A proposal being considered by the Victorian government to limit the powers of councils over big developments purportedly to increase housing supply is being criticised as “bypassing local democracy” by a local government association.
In an attempt to increase housing density in exisiting suburbs, the government is considering winding back the planning powers of local councils in the hopes of fast-tracking developments near public transport, the Age has reported.
The chief executive of the Victorian Local Governance Association, Kathryn Arndt, said the body and its member councils recognised the state’s housing problem but want to work collaboratively with the state government to fix it.
“Local councils understand their communities and whether individual planning applications are in their best interests,” she said. “Bypassing local democracy is not the answer to our housing crisis.”
Arndt said the state’s planning system was designed to give people a “democratic voice in their local communities” and pointed to the planning minister already having extensive powers, including the ability to override local governments in exceptional circumstances.
“Expanding ministerial powers further at the expense of local communities would be a mistake,” she said.
It comes after the new New South Wales housing minister, Rose Jackson, said last week she was determined to see medium- and high-density housing built in Sydney’s north shore and eastern suburbs.
The Property Council has also reportedly backed a process to fast-track planning approvals and cut out local government to help develop medium- and high-density dwellings in Melbourne’s suburbs.
The Municipal Association of Victoria’s president, David Clark, said planning should focus on building and growing communities rather than “lining developers’ pockets”.
Clark said any move to sideline councils would “put at risk the transparency and effectiveness of the current system.”
“Victorians expect to be consulted on significant development within their neighbourhoods and councils are the best place for this consultation to take place,” he said.
Clark said the peak body had sought an urgent meeting with the planning minister to discuss the proposed changes.
The mayor of Merri-bek city council in Melbourne’s north, Angelica Panopoulos, said it was vital that councils were empowered to determine planning applications that helped boost the liveability of an area.
“We appreciate the importance of neighbourhood character, but it is also always changing,” she said. “We need to manage that change in a respectful way that looks out for existing and future residents.”
Panopoulos – a member of the Victorian Greens – said the council backed new developments in Merri-bek that provided public and affordable housing and would support projects that featured “quality design in appropriate areas of our municipality”.
“Higher-density developments in established areas like Merri-bek are a necessary part of delivering the large number of homes needed for our growing population.”
A spokesperson for the Victorian government confirmed an update of Plan Melbourne – that sets the city’s planning strategy – was under way and would be considered this year.
“We will continue to work with councils, industry and local communities to improve housing choice and affordability close to jobs, services and public transport,” the spokesperson said.
The director of RMIT’s Centre for Urban Research, Jago Dodson, said the government’s reform could take different pathways and could include appointing a government agency the powers to override local government’s applications of residential zones within their municipalities. Dodson said it was vital that the reforms focused on quality development, access to amenities like parks and had a focus on affordable housing.
“It needs to have a social dimension to it too,” he said. “If developers are making large profits, some of that should be captured to support public infrastructure.”
He said the proposed changes would require legislation to pass parliament.
The opposition on Wednesday said removing councils for planning processes was not a substitute for real planning or proper investment in infrastructure.
