Red Alerts Red Alerts Red Alerts | (Updated 13/8/10) |
Special (22/5/10): Want to know what 'growth' means - really means?
Check out "Arithmetic, Population and Energy" (aka The Most Important Video You Will Ever See) by Dr. Albert A. Bartlett. The theme is: "The Greatest Shortcoming of the Human Race is Our Inability To Understand The Exponential Function".
Dr. Bartlett demonstrates that knowing how to do arithmetic can change how we see everything. Click here for Youtube links.
(13/8/10 - FG) With the Victorian State government pushing growth into Macedon Ranges, MRRA turns to Federal politicians for help. Family First and the Greens are the first to respond, with a very positive answers.
MRRA also submitted a question to the Boobook Declaration Steering Committee in Canberra, which is focussing on the Year of Biodiversity, and which is submitting a list of questions to the leaders of political parties asking them about biodiversity issues. We are pleased to say that MRRA's question about protecting areas with high biodiversity from over-population and over-development made the list at Question #16. You can find out more about the Boobook Declaration by going to http://www.boobook.org.au/declaration.htm
Click here for details of Bendigo and McEwen candidates' responses.
(13/8/10 - P) That puts around another 20,000 people and 7,000 houses in the Shire by 2036. And the State government's VC66 amendment has already been put in place (also sans consultation) to implement it. Hello suburbia!
Click here to go to this item.
(13/8/10 - E) Aha, someone gets it! Also, check out the ACF's environmental scorecard for the Federal election.
The Australian Conservation Foundation last week released Better Than Growth: The New Economics Of Genuine Progress and Quality Of Life, a primer for policy innovation.
“Better than Growth” sets out a path for Australia to transform our economy into one that is truly sustainable. The report was launched on 5 August 2010 at a lecture called “What is the World Worth: Putting Nature on the Balance Sheet” with keynote speaker, Pavan Sukhdev. Pavan is a leading international economist who heads up the United Nations Environment Programme’s Green Economy Initiative, as well as the G8 project The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity.
Better Than Growth is a 40 page document and you can access it through the following link:
You can also see the ACF's Federal election scorecard on environment by going to:
http://www.acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=3044
(13/8/10 - P) The local 'bush telegraph' gets numbers to the meeting
At last Monday's hastily-organised meeting to consult local communities on the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission recommendations not (yet) supported by the State government, organisers were bowled over as people just kept coming in the door.
More tables were quickly set up, more chairs found, and another room commandeered to fit 'em all in. All up, there were just shy of 100 people. At first it was proposed that people move from table to table - which all had different discussion topics assigned to them - but with so many people, it was wisely decided to just move the topics around, not the people.
No-one knows what the thoughts of the meeting were, because there was no feedback session at the end, but there was criticism of the very short notice.
(13/8/10 - P) No information on anything else relating to the outcome of the VCAT Review yet
The Department of Planning and Community Development has announced:
VCAT President Justice Iain Ross has announced a restructure at VCAT to assist with the implementation of his "Transforming VCAT" strategy. The restructure will take effect from 30 August 2010. Of interest to the planning industry are the following:
DP Mark Dwyer has been appointed as Head of the Administrative Division. The Administrative Division covers the Planning & Environment, Land Valuation, Taxation, Occupational & Business Regulation, and General Lists of the Tribunal.
DP Helen Gibson will remain as Head of the Planning & Environment List.
DP Cathy Aird has been appointed as Head of the Occupational & Business Regulation List, which includes liquor licensing and gaming matters.
DP Michael Macnamara has been appointed as Head of the Land Valuation List, in addition to the Taxation List and other List responsibilities in the Civil Division
MRRA Says:
We surfed the net looking for any more information on the VCAT Review results and drew a blank all over.
(13/8/10 - SG) Don't forget to sign up on BFDAG's Facebook page!
What a great job this group is doing.
So far, Ted Baillieu has promised to reinstate 4 lanes, Joanne Duncan (local ALP member for Macedon) has told locals the 4 lanes will remain, and the Minister for Roads Tim Pallas has written a letter that appears to endorse VicRoads' position (cut the road down to only 2 traffic lanes). The Minister's letter certainly gives no commitment to retaining 4 lanes.
While everyone waits, there was an accident this week on the newly 'reduced' Macedon section, where VicRoads has already gotten rid of the 4 lanes. A motorist, confronted by kangaroos, realised the only way to avoid a head-on with an on-coming car was to run off the left side of the road into an object. That's the choice that will be facing anyone travelling on only 2 lanes on Black Forest Drive because there won't be any room to move once VicRoads have finished with it.
MRRA Says:
Ah... improved safety? Really?
(13/8/10 - C) Boycott on paying rates for staff superannuation being investigated.
Ratepayers' Victoria Inc has issued a media release and figures for rates and rate increases in Victoria over the last 10 years in response to ratepayer anger at rate increases of up to 175% during that time.
Click here to see RV's media release 1.
RV has prepared a table showing rate increases for most councils across the state, which really does highlight the problem some ratepayers have with their councils.
Ratepayers' Victoria is now calling for ratepayers to call or send emails of their concerns. Click here for RV's media release 2.
You can contact Ratepayers' Victoria by email Jack Davis on Jack_d@iinet.net.au or phone 03 9570 6227.
Declaration: MRRA is a member of Ratepayers' Victoria Inc.
(13/8/10 - P) They're a way of life these days, aren't they?
Planning Minister Justin Madden this week table an annual report on interventions in planning matters to parliament.
The Brumby Labor Government intervened in 233 planning matters last year to secure jobs and investment during the global financial crisis, continue efforts to rebuild after the 2009 bushfires and address outdated anomalies in the planning system.
Click here to see the Minister's media release.
MRRA Says:
Securing jobs and investments?
Crickey, we thought Mr. Madden was the Minister for Planning, not Jobs and Investments.
With the way environment and consultation are being stripped out of the Victorian planning system in favour of what appears to be purely business plans and priorities, we certainly wouldn't think of him as the Minister for Sustainability or Democracy either! In fact, it raises the thought: do we actually have a planning system in Victoria anymore?
We went looking for details of the interventions, but couldn't find hide nor hair of the annual report.
Yeah, we believed Mr Thwaites as Planning Minister when he said this government would make interventions more transparent back when. We remember that.
These days however, if it's not an intervention it's departmental pressure or ministerial amendment or another announcement that the Minister for Planning has become the Responsible Authority for major projects, which basically means the Minister has most or all of the say. Which some see as the developer holding all the cards.
And we can't stop thinking about the way people's rights were ripped off them by the Transportation Major Projects Facilitation Act (hi everyone in Footscray who didn't get notice that their homes are to be demolished), and the way rights are going to disappear with the Development Assessment Committees, changes to the Planning and Environment Act, and likely the Environment Effects Statement Act, and the way everything is being looked at in terms of economics only, and so on and so on... and so on.
Nor can we get it out of our minds that somewhere, most of us in active community groups are probably on a police file that gets shared with private 'investors', and that this is a practice that appears to not only be condoned but defended by this 'transparent' and 'democratic' government.
(13/8/10 - O) Care about carbon pollution and the need for renewable energy?
GetUp is asking that if you do care, donate and you can have the new GetUp T-shirt. Stocks limited, get in fast for the final week of the Federal election campaign. Click here for more information.
(8/8/10 - FG) Who are the candidates in Macedon Ranges Shire?
Click here for details.
CURRENT Action Required State Govt Move Opens Door For Logging In Wombat and Cobaw Forests
(8/8/10 - E) Locals fire up to save forests - again. Call to action - join CAWFAG
The State Minister for Environment's recent announcement that VicForest will take over the Wombat and Cobaw State Forests - potentially opening them up for logging again - has caused a furore. Both forests were previously logged (almost into the ground) with the timber harvested primarily used for wood chips. Four years ago, after CAWFAG (Cobaw and Wombat Forest Action Group) ran a hugely successful anti-logging campaign, the logging (and wood chipping) stopped. CAWFAG was put reluctantly put into mothballs, with the fervent hope it would never be needed again.
After the Minister's announcement, key figures in CAWFAG called a meeting in Woodend, attended by about 60 people. That meeting saw the reincarnation of CAWFAG, now needed again to oppose the State government's treacherous shift of policy.
You can support CAWFAG by becoming a member: email mward10@activ8.net.au or call 0418 547 855.
Click here for contact details for Joanne Duncan MP (Macedon) and Geoff Howard (Ballarat East).
(8/8/10 - P) Wind turbines to 'adjoining' to coastal
Tarwin Valley Coastal Guardians Inc v Minister for Planning & Anor (includes Summary) (Red Dot) [2010] VCAT 1226: Secondary consent by the Minister for Planning as responsible authority to increase the height of wind turbines under condition 4 of permit TRA/03/002.
Graham v Stonnington CC (includes Summary) (Red Dot) [2010] VCAT 1224: Interpretation of the word “adjoining” in section 52(1)(a) Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Taip v East Gippsland SC (includes Summary) (Red Dot) [2010] VCAT 1222: Application of planning policy on climate change and flooding to a three-storey multi-dwelling development in the coastal town of Lakes Entrance.
(8/8/10 - SG) Also, latest ESC newsletter and next consultation details (for councils)
The Victorian government has released the Essential Services Commission [ESC]'s final report Establishing a Victorian Local Government Services report.
The report and other documents can be accessed by going to ESC's website http://www.esc.vic.gov.au/public/ or directly by the following link. http://www.esc.vic.gov.au/NR/exeres/EC74C2B0-6D25-491E-A046-A41D19E38680.htm
Click here for details about meetings the ESC is holding for councils.
Click here to see the latest ESC newsletter
CURRENT Environment Defenders Office [EDO] Bulletin #14
(8/8/10 - E) Climate change, bushfires and expansion of the urban growth boundary are in the spotlight in this edition.
Click here for more information.
(8/8/10 - E) WWF reference guide for the Federal election
This issue of the World Wildlife Fund's "Living Planet" magazine (download available for free) provides voters with a reference guide for the upcoming Federal election.
WWF is campaigning for '11 priority environmental asks' and is looking for your support. You can access "Living Planet", the 'asks' and information about sending a letter to political party leaders and your local candidates, and more information by going to http://ht.ly/2b4wx
(15/7/10 - P) Seems silliness just doesn't go away
Details are sketchy but it seems someone thinks the old retirement village proposal for a major flooding area in Gisborne, on an important heritage site (Macedon House), is still a great idea. Apparently an application has been made to Council to start this thing up again.
MRRA Says:
This was clearly a bad idea the first time around and we aren't aware of anything that makes it any better second time around. We will let you know what's happening as more information becomes available. We are hearing some residents in Gisborne have been contacted by the proponents. We also note People First are scheduled to appear before the Gisborne Outline Development Plan [ODP] panel on Wednesday 28 July at 10.00am at the Council offices in Gisborne. Click here to see MRRA's archive on this application.
(15/7/10 - E) More details on meetings and submissions for Remnant Native Vegetation Investigation Discussion Paper
Click here for details.
(15/7/10 - P) There are plenty of issues. Is anyone thinking square peg in round hole?
At last night's council planning committee meeting it was decided on a split vote to defer a decision on the Woodend supermarket proposal at the railway station. One of the big issues is the already deficient Urquhart Street / High Street intersection which, if the supermarket is approved, will have to cope with even more traffic. A decision is apparently expected at the Council meeting in two weeks time.
MRRA Says:
We've been told Cr. Neil Manning, who has been trying to get improvements to the proposal and have issues addressed, copped an earful in chamber from Cr. Henryka Benson about delaying things, to the extent she received a rebuke from the Mayor.
Odd, we were under the impression that Cr. Benson, who takes a highly visible role in promoting all things Kyneton, also represents Woodend residents. It's surprising that she doesn't seem to be behind Cr. Manning's attempts to get the best possible outcome for Woodend.
We would also ask, is it wise to accept VicRoads' view that there isn't a problem at Urquhart St, especially after the clanger VicRoads has created with Black Forest Drive?
(29/6/10 - P) Meagre consultation, shabby process, a whiff of State government agenda and heaps of population growth should be ringing LOUD alarm bells
Four workshops have been held recently in Macedon Ranges - Kyneton, Gisborne, Romsey and Woodend - in the first round of community consultation on the Shire's Settlement Strategy. These attracted reasonable attendances by residents, with the usual array of real estate agents, developers and others with specific interests, as well as residents.
The Gisborne and Woodend meetings made it clear growth is not welcome, particularly the type of 'accelerated' growth presented by the consultants. The consultants, CPG, seemed unable to explain where these extravagant population numbers came from or what areas had been counted to arrive at final figures they presented. The figures seems to move around almost at will, but the objective seems to be to almost double Macedon Ranges' population in 30 years. In numeric terms, that's going from 39,000 in 2006 to around 55,000 to 60,000 by 2036. Unfortunately, the whole thing is still at the 'pick a number' stage, although one thing seems certain is that the consultants are on board with the State government's intention to make Macedon Ranges an outlying suburb of Melbourne.
MRRA Says:
Sounds like someone's got an agenda to (at least) double the size of our main towns. And where are all these people going to live? We need to keep in mind that the number of people in each household is dropping, so a higher number of houses will be needed to accommodate the same number of people it took less houses to accommodate a few years ago. Where are they to go, without destroying our small towns and communities, without reaching out into rural land, without metro-style 'units' everywhere?
Where's the water to come from? Where do we get twice as much water to service towns twice as big?
How do we stop twice as many people being killed and properties lost in a bushfire? HAS THE GOVERNMENT LEARNT NOTHING?
In our experience, competent and comprehensive major strategic projects don't usually start with presenting the community with soaring population growth numbers and asking which towns that growth should go in. In fact, there was an audible gasp at the Woodend meeting when CPG informed the gathering that Macedon Ranges has the best road and
rail infrastructure in the State. Now that's starting to sound like a sell job to us.
Why do we get the feeling that the CPG consultants seem to have come in here armed with the government's 'suburbanization' population targets, and blurt about how good it is, and the only thing being asked of the community is how and where are all these people to be squeezed in? Who are the consultants working for - the government, or us?
Consultation to date is a teensy bit of a joke - during the consultants' presentation, up on the screen "extensive community consultation" flashed by, but hang on, up until then, there had only been some erratic appearances by the consultants outside shops and supermarkets. That's EXTENSIVE?? Who have the consultants been talking to?
Consultation on a major strategic project doesn't usually start with rolling out numbers, either - how about some public consultation on Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats - SWOT. About community values? About the community experience with infrastructure? About over-population and the damage it is already doing to the special values of Macedon Ranges?
It also seems unbelievably courageous (in a Sir Humphrey sort of way) for CPG to lob up and rely only on overlays in our current under-done planning scheme to identify environmental constraints, and then to call that strategic. Someone tried that with the infamous Amendment C8 Residential and Industrial Review in the early 2000s, and that amendment fell over monumentally (and embarrassingly) when it was abandoned, on the advice of a Ministerial Advisory Committee, because it lacked strategic justification. Hmm, could lightning be about to strike twice? Or will any amendment be assisted by a Ministerial hand helping to overcome difficulties - like what most of us want - to deliver a manic growth agenda?
There's also a big, big problem with the way that whatever is being planned for the 'rural balance' of the Shire seems to be a whopping secret. That's right, CPG said it will be done later. Hey, guys, a Settlement Strategy is supposed to be integrated. The fact that this one doesn't seems to suggest Plan B is for the rural areas to sop up whatever isn't squashed into the towns. And on that note, the bush telegraph is alive with rumours of wholesale rural living development is about to roll out. Oops, didn't Melbourne 2030 say that's NOT to happen?
What about fire? No problem apparently, the consultants are waiting for the Royal Commission's report on Black Saturday to work out whether Macedon and Mt. Macedon are too big a fire risk for further growth. Wonder if they've ever heard of Ash Wednesday? Does it count that Woodend is one of the 50 worst fire risk towns in Victoria? Not yet, it seems...
And poor Statement of Planning Policy No.8. CPG told the Woodend meeting they had deleted it as a key policy just before that meeting because... someone at the Gisborne meeting said it didn't count anymore.
As for the consultants, CPG (formerly Coomes), from their website it seems they've worked on a lot of very large subdivision developments like Hillcroft Estate, South Morang; Caroline Springs Estate, Melton; Aurora Estate, Epping North; Roxburgh Park Estate; Cairnlea Estate, Deer Park, etc.
We would like to know what their experience (if any) is in Settlement Strategies for rural, environmentally-sensitive areas because in our mind, they certainly aren't off to a good start in the credibility or strategic stakes with what they've done so far. It's so NOT impressive to look like all you've come here with is the government's growth figures!
The word "underwhelmed" springs to mind... and if we think about it, we will probably be able to come up with some more.
(29/6/10 - E) This could be the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council's last report, as the Brumby government moves to dissolve VEAC, so don't miss this opportunity to comment
The Victorian Environmental Assessment Council (VEAC) released its Discussion Paper for its Remnant Native Vegetation Investigation on 28 June 2010.
You can now access VEAC's website at www.veac.vic.gov.au and download a copy of the Discussion Paper.
Hard copies of the Discussion Paper are also available from Department of Sustainability and Environment or Department of Primary Industries offices in the major towns, as well as from Information Victoria in Melbourne.
The Discussion Paper is the first report from VEAC's Remnant Native Vegetation Investigation and provides detailed information about the connectivity, condition, issues and challenges around remnant native vegetation in Victoria. The paper takes a strategic approach to this wealth of information - the Council does not propose to make land use recommendations for each of the thousands of individual public land reserves across Victoria.
SUBMISSIONS INVITED
Submissions are sought in response to the Discussion Paper. Submissions will be used to assist Council in formulating its final report due to be submitted to the Minister for Environment and Climate Change by March 2011.
If you care about how native vegetation contributes to Victoria's sustainable landscapes, biodiversity conservation, recreation activities, or have an opinion on how it should be managed to improve ecological connectivity, this is an opportunity to be heard.
THIS SUBMISSION PERIOD CLOSES ON MONDAY 30 AUGUST 2010.
Details on how to make a submission are on VEAC's website and the inside front cover of the Discussion Paper.
REGIONAL WORKSHOPS
VEAC is also holding workshops at various locations around Victoria to discuss information and issues raised in the Discussion Paper. The times and locations are as follows:
Bendigo: 10 am - 2 pm, Tuesday 20 July
Mildura: 11 am - 3 pm, Wednesday 21 July
Hamilton: 10 am - 2 pm, Thursday 22 July
Dandenong: 10 am - 2 pm, Tuesday 27 July
Benalla: 10 am - 2 pm, Wednesday 28 July
Horsham: 10 am - 2 pm, Thursday 29 July
Melbourne CBD: 10 am - 2 pm, Tuesday 3 August
Traralgon: 10 am - 2 pm, Wednesday 4 August
Please contact VEAC if you wish to attend one of these workshops, or if you require more information.
JOAN PHILLIPS
Director
Victorian Environmental Assessment Council
Level 6, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne, 3002
Phone: (03) 9637-9902 Fax: (03) 9637-8024
Toll free: 1800 134 803
Email: veac@dse.vic.gov.au Website: www.veac.vic.gov.au
(29/6/10 - SG) MRRA gets a run but so does yet more de-regulation
The Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission - Victoria's version of the Productivity Commission - has released its report into Streamlining Local Government regulation (draft, April 2010). In a nutshell, the report is about making Council regulations less tiresome for developers and business, including planning.
Seems the VCEC thinks Development Assessment Committees [DACs] are good, which tells us ordinary people who don't count that DACs definitely won't work for us. The commission also seems to think councils may be "imposing disproportionate risk management requirements" on contractors.
'Not impressed' might cover it.
Click http://www.vcec.vic.gov.au/CA256EAF001C7B21/0/0925AE643E27917BCA25766D0005157E?OpenDocument
to access the report and submissions.
MRRA Says:
Yep, yet another State government report that isn't about getting it right but getting it cheap and easy (for some), and turfing out regulations and standards. There are now so many reports of this ilk rolling in, it's almost boring.
MRRA were devils and said there needs to be more prescription. The VCEC dismissed this fanciful notion as not a goer. Dang, what were we thinking of, in this world of ever-sliding standards and accountability!!??
So yes, let's chuck out all the rules so some feel liberated, and richer. The rest of us don't mind being walked over, disadvantaged, damaged or exterminated, do we?
Does it always take something catastrophic like climate change, or the world financial crisis, to make people understand that the world's obsessive pursuit of the almighty dollar, of giving every advantage to business and economics and growth, of stripping out regulation, is signing our own death warrant?
PS If anybody finds something truly democratic and equitable, or socially and environmentally responsible, in the report, can you please let us know? Thanks.
(22/5/10 - P) Definitive interpretation of State guidelines for development in open, potable water catchments
Just before Christmas, VCAT delivered a 'red dot' decision that finally, finally set some standards and restrictions for development in open, potable water catchments. The application, for four houses on four rural lots, had been around for several years. The land in question is immediately upstream of Woodend's Campaspe Reservoir, which provides drinking water for the town. That is, the subject land is within an open, potable water catchment, meaning the water that runs from the privately-owned land is harvested and stored as a domestic drinking water supply.
The application was refused by Macedon Ranges Shire Council, and also collected objections from referral authorities Western Water and Southern Rural Water on its way to VCAT in 2007. VCAT approved the application.
VCAT's decision was then challenged on a point of law at the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that VCAT had indeed made a legal error in not taking matters required to be considered properly into account.
As a result of this Supreme Court ruling, to its credit the State government reviewed and introduced stronger guidelines for development in open potable water catchments. One of the new bases for decision-making introduced in the revised guidelines is a requirement for the 'precautionary principle' to be applied when determining planning applications, and another is a new, explicit need to consider 'incremental' impacts of development (i.e. not just the impact of the application under consideration but its impact when added to existing impacts).
The Supreme Court's ruling overturned VCAT's original decision, and the application was sent back to VCAT for a new decision. The new guidelines were now required to be used to make this decision. VCAT's December 2009 decision, with Vice President Helen Gibson in the chair, concluded that an application for 4 houses did not meet the guidelines' requirements. VCAT ordered that a permit issue for only one (1) house.
Needless to say, such a sensible decision - which puts the public interest first - has been met with howls of protest from those who don't appear to (1) understand the importance of protecting domestic drinking water supplies and the catchments that collect that water, (2) those who see open potable water catchments as just so much empty land begging to be profitably developed and (3) don't seem to get 'public interest'.
The December 2009 VCAT decision is now, we understand, being challenged in the Supreme Court.
Click here to see MRRA's archive. Click here to see the December 2009 VCAT decision. Click here for more information about the new guidelines for open, potable water catchments.
MRRA Says:
The December 2009 VCAT decision provides an excellent insight into the reasoning applied in making the decision. It also sets down a definitive interpretation of the new open potable catchment guidelines, what they mean and how they are to be applied.
The other VERY interesting thing about this decision is how VCAT saw the Macedon Ranges' planning scheme - seems it is so full of references to protecting rural land and our precious water catchments they were too numerous to fully reference. Another very welcome finding was that Statement of Planning Policy No. 8 is not only relevant but upholds National water policy. And so say all of us!
(22/5/10 - P) The very, very lazy Department leaps over proper planning by sliding MELBOURNE 2030 over the whole State!
The State government called for submissions over the Christmas period on changes it was proposing to the State Planning Policy Framework [SPPF]. The SPPF sits in the front of all planning schemes and provides State policy for planning decisions.
The Department's 'changes' were publicized and touted as 'policy neutral', basically just a bit of housekeeping. That's not what MRRA found when we did a word for word comparison of the 'old' and 'new'!
Hidden amongst all of this supposed 'neutrality' were some knock-out and distinctly non-neutral characteristics: for example, the policy statements that restricted Melbourne 2030 to the metropolitan area had been deleted, meaning - oops - M2030 now applied everywhere, and additionally, Melbourne 2030 policy statements were suddenly splattered across all sections of the SPPF. And some of the results this produced were laughable. For example, the Melbourne 2030 AIRPORTS policy was included in the existing SPPF policy for Airfields - an uneasy mix of Tullamarine policy being applied to informal airstrips across the State. As MRRA pointed out in its submission, Kyneton airfield is NOT Tullamarine. Trying to work out what Melbourne 2030's reference to 'fringe areas' meant in a Macedon Ranges' context produced mega head-shaking and shoulder-shrugging...
The State Heritage policy was decimated with, as it turns out, a garbled version of the Planning and Environment Act's objectives for planning in Victoria substituted as 'new' State Heritage policy.
Attempts to 'streamline' the SPPF has left it totally without context or explanation - and in some places, it doesn't really make sense. Add to that the stripping away and mish-mashing of references to documents or policies or other standards that development was, until now, required to comply with, and...
A step or two too far, we think. If you aren't already familiar with the SPPF, you will have no hope of understanding it if these 'thousand cuts' go ahead.
There were also some insidious changes, such as making it State policy that development in Activity Centres would only be high density instead of the existing 'mix that includes high density', and of course the clanger that sees the existing reference to Macedon Ranges as an area of State level significance deleted.
MRRA Says:
Neutered rather than neutral.
This whole exercise really is an insult to people's intelligence. We hope it's just laziness and/or incompetence which can be overcome with a little thought, effort and improved work practices - oh, and an adherence to the principles of sound and orderly planning.
We thought about sending in a comprehensive typed submission detailing everything we found, but hey, the Department is paid to get it right and we aren't paid at all. So we just sent a short overview and a pdf of our working copy of the SPPF covered in extensive hand-written annotations. Let's see if anyone listens...
(22/5/10 - P) Joke Joyce - only an 'improvement' if you are a developer.
The State government's proposed changes to a critical piece of legislation - the Planning and Environment Act - provide more evidence of a mindless 'at any cost' development and growth agenda. A key issue is the attempt to set up a separate planning process for proponents of development, to make it easier for them to get what they want. Ordinary people are shut out, while developers get a 'fast-tracked' process where the Minister makes the decisions - developers even get to run their own planning scheme amendments to rezone land to fit their development.
MRRA Says:
Last time we looked this wasn't called good planning - in fact, it isn't called planning at all. It's also not democracy, accountability, transparency or equity. Oh, well, shouldn't be surprised, 'mates rates' usually aren't. It would be laughable if it wasn't so despicable.
Now the only thing standing between Victoria and this disaster is the Upper House. And an election in November, of course...
(22/5/10 - SG) Another attempt to massage law to fit an agenda?
In another example of what is becoming a torrent of change and proposed change, the State parliament's Environment Committee is currently 'reviewing' the Environmental Effects Statement Act. The Review's Terms of Reference suggest one of the Review's objectives is to make EES processes quicker and less costly. It's an argument often put forward by proponents (e.g. developers or even the State government itself).
There was a fairly comprehensive review of the EES Act in 2002. The Panel's recommendations were almost entirely set aside by the present State government.
MRRA Says:
Community people in our networks are getting a strong feeling that the total rush of 'stuff' being put out by government and its agencies is keyed to keeping us exhausted and pre-occupied.
Many of these items upon which comment is invited involve reading reams of paper just to understand the issues and the solutions being put forward. It can be tedious, and is certainly time-consuming.
The nub of it is that even when community groups make a submission, using up precious volunteer time and sometimes scarce funds, most community-based submissions are simply ignored. It's more usual these days for the 'big boys' to get what they want, or the outcome is pre-ordained to deliver an ever-more-obvious agenda anyway. Nothing any of us could say will change it.
MRRA let its exasperation out in responding to an invitation to put in comments on this one. Click here to see what we said.
Click here to see the ever-so-enthusiastic-and-polite response we received. We're impressed!
(22/5/10 - C) More bad news - the gist seems to be 'expect higher rates'
The MAV has issued a media release, announcing the availability of the latest Local Government Cost Index, which forecasts council costs will increase an average of 4% in the next year. Click here to see the MAV's media release, and for a link to the Cost Index.
CURRENT Action Required Latest Department Of Planning And Community Development [DPCD] Notices
(22/5/10 - P) On guard, people, annual report released on Urban Development Program (Brumby's Bible?)
Click here for information about government issues you can comment on, and latest approved and exhibited amendments to planning schemes in Victoria.
(30/10/09 - C) Out with www.macedon-ranges.vic.gov.au, in with www.mrsc.vic.gov.au
Macedon Ranges Council has announced on its website (http://www.macedon-ranges.vic.gov.au/page/page.asp?page_Id=2067) that Council email addresses and its website address are changing to make it simpler and easier to contact Council.
The old address of "macedon-ranges" is being replaced with the shorter "mrsc" as part of electronic addresses. The format of staff email addresses has also changed, and will usually be the person's first initial and surname.
Council's website says you may want to email any staffers you regularly contact to confirm new email addresses. Both the old and new email addresses are up and running, and "old" addresses will divert to the new ones until March 2010.
MRRA Says:
This is a good move. The old addresses have always been a mouthful, and prone to typo mistakes, so bouquets to Council for this one.
(30/5/09 - O) The try, try and try again principle, beautifully repackaged.
When you think you can't go on, turn your mind to this... Make sure you watch until the end.
http://www.maniacworld.com/are-you-going-to-finish-strong.html
UPDATE Massive Residential Development Planned For Golf Course Hill In Woodend
(14/10/06 - P) There's movement at the station, or so the stories go
Hot rumours circulating in Woodend suggest the developers who are dreaming of turning Farming zoned land and Woodend icon Golf Course Hill into a 750 - 1000 lot housing estate - and putting a new Braemar School next to the sewerage treatment plant - have now purchased the Davies' 300-odd acre farm, and it will be vacated by early next year. Click here to see our earlier report.
MRRA Says:
Judging by the number of calls we are getting from Woodend residents angry with and opposed to this development, there will be a monumental fight over this application when it - or the Braemar application - finally comes in. We hear the Braemar application isn't too far away. Is it too cynical to suggest the Braemar application is going first in an attempt to justify all of those new lots?
There will inevitably be support for the Braemar proposal. What supporters need to understand is that to get the school, they also have to take the houses. By the way, 750 - 1000 new lots will almost double the numbers of houses inside the town today.
Are We All Rooned? Someone Asks The $64,000 Question: Should It Be An Ambulance Or A Fence?
(23/8/06 - E) "The water issues continue to amaze me. I would not have thought we could come this close to the edge of the cliff without somebody thinking about the fence that might be built for the future..."
Click here to see how somebody feels about the water crisis.