REASONS FOR DECISION TO EXERCISE POWER OF INTERVENTION

UNDER SECTION 20(4) OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 1987

MORNINGTON PENINSULA PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C225

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act), the Heritage Act 1995 and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 provide for the intervention of the Minister for Planning in planning and heritage processes. In exercising my powers of intervention, I have agreed to: Make publicly available written reasons for each decision; and Provide a report to Parliament at least every twelve months detailing the nature of each intervention.

REQUEST FOR INTERVENTION 1. The Arthurs Seat Skylift Pty Ltd has requested that the Minister for Planning prepare, Amendment C225 to the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme and adopt and approve the amendment with the exemption from notice using section 20(4) of the Act. 2. The effect of the amendment is to change the schedule to Clause 61.01 of the planning scheme to make the Minister for Planning, the responsible authority for administrating the planning scheme and considering and determining associated matters for the Arthurs Seat Skylift development.

WHAT POWER OF INTERVENTION IS BEING USED? 3. I have decided to exercise my powers to exempt myself from all the requirements of Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Act and the regulations in respect to Amendment C225 to the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme. 4. Section 20(4) of the Act enables the Minister for Planning to exempt an amendment which the Minister prepares from any of the requirements of sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Act or the regulations. 5. In seeking to exercise this power, Section 20(4) of the Act requires that the Minister must consider that compliance with any of those requirements is not warranted or that the interests of Victoria or any part of Victoria make such an exemption appropriate.

BACKGROUND 6. Arthurs Seat is a well-known, popular landmark and landscape feature on the Mornington Peninsula. A chairlift operated within the Arthurs Seat State Park with the operator obtaining a lease to use the site from the early 1960s for some 40 years. It closed in 2006 for safety reasons. 7. After the chairlift closed, and the lease terminated, Parks Victoria, as the public land manager, sought expressions of interest for a new chairlift and associated infrastructure. A process from 2009 led to the selection of a preferred developer. 8. The preferred developer, Arthurs Seat Skylift Pty Ltd, lodged a planning permit application with the Mornington Peninsula Shire Council (Council). Council issued a notice of decision to issue the planning permit for the Arthurs Seat Skylift and associated infrastructure in 2014. A review of Council’s decision was sought under Section 82 of the Act. 9. After an eight (8) day hearing at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) the planning permit was granted. Plans have subsequently been endorsed under the permit. 10. On 20 July 2015 it was announced that a fifty (50) year lease had been signed to facilitate the development within the Arthurs Seat State Park. To facilitate this lease, the National Parks Act 1975 was amended by inserting Clause 32CC. 11. While I have decided to exercise my powers to exempt myself from all the requirements of Sections 17, 18 and 19, I consulted with a number of stakeholders to inform my ultimate decision pursuant to Section 20(5) of the Act.

BENEFITS OF EXEMPTION 12. The main benefit of the exemption of the amendment from the formal notice requirements under the Act, is that it will enable a prompt decision to be made on the adoption and approval of the amendment. It will also avoid unnecessary duplication of process, as significant consultation occurred with potentially affected parties during the original permit application process for the development including the eight (8) day hearing at VCAT. 13. It is considered that the views of affected parties are known and understood and have been considered. The exemption of the amendment will expedite the process to change the responsible authority status for the development, which will facilitate the delivery of this state significant project.

EFFECTS OF EXEMPTION ON THIRD PARTIES 14. The effect of exempting the amendment from the requirements of Section 17, 18 and 19 of the Act and the regulations is that third parties will not be notified of the proposed amendment, nor will they be provided with an opportunity to make formal submissions in relation to the amendment or have those submissions considered by an independent planning panel. 15. A planning permit has been granted for the development with the views of the affected parties considered and understood during the determination of that permit. Those views and the views of parties consulted under Section 20(5) of the Act have been taken into account in the preparation of the amendment.

ASSESSMENT AS TO WHETHER BENEFITS OF EXEMPTIONS OUTWEIGH EFFECTS ON THIRD PARTIES 16. Amending the responsible authority status for the development is a procedural matter that will have no effect on third parties. Proper planning process will continue to apply to this development. Any future application to the development will not alter notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act as a result of this intervention. 17. Accordingly I consider that the benefits of exempting myself from Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Act outweigh any effects of the exemption on third parties.

DECISION 18. I have decided to exercise my power to exempt myself from all the requirements of Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Act and the regulations in respect of Amendment C225 to the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme.

REASONS FOR INTERVENTION 19. I provide the following reasons for my decision to exercise my power under Section 20(4) of the Act. 20. I am satisfied that - Compliance with any of the requirements of Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Act and the regulations is not warranted because:  Planning permit applications associated with the Arthurs Seat Development will still be subject to the standard planning permit application process including the notice requirements and appeal rights of the Act where applicable.  Given the above, it is unlikely that further consultation would alter the outcome.

SIGNED BY THE MINISTER

HON RICHARD WYNNE MP Minister for Planning

Date: 1 May 2016