Local Planning in Victoria

Local Planning in the ACT

View across Canberra; from War Memorial Across Lake Burley Griffin to Old and New Parliament Houses


 

- Canberra is incredibly unique in that it had a well formulated full scale plan from its very inception, consequently a number of orderly design principles are observed, perhaps most notable the City Beautiful.

- Canberra being the national capital has Commonwealth significance and is legislated accordingly, resultantly leaving a unique planning environment where commonwealth interest and territory interest are represented by differing governing bodies.

- Dual Planning System:

- NCA administer a statutory and strategic capital plan NCP affecting primarily commonwealth land: Designated Lands

- ACTPLA administer territory plan which has the bulk of territory land under its jurisdiction: Territory Land

- Notably on land ownership: land in the ACT is held under a unique land tenure leasehold system where land is effectively leased for 99 year periods with the general expectation that the lease will be renewed after the expiry of the 99 year period. 

Local Plannig in NSW

Local Level Planning Framework

This week our Planning class was privileged enough to have Hamish Sinclair (Consultant Planner and ACT PIA director) as a guest lecturer. As an individual who has had substantial experience working within the ACT Planning legislation- as well as contributing to formulating it- it was certainly illuminating to have an ‘insiders’ insight into the prevailing planning environment.

Surprisingly one of the most the conspicuous and intriguing notions in this week’s discussion was simply how complex navigating the dual National and Territory ACT planning process can be (This is demonstrated in the flow diagram below). Additionally the idea of what could be described as a presence or culture of complexity was also breached- specifically how it is common place for governments or planning bodies (at various levels) to overregulate by amending  planning legislation or protocol-even when in some instances it has clearly become out-dated or miscellaneous- as opposed to reducing, simplifying and modernising it. These issues are confounded within the Australian context by the varying intricate interstate local level planning codes that add to complexity of the ‘operational planning environment.’ Interestingly Hamish juxtaposed the Australian planning system with the New Zealand system which is to a greater extent homogenous and not as complicated by differing state planning codes.

A second fascinating and perhaps more poignant idea discussed was that of the role of the planner in a local planning framework that is dominated by private development sector. The work of a planner is inherently communicative, visionary and idealistic however how much ‘positive change’ can be achieved by planners who operate in such developer dominated fields that subject to economic/market forces? The suggested answer lies within first recognising the need that developer driven investment is essential and that successful development goes hand in hand with sound planning. Once that is understood it could possible for a planner to work within the planning system to develop a solution which resonates the needs and ideals of all stakeholders within the community.

There are certainly many different ways one can learn about Urban Planning, however surely one of the best ways is to simply listen to and discuss planning issues with those experienced individuals in the profession who are willing to impart their knowledge and thoughts to the new upcoming generation of planners. This is what our class experienced with Hamish and it would certainly seem that some great trains of thought and ideas for consideration arose from it. 

- ACT Planning Systems Flow Chart.

Who is Involved?

Stakeholders are diverse in nature from residents to business owners and governments.

A major hallmark of the Urban Planning process is surely its complexity in terms of stakeholder interest representation and consultation. As is often said academic literature on planning: it is part of the urban planner role to work as a public advocate, to work for a common good across society and not simply for the good of select stakeholders (often the most influential). As such planners, in addition to standard spatial, environmental, social and economic facets of society need to consider the interest of stakeholders- that is people influenced by a project and people who influence the decisions.

As noted in a recent UC Urban lecture there are various levels of stakeholder participation within the planning process: 1) Information provision- informing those with interest in plan, 2) Consultation: stakeholders are sought at intervals to provide input and feedback, 3) Deciding together- stakeholders are meaningful decision makers who work with the planning body and other pertinent professionals in the planning formulation process, 4) Acting together- stakeholders involved at implementation stage in the process and 5) Supporting independent stakeholder groups- independent development of strategies by involved stakeholders. 

Case Study: Dockland Redevelopment, Melbourne