angus Clelland, CEO, Mental Health First Aid Australia

“We are working towards a world where we all have the skills, knowledge and confidence to help someone experiencing a mental health problem”

https://www.mhfa.com.au/

ongratulations to UPco Director, Amanda Ring, s just celebrated thirty years with the business. y respected planner and industry figure, Amanda great wisdom, experience and perspective to her a leader and mentor – and over the past three s, she has been involved in more successful s than we can count

a continues to have an undeniable influence on our our clients and our approach to planning. Thank you for your service, Amanda – we can’t imagine UPco without you.

Conference

Annual Conference reflections

As a statutory planner in local government, it’s easy to lose sight of the bigger picture. It’s often lost in a sea of applications, objectors to appease, and VCAT review to attend. Statutory planning can feel like a whirlwind that is confined within the borders of the municipality. The broader goals of planning often get lost amid the chaos of emails, site visits, and meetings.

Things have certainly been chaotic at Maribyrnong City Council. After our temporary office was vacated due to a “mysterious” fire at the gym next door, we’re eagerly awaiting the move to the new Footscray Civic Precinct. In this environment of constant flux, the theme of “Embrace the Chaos” at this year’s VPELA Conference resonated with me deeply. I was a fortunate recipient of a scholarship to attend the event, offering a much-needed break from involuntary working from home and a chance to gain new perspectives on the industry.

The conference was packed with valuable insights. One of the most engaging moments was listening to investigative journalist Nick McKenzie, whose exposé on corruption within the construction industry was both eye-opening and a stark reminder of the ethical challenges we face as planners. Our role isn’t just about processing applications – it’s about ensuring transparency and fairness in the development of our cities. McKenzie’s talk brought home the importance of maintaining integrity and accountability, even when faced with chaos.

Another highlight was the closing speech by Olympic cyclist Anna Meares. Her story of winning a gold medal after fracturing her neck was deeply inspiring. Meares’ resilience in the face of such overwhelming odds served as a reminder that chaos can be a catalyst for personal and professional growth. If she could overcome such challenges, what excuse do we have when faced with obstacles in our work?

For me, the housing panel hosted by Alex Dyson was a standout. The concurrent housing and cost-of-living crises are among the most pressing issues facing the planning industry today. While some of the suggestions -like squatting – were kind of ‘out-there’, they emphasised the need for creative thinking as a means of tackling these challenges. Sometimes, a bit of chaos is exactly what’s needed to spark new ideas.

During the Minister for Planning’s panel, I asked a somewhat provocative question about poor quality townhouse developments, and what can be done to improve outcomes for future residents and the broader community. This has been answered in part by the recently distributed draft changes to ResCode. While these changes will undoubtedly create chaos for the average Joe Blow ‘drafties’ submitting multi-dwelling applications (and wreak havoc on my Clause 55 assessment template), they represent an exciting step forward. Just don’t get me started on codification of neighbourhood character. Ultimately, the best aspect of the conference was that it reminded me why I got into planning in the first place. The day-to-day realities of statutory planning are far removed from what we learned at university. I thought I’d spend a lot more time talking about issues like gentrification. Instead, my work often revolves around assessing applications and being a quasi-architect, arborist, engineer, building surveyor etc. Events like the VPELA Conference offer a chance to reconnect with the larger issues and remember that every decision we make—no matter how small – helps shape the future of our cities.

This is why I’d encourage all local government planners to attend the conference at least once. Being exposed to the diversity of experience and insights from speakers and other delegates was invaluable. It’s easy to get tunnel vision when working within the confines of local government, but hearing about the challenges and innovations happening across the industry provided fresh perspectives. The conference wasn’t just a networking event; it was a space to share ideas, foster innovation, and build connections that can help us become more effective planners.

What I appreciated most was the reminder that chaos is a natural part of the planning process. Our work involves balancing competing interests, navigating complex regulations, and responding to unforeseen challenges. Rather than trying to eliminate chaos, we need to learn to work with it – to embrace it, as chaos can foster creativity. This is why attending the conference was such a valuable opportunity. It provided a chance to step back from the everyday chaos of statutory planning, reflect, and engage with the broader scope of our field. Much like the waves at Lorne, things can be rough at times, but there’s always a calm both before and after the storm.

Big-picture ambitions often get lost amid the grind of assessing development plans, scrutinising reports and measuring setbacks. It can be hard to feel like you are making a difference when you’re looking at plans created in Microsoft Paint (I’m not joking). At the end of the day, planning is about making positive change – whether that’s addressing affordable housing, improving sustainability outcomes or even going to VCAT about the definition of ‘lawn’ on an endorsed landscape plan (again, not joking).

So, while statutory planning may often feel overwhelming at times, the VPELA Conference reaffirmed that chaos isn’t something to shy away from – it’s something to embrace. Within that chaos lies the potential for innovation, growth, and lasting change. And that’s what planning is all about.

Robyn Neal is an Urban Planner with the City of Maribyrnong

L>R Alex Dyson, Jo Cannington, Jorden Van Den Lamb and Jennifer Kulas

Robyn Neal, Urban Planner, City of Maribyrnong

Conference Safety in the face of chaos? Gender sensitive

placemaking for diverse communities

I’d like to thank Ebony Hickey for welcoming me to Country this morning and pay my respects to traditional owners and Indigenous people who might be present in the room today. I’d also like to acknowledge Indigenous women and their creative practices on this land for the past 60,000 years.

I lead a research team at Monash University, the XYX lab. We are interdisciplinary designers committed to thinking about the experiences of women and gender diverse people in cities. Today I will be discussing some of the work we do related to gender sensitive place making including our use of research driven co design methodologies and an evidence-based approach to women’s safety in cities. We have developed our knowledge through the tools of design thinking – using the skills that we have as architects and urban designers and transferring these into communities where women become the expert in the design process.

We’ve partnered with local and state governments, architects, urban designers, and engineers, and we are often called upon to collaborate with these organisations because they’re looking for an approach that can centre the voices of women and girls. They all understand the importance of gender-sensitive cities.

Why think about gender and cities? What is valuable about understanding the relationship between gender and place? It is likely that you are all committed to thinking about the diverse communities that your work needs to serve. By extension, when we think about women and girls, what we’re thinking about is not just that they are 50% of the community but that they represent enormous diversity. As such, we also need to consider their socio-economic status, level of education, where they live, age, ability, ethnicity, etc. And these things are increasingly important in the work that we do and how we undertake that work.

Maybe you have come across the term ‘intersectionality’ – an approach that policy requires us to understand as practitioners. Yet,

Professor Nicole Kalms, Associate Dean of Research, Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture, Monash University

it is somewhat outside of the training that we might have received as lawyers or architects, urban designers and planners. We are increasingly required to think about how gender equality plays out in the work that we do within the context of the Victorian Gender Equality Act – the first legislation to ensure that we’re paying attention to intersectionality. We really need to think carefully about how we’re including the diverse needs of women and girls in the work that we do.

The research lab I lead is often called upon to intervene, repair, and understand when horrible things happen to women in public places. While random acts of violence are certainly rare, they shape women’s urban imagination and have a particular place in women’s experiences of cities. And that’s because the perception of places, the fear or risk of violence and women’s feelings of vulnerability shape the ways that women, as well as gender diverse people, move through cities.

Sociologist Fiona Vera-Gray, describes women’s modified behavior as a form of “safety work”. The term (originally coined by sociologist Liz Kelly) describes the “thinking process, decision-making, and embodied watchfulness” women use; in short, the energy that women spend planning, amending and strategising their access to public spaces to prevent violence from happening.1

While safety work may be front and centre of their experience when plotting how to move through the city at night or when going out in a new area of the city, often this is unconscious with women acculturated into ways of organising themselves – learning as young girls about ‘how to stay safe’ and impacting their entire life course.

TramLab Toolkits [Monash University, La Trobe University and RMIT]

2022 Good Design Award for Design Research

I want to talk through a particular case study of research that was catalysed by the rape and murder of Aya Maasarwe on January 16, 2019. Aya had just alighted the number 86 tram when she was raped and murdered in Bundoora. Almost immediately, my research lab, in conjunction with colleagues from La Trobe University and RMIT, was funded by the Victorian State Government to improve the safety of women and girls on public transport.

2022 Victorian Premier’s Design Awards Best in Category Design Strategy

Figure 1: TramLab Toolkit covers. Victorian State Government, La Trobe University, Monash University XYX Lab, RMIT University, TramLab Toolkit 2: Gender-Sensitive Placemaking – Improving The Safety of Women and Girls on Public Transport. (2020).

“The TramLab Toolkits have positively altered the future of public transport safety for women and girls in Victoria and internationally.” Victorian Premier’s Design Awards

This huge, multi-year project documents the systemic failure of public transport in Victoria. While the 286-page report was embargoed, we did manage to release four TramLab Toolkits (Figure 1) that look at the intersecting components required to improve safety for women and girls using public transport in Victoria.

The first toolkit reflects the importance of communication campaigns; the ways that we instruct people to think about how they might need to behave in public transport spaces.

The second one argues for gender sensitive place making, and how to think about the places around public transport stations and stops, the relationship to active transport, and how these spaces shape experiences of safety for women and girls.

The third toolkit looks at how stakeholders and service providers should gather gender sensitive data – noting that one of the key failings of public transport and the reporting systems related to women’s experiences in cities is that providers do not collect data in a way that is appropriate for women and girls. As a result, about 90% of sexual harassment and assault is not reported by women and girls.2 And that’s not just a Victorian problem; this is reflected globally.

The fourth toolkit asserts the need to train frontline workers in public transport service to ensure that they’re behaving and responding to women’s and girls’ concerns in appropriate, gender-sensitive ways.

Through the TramLab project – as with all our projects – we learnt that single solutions aren’t going to solve the problems of women’s vulnerability and risk in cities. So here are some of the things that

• The evidence tells us what works: improving lighting, not just brighter lighting but well-designed nuanced lighting; the importance of real-time mobility technology; co-design with communities of women, of course; and ensuring that First Nations people are included in our place-making processes.

• Communication – behaviour change campaigns instructing public transport users on how to behave, as well as communication campaigns encouraging women to report concerning experiences or incidents of harassment in public transport spaces, is key. The XYX Lab is committed in this project but also to our other public placemaking projects, which reveal the often shocking statistics that we have gathered related to women’s experiences and fear of violence in public spaces (Figure 2). While our clients and partners often say to us, “well, if you plaster the space with details of how many women have been harassed in this place, won’t it make them feel less safe?”…. But our work with women and girls, listening to what they want, tells us that women want those messages to be out in the public realm. They feel that reflecting their experiences of risk and fear in the public realm acknowledges them.

• Any negative experience that women have had shapes the way they feel about being in the public realm. Research tells us that the media, television, and the experiences of friends and relatives also shape perceptions of risk and vulnerability when women are in the public realm. Our research indicates that women’s negative experiences are related to the behaviour of other people (for example, sexual harassment, violence and drug affected people).3

Figure

INDIVIDUA L STORIES

GENDER

being a woman = high risk of victimisation

OTHER ATTRIBUTES

age, disability, ethnicity, income, sexuality, etc.

PERSONAL NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES

OTHER PEOPLE SPATIAL CONDITIONS

DESERTED

no potential allies, lack of informal oversight

TELEVISION AND MOVIES MEDIA REPORTS

FRIENDS’ OR RELATIVES’ NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES

INCREASED VULNERABILITY

ISOLATED

underpasses, car parks, access ways

UNPREDICTABLE PEOPLE CROWDED

LACK OF MAINTENANCE POOR LIGHTING

• Other hotspots for women, girls and gender diverse people include isolated infrastructural spaces, car parks, accessways, underpasses, and areas with poor lighting. Whether it’s over lit or under lit. And spaces lacking maintenance or full of rubbish and drug paraphernalia make women and girls feel unsafe. Spaces of entrapment are of particular concern for the queer and transgender communities who place emphasis on multiple modes of egress out of public places – particularly transport spaces.

proximity permits unwanted touching and harassment under-lit and over-lit

BYSTANDER INACTION

ENTRAPMENT

All of these things either increase vulnerability or certainly increase risk in the eyes of women and girls. This perception of safety drives the research that we’re doing.

Now, I’m going to talk about a project that involved data. Data is important not just because of the work that we did with the public transport spaces but also because data is the leverage point that governments and communities use to acquire funding for projects and, therefore, the ways we can substantively make change.

INCREASED RISK

PERCEPTIONS OF SAFETY

Figure 3: Factors Impinging on Perceptions of Safety and Increased Risk. XYX Lab, Monash University 2020. Adapted and expanded by Gill Matthewson from Yavuz and Welch (2010): 2495

And the idea that a busy place is safe just because there are people around is not true at all. These are often the places where sexual harassment happens under the cover of over crowdedness or anonymity.

• Conversely, spatial conditions – the materials and ambience of a

The data we seek to surface in the XYX Lab is about understanding the diversity of experience of women, girls and gender diverse people, and thinking about how we can disaggregate that data for valuable community insights. This led my research team, in collaboration with our long-term partner, CrowdSpot, to develop the YourGround project. It’s a geolocation survey tool – a map accessible from any smart device. It asks women, girls and gender diverse people to share their experiences of public spaces. It’s not a reporting tool. It’s a mode and method to gather site specific data – right down to the street corner –and validate experiences of women, girls and gender diverse people to help us understand how urban typologies relate to experiences of harassment, fear and gendered violence.

We’ve also completed multiple projects in Victorian alongside YourGround, including the Gender Equality Map and Unsafe in the City with Plan International. This project was undertaken across five continents and, universally, the experiences of women and girls are the same; sexual harassment in public transport and all aspects of public space, including parks and recreation spaces, are ubiquitous.

This form of data collection is crowdsourced. It’s an alternative way

ENVIRONMENT v’s BEHAVIOUR

what are the intergenerational costs of spatial inequity? What does it mean for women when they prefer to use a car rather than to walk or use public transport? What are the consequences for teenage girls’ physical health when they opt out of accessing parks or playing sports due to gender violence or inadequate facilities? Importantly, it allows our partners to lobby for resources and to prioritise aspects of their community where they can actually say: “We need to make change and develop spaces that benefit women and girls”.

Alongside the geolocative survey and the coding and synthesis of this data, the XYX Lab designed the communication outreach and all of the different modes that were used to help shape and deliver the project (Figure 3). This includes social media messaging and how the tool is communicated to women and gender diverse people. All these modes encourage women, girls and gender-diverse people to see how and why they might participate in the project. So this kind of identitybuilding is part of the design work that we do.

With YourGround, this has involved a quite diverse representation of women. In Victoria, we translated the communications into nine different language groups, and in New South Wales, into seven different language groups. It’s not perfect, but we’re striving to ensure that women from different ethnic backgrounds are able to participate in the projects that we do.

Because of the research that emerges from this work, the media is really interested in talking to us about this research (Figure 4). This is another way that we propel the work and have uptake with the project. I do a lot of speaking about these projects on television and radio, but we involve women from communities to talk about their experiences so that it centres the communities we hope to serve.

What we discovered in the YourGround project is that the things that make women, girls, and gender-diverse people feel safe often are infrastructural amenities. This includes maintenance, visibility, safe pathways, clear wayfinding, and good lighting—not necessarily bright lighting—and these aspects shape the ‘vibe’ of a place, they say. Importantly, these are also aspects of public placemaking that we can shape in urban design practice.

This is vital to address as we know that women and girls won’t go back to a location alone if they’ve had an unsafe experience. We know that some people can’t change their route or avoid a place because they might be going to work, for example, or having to deliver their children to school. We know that women and girls avoid places after dark. We also know that a significant number of them, having had an unsafe experience, never go back to that place. Now, that might not sound like such a big deal, but if you’re never getting the train from Northcote station or a bus again because of an unsafe experience, what we can see is that women and girls are changing their whole

relationship with urban spaces. And then, of course, we know that people just minimise their use of places because they want to avoid feeling at risk or vulnerable.

Finally, I offer a few comments about gender-sensitive approaches in practice.

There has been a huge push for organisations to think very carefully about how they might charge leaders to engage with gender. We all know something about gender inequality and the issues that we might be facing in our workplaces and in the work that we do. Some leaders feel a fair bit of anxiety about being asked to deal with gender when they’re thinking about their work in the public realm, and with good reason. There are some pretty controversial and hot topics related to gender and policy communities. It can be one of those things that you can get really wrong. That kind of anxiety, I think, is a really dominant part of workplaces.

Some common pitfalls – and we’ve all had this experience – all of a sudden, a woman is put on the team, and she is supposed to ‘fill the gender gap’ and speak for all women everywhere. She is tasked with covering off that particular box that needs to be ticked. And I think this is where we start to get into tricky territory because what follows is that we start talking about our own experiences of being in the public realm or we start talking about my wife’s experience, my sister’s experience, my daughter’s experience, my girlfriend’s experience, my gay friend’s experience. And that is not research. We must be really careful about how we start to charge our organisations by thinking about gendersensitive placemaking – applying the same research rigour that would apply to other technical aspects of the built environment.

My work at the XYX Lab is committed to evidence-based approaches and working with communities that have that lived expertise to contribute to solutions. We must think about placemaking as a process that centres the people we hope will benefit from our work.

Nicole Kalms is the Associate Dean of Research for the Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture at Monash University. She’s also a professor in the Department of Design and the founding director of the XYX Lab, which leads national and international research in gender and place. This is an edited transcript of her conference presentation.

1 Fiona Vera-Gray, The Right Amount of Panic: How Women Trade Freedom for Safety (2018), 12, 82.

2 Australian Bureau of Statistics. Personal Safety, Australia, (2021-22), https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crimeand-justice/personal-safety-australia/latest-release.

3 XYX Lab and CrowdSpot. YourGround Victoria Report, (2021), yourground.org.

Nicole Kalms’s She City examines how gender shapes urban design through three sections: ‘Resisting Sexist Cities’, ‘Designing Feminist Cities’, and ‘Prioritizing Safer Cities’. Kalms identifies barriers to women’s public participation and offers practical strategies to overcome them.

Addressing issues like violence against women, the book guides practitioners and inspires the creation of women-centered urban spaces, making it essential for architects, planners, and urban designers committed to meeting the needs of women and girls.

She City: Designing Out Women’s Inequity in Cities is published by Bloomsbury and is available in hardback, paperback, and ebook formats. It can be found at Bloomsbury.

The Business ResCode reform good, but not enough

In an earlier Revue article (March 2023), I highlighted shortcomings in the State’s planning framework I believe have been holding back the timely delivery of housing in the face of high demand and the Government’s own desire to accelerate supply.

Over-regulation, a high interest rate environment, steep increases in construction costs and excessive levies on development have combined to push housing opportunities further and further away from people looking to secure their financial future with a real asset, and to start and raise families.

I stressed issues confronting the industry and offered solutions, namely:

• Melbourne CBD. I suggested reintroducing off-the-plan stamp duty exemptions for Australian residents, as buyers currently have no incentive to buy off the plan and developers need pre-sales to finance any construction. This has been complicated by the steep price rises of construction, particularly tall concrete buildings that compete with the Government’s Big Build for materials and labour.

• Inner and middle-ring suburbs. For the last five years, I’ve been advocating to demolish neighbourhood character overlays (NCOs) as expressed in the previous Revue article and, since then, also in many industry and government forums as well.

It is encouraging, therefore, to find the Government heeding industry concerns, with proposed ResCode reforms to help overcome the planning system gridlock holding the industry, the economy and the State back.

It is good to see the acknowledgement of problems posed by NCOs and design elements such as street setbacks, site coverage, overlooking and over-shadowing, and private open space. Neighbourhood character rules that applied even where neighbourhood or heritage overlays didn’t exist were prohibitive and overdue for reform.

These reforms, whilst commendable, only apply to the reach of the nominated activity centres. I would contend that the newly revamped ResCode should apply to all metropolitan Melbourne.

These changes to NCOs would mean that smaller developers can better pursue a stake in the game and help deliver the ambitious 80,000 new homes the Government wants built in Victoria each year. Planning amendments will allow small apartment projects to be built with lightweight cladding and timber. This means lower construction costs per square metre, compared to high-rise concrete buildings, and a far lower carbon footprint as well.

I’m not alone in supporting these changes. The UDIA is behind them, pointing to the 52,300 house starts in 2023, a 10-year low, highlighting the gravity of the need for change. The Planning Institute of Australia has also given qualified support in principle for the reforms.

Rory Costello, Founder and Executive Director, Villawood Properties

While the ResCode changes are positive, there remain considerably more reforms that are needed to properly address the impediments sending developers looking elsewhere – increasingly interstate – to conduct their businesses.

Red tape and ever new and increasing State Government taxes are also stifling developments.

Melbourne greenfields growth

The 70:30 issue has dominated the State Government’s focus, particularly over the last 12 months, but the target of 80,000 houses per year has shown itself to be unattainable with current constraints across our industry.

I’ve previously stressed that, whilst I support inner and middle consolidation as much as possible, our housing targets can’t be achieved without the greenfields and regional cities carrying their share of the load.

It is encouraging the State Government is recognising that 70:30 is not appropriate in regional cities and amending its targets to suit. Buyers moving to regional cities don’t head there for apartment living. Their aspiration is for a detached house. There is very little market for highdensity housing, save for downsizers and small households.

Some of that support needs to filter down to local government, particularly in regional areas, where some PSPs have stalled dramatically with unworkable outcomes which have translated into developer levies (DCPs) that have spiralled to eye-watering levels, sometimes three to four times the rates of their metropolitan counterparts.

In the end, supply matches demand. So, the planning fraternity needs to get on board to allow developers to get on with the job of building houses and increasing supply, creating competition and affordability.

Rory Costello is a Founder and Executive Director at Villawood Properties

The Business Addressing emergency housing: How our planning system can do more

Introduction

When will our planning system finally play a key role in addressing domestic and family violence?

In the last few years, I’ve had the privilege of assisting the Salvation Army on a number of projects focused on crisis accommodation and domestic and family violence services.

This work has been rewarding both professionally and personally. Still, it has often been highlighted that the planning system presents frustrating obstacles to obtaining approval for projects, even those providing domestic and family violence services and accommodation. Our planning system can and should do more to help address this issue.

The Salvation Army

The Salvation Army provides a wide range of services to support women and women with children impacted by domestic and family violence. They offer domestic violence help through refuges, children’s and parenting services, counselling, support, men’s programs, accommodation, and advice to women and children who are experiencing, or who have experienced, family and domestic violence.

Disturbing statistics

Crime Statistics Agency figures for the year ending 31 March 2024 provide just one indication of how dire and alarming the domestic and family violence situation is in Victoria.

In July, The Age reported that these figures showed total female victim reports rose for homicide and related offences, assaults, and sexual offences.

The Age article also reported that Victoria Police had responded to a record number of family violence incidents in the 12 months to March 2024, equivalent to one family violence incident every six minutes.

Cameron Gentle, Director of Urban Planning, Hansen Partnership

Safe+Equal, the peak body for Victorian organisations that specialise in family and gender-based violence, highlights a number of disturbing facts on its website. Just some of these include:

• One woman is killed nearly every week in Australia due to family violence.

• On average, police attend a family violence incident every six minutes in Victoria.

• Family violence is the leading cause of homelessness for women and children.

• Children are present in 30 per cent of family violence incidents attended by police.

Two websites I would recommend having a look at to understand the trends and statistics further are:

www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/family-violence-data/family-violencedashboard www.safeandequal.org.au/understanding-family-violence/statistics

Obstacles & solutions

One project I assisted the Salvos with involved facilitating in-person Orange Door support services in Bass Coast.

Although the proposed use was permissible in the zone, public exposure represented a significant risk to the project given the likely need for public notice and unfortunate misconceptions about potential impacts.

Using the Community care accommodation provisions at Clause 52.22 of the VPP was also explored but dismissed as an option given its limited scope, and other aspects of the proposed use and the site.

An extensive exercise to prove existing use rights, however, eventually enabled a Section 97N certificate to be issued and will allow the services to be established discreetly, and without significant delay.

Although ultimately satisfying professionally to have been able to facilitate the project, it was also incredibly frustrating that, despite the critical need for support services in the community, the planning system presented more barriers than solutions. In my view, something so important should not have been so difficult.

Using Clause 52.22

On other projects for the Salvos, the Community care accommodation provisions at Clause 52.22 of the VPP have provided an opportunity for crisis accommodation to benefit from permit or notice and review exemptions.

Fully benefiting from these exemptions, however, does require careful navigation of the requirements relating to funding, client and staff numbers, and compliance with specified Clause 55 standards.

Similar to the Bass Coast project, exposure to third-party notice and review for a project of this type represents a significant risk to timing and approvals.

As with any planning application subject to third-party notice, it only takes one objection and a subsequent appeal to significantly delay or end a project. That one objection may well be based on misconceptions about potential impacts.

Given the limited funding available for Community care accommodation projects, objections and appeals significantly increase the probability that a project is unable to proceed.

In my view, there is a need to revise the provisions of Clause 52.22 to better facilitate the provision of Community care accommodation, and potentially broaden its focus to facilitate the provision of support services.

Conclusions

Despite all too regular reminders of the significant domestic and family violence crisis facing our community, the planning system currently provides limited assistance in addressing this issue. It can and should do more, and this could start with a review of Clause 52.22. I hope to continue assisting the Salvation Army with its domestic and family violence projects and make a small but meaningful contribution to addressing this issue as a planner. I also hope that over time this assistance is required less and less.

1800 Respect (1800 737 732) is a 24-hour counselling line for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.

www.1800respect.org.au www.salvationarmy.org.au/need-help/family-and-domestic-violence

Cameron Gentle is a Director of Urban Planning, Hansen Partnership

Don’t

forget to check out VPELA’s facebook page.

This is a great way to keep in touch with what’s

on.

Welcome to our new members…

Michael Alexander Maribyrnong City Council

Skye Arnold Planning & Property Partners

Perry Athanasopoulos Tract

Rom Barca Planning & Property Partners

Joshwa Johnson Dmello Urban Planner

Clare Field Tract Consultants Pty Ltd

Jo Garretty SALT3

Lillian Graystone Melbourne Water

Lachlan Harris Ratio Consultants

Suellen Hunter City of Stonnington

Shuja Jamal Herbert Smith Freehills

Monica Kelly Maddocks

Mitchell Kennedy SLR Consulting Australia

Emma Kennedy Urban Planner

Tihana Kljajic Maroondah City Council

Andrea Myers Metro Tunnel Project

Taryn Parkinson Clayton Utz

Chiara Randazzo Planning and Property Partners Pty Ltd

Hannah Raper Metro Tunnel Project

Martin Richardson East Gippsland Shire Council

Lisa Saraceni SLR Consulting Australia

Rebecca Steer GHD

Samuel Sunter Clayton Utz

Jessica Thomas Contour

Correction

In our last issue new member Chris Smitt was incorrectly listed as being employed by Metropol Solutions, he is in fact with EHS Support. We apologise for the mistake.

The Business Comprehensive deliberative engagement unlocks bright future for Pakington Street North

New housing and streetscape improvements are in store for a beloved area of Geelong West, following the adoption of the Pakington North Urban Design Framework (UDF) by the City of Greater Geelong. The City has been working to deliver a UDF for this precinct since 2017, so we went beyond the usual engagement process to collaborate with the community members passionate about this area.

A deliberative engagement approach was key to achieving grassroots support and providing the City with the confidence to endorse the UDF. Joining the City and Capire Consulting Group in this process was our Pakington North Community Panel: a representative sample of local residents, business owners and people who work, shop or study in the area.

Over six sessions between February and April 2024, panel members co-designed the UDF via themed sessions focusing on built form, public realm, and access and movement. We promised panellists that their guidelines and recommendations would be incorporated to the maximum extent possible.

The City’s Urban Designers then applied their lens to the advice and translated it into the UDF, for the panel to review and provide feedback on. Panellists were able to ask questions during presentations and Q&A sessions with subject matter experts. They could also access online interactive tools and a private Have Your Say page.

Guiding panellists through the journey and involving them in decisionmaking for the UDF garnered a solid level of trust in the process, and they got on board with the mission to reach a holistic design approach together. The City found that most panellists were open to change and wanted to see innovative solutions. Now, we have some champions in the community who can share the importance of infill development.

The final UDF respects the area’s history, while allowing for appropriate development and upgrades that will enhance the precinct. We’ve unlocked the opportunity to develop much-needed housing that suits different needs and incomes, as the shortage of housing stock bites. The housing heights in the adopted UDF is similar to past versions, with some areas featuring heights even greater than previous iterations.

The UDF also paves the way for quality architecture and peoplefriendly spaces through heritage design elements, improved connections and streetscape upgrades. We’re excited to capitalise on the momentum we now have – setting the City up for a bright future.

Explore our 30-year vision at yoursay.geelongaustralia.com. au/mypakonorthprecinct or contact urbandesignandheritage@ geelongcity.vic.gov.au if you want to know more about the process.

Having worked extensively across both government and the private sector, Tennille is passionate about involving community in co-design processes. She’s incredibly proud of the City’s Urban Design and Placemaking teams and engagement consultant Capire Consulting Group in realising the future vision for Pakington Street north. Tennille Bradley is an Executive Director of Placemaking at the City of Greater Geelong

Tennille Bradley, Executive Director, Placemaking at the City of Greater Geelong

The Business VPELA Seminar: Empowering regional planners at

Bass Coast Shire Council

On Friday, 2 August, 2024, the Bass Coast Shire Council hosted a training seminar titled “How to Present a Compelling Case at VCAT/ Panels as a Local Government Planner”.

We were lucky to have the event held at Berninneit, a multi-award winning Passive House Cultural Centre located in the heart of Cowes.

Jodi Kennedy, General Manager Community & Culture at Bass Coast Shire Council, also gave us a personal tour showing us what a fantastic community asset it is, and I would encourage the Phillip Island holiday makers among you to catch a gig or see a show at the theatre or visit the art gallery or museum.

Beveridge Williams was proud to sponsor the event, and with offices in Ballarat, Geelong, in the west and with offices in the east from Warragul to Sale, we understand the value of local knowledge and working in the regions.

This event was part of VPELA’s initiative to bring industry events to regional areas, recognising the crucial role of planning professionals in these regions.

Recognising regional planning professionals

By bringing industry events to the regions, VPELA is aiming to ensure that planners outside metropolitan areas have access to the same high-quality training and professional development opportunities as their urban counterparts. This initiative underscores the importance of regional planners in shaping sustainable and well-planned communities.

Development pressure has never been more keenly felt in the regions. The COVID experience, the housing crisis, the challenge of realising a renewable energy future, are all major factors shaping development pressures in the regions.

Balancing competing development, environment, climate objectives and population pressures, is not easy and professional advice and planning systems are there to manage the process.

Distinguished presenters

The seminar featured three respected presenters, each bringing a wealth of knowledge and experience:

• Greg Tobin, from Harwood Andrews, a legal expert with extensive experience representing clients at VCAT and Planning Panels Victoria (PPV).

• Sarah Carlisle, from PPV, who provided deep insights into the workings of Planning Panels and the nuances of presenting cases.

• Michael Deidun, a VCAT member, who shared his perspective from the Tribunal, offering practical advice on what constitutes a compelling case.

Key topics explored

The seminar covered a range of critical topics, designed to equip local government planners with the skills and knowledge needed to present their cases effectively. The key topics discussed included:

1. Expert insights and case studies – The seminar included presentations from the experts, who shared their expertise at both VCAT and PPV. They delved into various case studies, particularly focusing on matters relevant to the regions. The discussions highlighted the complexities and challenges of land use conflicts providing attendees with a deeper understanding of how to navigate these issues.

2. Crafting a good submission – One of the most practical takeaways from the seminar focused on what makes a good submission; reminding us all to use the resources and practice notes provide by VCAT to our advantage. The presenters shared tips and tricks for crafting compelling and persuasive submissions. They emphasized the importance of clarity, coherence, and evidencebased arguments. Attendees learned how to structure their submissions effectively, ensuring that they address all relevant issues and present a strong case.

Bernard Steward, Principal Planner, Beveridge Williams

3. Have a go! – The presenters were also very strong in their advice to “Have a Go”. Their advice was to let the Panel or Tribunal members know that you may be new to the process and procedures of a Panel or VCAT and that members would be happy to assist and provide some guidance. So get out there and try your hand at presenting.

4. Recent decisions and their implications – The seminar also provided an overview of recent decisions that local government planners should be aware of in their decision-making processes. The presenters discussed key rulings and their implications for future cases, helping attendees stay up to date with the latest developments in planning law and policy.

Key takeaways

The seminar was well received, offering attendees a wealth of knowledge and practical advice. Some of the key takeaways from the event included:

• Enhanced understanding of VCAT and PPV: Attendees gained a deeper understanding of the processes and expectations at VCAT and PPV. This knowledge will enable them to navigate these forums more effectively and present stronger more confident cases.

• Practical tips for submissions: The tips and tricks shared by the presenters will undoubtedly help local government planners craft more compelling and persuasive submissions. The emphasis on clarity, coherence, and evidence-based arguments will be particularly beneficial.

• Awareness of recent decisions: Staying informed about recent decisions is crucial for effective planning. The seminar provided an overview of key decisions and their implications, helping planners stay current with the latest developments in planning law and policy.

Conclusion

The VPELA seminar at Bass Coast Shire Council demonstrated the organisation’s commitment to supporting regional planning professionals. By bringing industry events to the regions, VPELA ensures that planners have access to the training and resources they need to excel in their roles. The insights and practical advice shared

during the seminar will undoubtedly empower local government planners to present more compelling cases at VCAT and PPV, ultimately contributing to better planning outcomes for regional communities.

Bernard Steward is a Principal Planner with Beveridge Williams with more than 25 years’ experience in statutory planning, community consultation and project management.

Bookings now open

Thank you to our YPG sponsors

The Business Are councils highway robbers in the application of development contribution plans?

This thought piece has been prepared as a critical review from over a decade working with developers in growth areas where there is a requirement to enter into works-in-kind or landin-kind agreements for various projects under a development contributions plan (or DCP).

What is a DCP? This is a document incorporated into a planning scheme which raises levies for development and community infrastructure within its precinct area. You will commonly find one within the Urban Growth Zone within Victoria’s growth area.

Under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the purpose of a DCP is to levy contributions to fund the provision of works, services and facilities in relation to the development of land in the precinct area and costs to prepare the plan.

In other words, a DCP will say $X is required to provide public works (ie construction project) and acquire private land (ie land project) for such infrastructure and then justifies a levy to raise the funds from developers in the precinct. Each project is individually costed within the DCP. These costs are accumulated across the precinct and then apportioned on landholders within the precinct depending on the extent of their land that is developable.

Council, as municipal authorities, typically are the nominated Collecting Agency (ie receive the levies) and concurrently the Development Agency (ie delivers the infrastructure). In the writer’s view, this creates a serious question of whether there is a conflict when the Council then seeks to act in another capacity, such as a responsible authority for the purpose of a planning permit or issuing compliances for a subdivision.

You will see in this piece that Councils then often use its position as the responsible authority in assessing a planning permit, endorsement powers or certification responsibilities to arrive at an “agreement” forced upon developers as a tool to unjustly lock in values and shift the risk away from a Council. This is often delivered as a “works in kind arrangement”, where the developer assumes the responsibility of delivering certain items of infrastructure in lieu of the financial contribution that was otherwise apportioned to be paid by the developer. This often creates a disadvantage to the developer to a point where a developer ends up significantly out of pocket for the delivery of land or construction projects which benefits extend to the entire precinct area, not just the development itself.

How has this been allowed to happen? My view is simple; there is a break in the chain between funds to be collected and the actual cost of a project. Knowing this reality, Councils too often seek to close the shortfall by locking a developer into funding the deficit amounts in return for a development approval. Otherwise, the Council will have to put its hands in its own pocket to complete a project for the benefit of the related Council’s municipality.

Joel Snyder, Partner, Best Hooper

The most typical way that Councils have locked in a developer is through requirements in a planning permit for a section 173 agreement or requirement of delivery of a public project or vesting in land.

We have also seen Council’s impose conditions on permits where there is arguably no nexus between the public project and the development itself, however, seeks to lock up the obligation with the developer.

Over the years, such conditions or drafting of agreements have not been challenged in an appropriate forum due to development pressure and other commercial reasons. This has therefore rewarded Council’s behaviour and provided its own positive reinforcement.

Council’s activities are, in short, attempting to use their negotiation leverage to protect itself from funding a potential shortfall between the funds collected (as a Collecting Agency and the funds required to be spent to deliver the infrastructure (as a Development Agency).

Even though a DCP commonly provides review mechanisms and indexation for projects, in our experience, these continue to be underfunded.

Perhaps there is an incentive for Councils to continue this habitual approach as it continues to keep levies at low levels at the detriment of a developer.

In my view and experience is that Councils, as collecting agencies, have no proper basis to fix the amount it is to credit or reimburse a developer for a DCP project. Accordingly, it is likely that the process to get around such underfunding is unfortunately to continue, while this common leverage is available against a developer.

The key takeaway is that it is imperative that you review of permit conditions as to their validity and lawfulness in relation to a requirement to deliver public assets, land or works. Similarly, care needs to be taken when drafting the section 173 agreement required under a permit to minimise the potential risks associated with the delivery of public infrastructure items. I find it unlikely you will ever see a condition on a permit which requires the fixing values of a land or construction project under the DCP – this is likely because such condition would be unlawful – however Council’s nonetheless commonly seek to do this through other mechanisms which are not are readily challengeable.

Where there are no commercial pressures, in some instances, seeking legal advice and a legal challenge may be vital.

This article has been adapted from Joel Snyder’s article entitled “Are Councils Highway Robbers in the Application of Development Contributions Plan” available on the Best Hooper website.

To eave or not to eave?

Standard B17 allows for encroachments by eaves into the setback envelope. Standard B20, however, makes no such allowance.

In the last edition, we highlighted Little v Darebin CC [2024] VCAT 394, where the Tribunal stated:

I do not accept… that a proper reading of the text and diagrams in the ResCode Standard B20 (north-facing windows) requires the factoring-in of the requirement that any relevant eaves forming part of the proposed dwellings must stay within the ‘dotted lines’ … If the draftpersons of Standard B20 wished to take the approach that the far edge of any eaves must be the measuring point for whether or not a proposed new development complies with the ‘dotted line’ shown in the Standard B20 diagram, such draftpersons could have very easily said so in the relevant text in Standard B20, but this did not occur. Furthermore, I find that where Standard B17 does expressly require any eaves to be disregarded, it makes sense to do likewise with Standard B20.

A little over two months later in Karaoutsadis v Hobsons Bay CC [2024] VCAT 702, the Tribunal has taken the opposite approach stating: Unlike standard B17, standard B20 does not provide that eaves or other similar structures are allowable encroachments.

The second approach appears more commonly adopted by the Tribunal, but the first approach came from a senior legal member. Having regard to the objective and lack of expressed encroachment allowance, the second approach receives my vote despite the ‘tidiness’ of the first approach.

Does boundary fencing prevent overlooking?

Recently in James v Darebin CC [2024] VCAT 805, an objector applicant brought ‘fresh eyes’ to consideration of the final paragraph associated with Standard B22. In short, the objector took issue with 1.8m high boundary fencing being sufficient to prevent overlooking into their property notwithstanding the areas from which potential overlooking could occur were less than 800mm above ground level.

The permit applicant and Council advocated the common approach that 1.8m high boundary fencing was sufficient in the circumstances. The Tribunal sided with the objector stating that the ‘1.8m visual barrier’ need to be measured from the floor level of the potential overlooking location.

Further having regard to the opening words of the final paragraph that “this standard does not apply…”, the Tribunal found that, if met, the Standard does not apply and therefore the objective and decision guidelines must be considered.

Whilst this second finding is perhaps less consequential, the first finding is more substantive, given the Tribunal remarked:

Hew Gerrard, Senior Associate, Glossop Town Planning

its application does not accord with the long held understanding and approach often applied by architects and town planners to accord with the standard B22 exemption (i.e. a 1.8 metre boundary fence).

Major hazard facilities – in scope or out of scope?

Questions of what can be considered and what cannot be considered in the context of integrated decision making continue to plague the Tribunal. Major hazard facilities (MHF) are not immune in this respect and whether consideration of proximity of a development to a MHF can be considered in the absence of a BAO or similar.

Earlier this year in Nasralla v Hobsons Bay CC [2024] VCAT 212, the Tribunal found Clause 13.07-2S not relevant to a development permit stating in part:

I acknowledge that the strategies of clause 13.07-2S of the Scheme include considering the risk associated with increasing the intensity of use and development within the threshold distance of an existing MHF. However, in order to take that policy into account in the decisionmaking with respect to any particular planning permission, that policy needs to be relevant to the purpose for which the discretion was conferred.

In Edenville Corio Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC [2024] VCAT 794, the permit applicant relied on the findings of Nasralla that proximity to a MHF was not a relevant consideration. Whilst acknowledging Nasralla, the Tribunal in Edenville stated that some weight needed to be given to proximity under section 60(1A)(g) of the Act and that:

We consider it is counterintuitive to include clause 13.02-7S in the planning scheme and then for it to have no power in a situation where it should be of most utility.

Whilst not involving an MHF, in a similar vein, it was interesting to note the Minister for Planning in Paterson v Minister for Planning [2024] VCAT 761 arguing that a) the Tribunal could and should consider Aboriginal cultural heritage despite it not being referenced, relevantly in that matter, by the Farming Zone, and b) that recent Tribunal decisions curtailing consideration to only policy directly called up by the permit trigger should not be followed. Changes afoot?

Hew Gerrard is a Senior Associate at Glossop Town Planning

VPELA & UDIA Canadian Study Tour

Established in 1989, the Association holds regular seminars, social events and a conference annually. It also reviews legislation, provides high level advice to Government and makes submissions to all aspects of land use planning. If you have any questions or are interested in joining the Association, contact Anna Aughterson, Executive Officer – admin@vpela.org.au