//
[2004] VCAT 544
General information, not legal advice.
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
2004-03-30
Original judgment source is linked above.
The application accords with the general direction for the Green Wedge Zone as it is not an offensive use that will detract from the rural amenity of the area. Melbourne 2030 seeks to protect green wedges from intensive agricultural that would cause odour, noise and visual obtrusion to the area
72 Such a statement is a curious interpretation of the role of green wedges. It does not accord with my reading of the documents. Wisely, Ms Stojanovski did not repeat such a statement at the hearing. Instead, in relation to the green wedge provisions in Melbourne 2030, Ms Stojanovski concluded that the proposed development will provide a function that is essential to any urban environment and areas which serve as tourist attractors. She highlighted that Werribee South is identified as an area of environmental and social values. Further, she noted that Melbourne 2030 also nominates that there are recreational and tourism opportunities associated with Point Cook Coastal Park.
73 Ms Stojanovski conceded that the proposal does not have a direct relationship to Werribee South, the Coastal Park, the RAAF Museum or the tourism precinct in K Road. However, she submitted that it will provide accommodation and business facilities that will facilitate tourism to the municipality.
74 I do not consider that the factors identified by Ms Stojanovski support a conclusion that the proposal is consistent with the green wedge provisions of Melbourne 2030. She has selectively cited the document and placed too much reliance on the references to recreation and tourism opportunities.
75 I appreciate that it is necessary to have regard to the Melbourne 2030 document in its entirety. It includes important objectives relating recreation, tourism and economic development, particularly under the key direction A more prosperous city. Such objectives are also supported by State and local policies, such as those at Clause 17.04 and Clause 21.08
76 This is a situation where there is conflict or tension between policies. For instance, there can be no doubt that the proposal would have economic advantages. In the words of Mr Lawrence, the project offers a host of economic benefits. It would also have social planning advantages, in that it would provide a facility for the expanding residential area to the north. However, I consider that the more specific policies relating to the use of green wedges should prevail.
77 I have reached the conclusion that the proposal would be contrary to many of the key provisions relating to the role of green wedges. It is not a use that needs to be located in a non-urban area. It would not preserve a rural landscape. It is a scale of development and intensity of use that is incompatible with the character of non-urban land in a green wedge. It would also be contrary to the role of green wedges, identified in Implementation Plan 5, in providing a home for those who enjoy living in a more open landscape.
78 In the light of my findings on the strategic issues it is not necessary to fully consider other matters.
79 In his objection to the application Mr Perks queried the capacity of Point Cook Road to deal with the extra traffic. I was advised, however, that the road is to be duplicated within three years. VicRoads has indicated that access to the site can be managed with an upgraded single entry.
80 It is unnecessary to consider whether the proposed on-site parking provision is adequate. Given the size of the site there is scope to provide as many spaces as necessary. The applicant has not contested the proposed condition requiring extra spaces and an overflow area for future spaces, if needed.
81 In summary I have found that infrastructure requirements could be managed to avoid adverse environmental impacts. Adequate parking spaces could be accommodated on the site. Traffic generated would be unlikely to affect the capacity of the road.
82 However, my fundamental finding is that the proposal is contrary to the purpose of the Rural Zone, the character of the area and strategic planning for the green wedge. The Council and the applicant have failed to justify why an intensive urban use should be located in a Rural Zone that is part of Melbourne's Green Wedge.
83 Accordingly I will allow the Application for Review and make the appropriate order.
Perks
Wyndham CC [2004] VCAT 544
63 However, I consider that the purpose of Clause 57 has relevance to the extent that it is consistent with the overall thrust of the provisions relating to green wedges in the October 2002 document Melbourne 2030 - Planning for sustainable growth. That document is one that must be considered pursuant to Clause 60(1)(b)(ii) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. It should be given weight because it is a strategic plan in its final form that has been adopted by the Minister and the State Government. After extensive consultation they are pursuing its implementation on a serious basis (See O'Connell Street Developments Pty Ltd v Yarra CC & Ors, [2003] VCAT 448).