Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C323 Melbourne Arts Precinct, Southbank

Addendum to October 2018 Town Planning Evidence Prepared by C A Heggen BTRP FPIA Prepared for Creative Victoria

October 2019

Contents 1 Preamble 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Summary of assessment 1

2 Assessment 2 2.1 What were the principal recommendations of the Panel in its Interim Report? 2 2.2 What has changed in the revised version of Amendment C323 2 2.3 Has there been any relevant change to the planning or physical context since the Panel last considered Am C323? 2 2.4 What issues have been raised by submitters? 3 2.5 Does the revised version of Am C323 deliver an appropriate planning outcome? 3

3 Conclusion 5

Appendix A: Existing controls 6

Appendix B: Re-Exhibited CCZ Schedule 7 9

Appendix C: Witness statement 13

1 Preamble 1.1 Introduction The revised Amendment was re-exhibited from IN ■ Does the revised version of Am C323 deliver an In October 2018 the Panel considered July 2019 and a total of 12 submissions were appropriate planning outcome? Amendment C323 (Am C323) to the Melbourne received, some of which are supportive of the My conclusion is that, whilst in some areas the Planning Scheme which seeks to introduce revised Amendment and others of which raise revised Amendment departs from the approach permanent planning controls for the Melbourne concerns. recommended by the Panel, it provides a sound Arts Precinct in Southbank. I have been requested by Creative Victoria and and logical basis for permanent controls and associated policy directions, subject to some On 3 December 2018, the Panel issued an Interim Melbourne City Council to prepare this addendum minor further refinements recommended later in Panel Report which concluded that whilst there is to my original expert evidence statement of this addendum report. broad policy support for the Amendment, it had October 2018 to address the planning merits of My reasons for these conclusions are set out in concerns with the adequacy of the Amendment as the revised Amendment. the following section of this document. exhibited. 1.2 Summary of assessment Additional background information is included in The Panel’s view was that, whilst refinements to My instructions are principally to consider the the appendices as follows: the controls that were ‘workshopped’ during the appropriateness of the revised Amendment in ■ course of the hearing addressed some of the Appendix A – Current planning controls and terms of both the suitability of the changes that identified shortcomings, these changes ought to policy have been made; and whether there is justification be the subject of further exhibition. In addition the ■ Appendix B – Re-Exhibited CCZ Schedule 7 for the proposed approach where the suggestions Panel identified further work that in its view should ■ Appendix C – Witness Statement of the Panel have not been adopted and an be undertaken to provide an enduring planning alternative is proposed. framework for the Arts Precinct. This addendum does not address the broader “…there is merit in differentiating the state strategic policy and urban context of the Arts significant Melbourne Arts Precinct via its own Precinct which were addressed in my original schedule to the Capital City Zone. This would be evidence and are well understood by the Panel, consistent with comprehensive policy directions to except where this is directly relevant to the issues date. However, the Panel has concerns about the presented by the revised Amendment. effectiveness of the proposed direction and drafting of the Amendment that cannot be However, in undertaking a detailed consideration remedied without further consideration and most of the revised Amendment, I have also considered likely re-exhibition. For these reasons, the Panel whether there have been any relevant changes to is disinclined to finalise the Melbourne Arts the planning context, or physical changes that Precinct Amendment within the confines of the need to be taken into account. drafting undertaken to date.”1 Accordingly I have structured my assessment around the following questions: Since the interim Panel Report was released, the Amendment has been revised by the Melbourne ■ What were the principal issues identified in the City Council in conjunction with Creative Victoria Interim Panel Report? to respond to the issues raised by the Panel (the ■ What changes have been made to the revised Amendment). The revisions take the form Amendment of amendments to the proposed Capital City Zone ■ What issues have been raised by submitters? Schedule (CCZ7) and the inclusion of changes to ■ Has there been any relevant change to the various clauses in the MSS to provide supportive planning or physical context since the Panel policy directions. last considered Am C323?

1 Interim Panel Report, page 17

2.1 What were the principal Creative Victoria to provide practical guidance, The amendments to CCZ7 include: It is the case that public realm improvements in 2 Assessment given the absence of suitable definitions in the Southbank Boulevard and Dodds Street have recommendations of the Panel ■ Refinements to the purpose of the schedule, Victorian Planning Provisions (VPPs). progressed since that time. However, while these in its Interim Report? which includes a description of the types of ■ Retaining the interim controls of the CCZ works will enhance the physical appearance and Whilst the Panel was of the view that the original arts, culture and creative industry uses Schedule 7 in their current form until more connectivity of the northern end of the Arts Amendment was consistent with strategic policy encouraged to locate within the precinct, in lieu comprehensive and directed permanent Precinct generally, they are not directly relevant to directions for the Melbourne Arts Precinct, it of providing a definition of creative industries in controls are developed and implemented. the Amendment which is primarily aimed at expressed concerns about the workability of the the schedule. However, the Panel also recommended that guiding planning outcomes on privately held land. Amendment as drafted and declined to support it ■ Amendments to the table of uses to include further work be undertaken to strengthen and in its exhibited form. Whilst some of the floor area limits in Section 1 for food and drink Similarly I am not aware of any further Council or refine the Amendment to: refinements suggested by Creative Victoria during premises, shop and place of worship. VCAT decisions on permit applications within the the course of the hearing were found to have ■ Delineate what makes the precinct unique or to ■ Amendments to the application guidelines for precinct that have a bearing on the matters before merit, the Panel was obliged to evaluate the identify the future character sought for the use of land to require an acoustic assessment the Panel. amendment as exhibited. precinct either in its purpose, controls or for residential uses. In terms of the planning context, there have been decision guidelines ■ The Interim Panel Report therefore provides A range of more general refinements to referral no significant changes in State or local planning ■ direction for further work to be undertaken to Consider the role of Design and Development requirements, application requirements and policy or changes in the controls affecting the Arts address the issues identified by the Panel. It does Overlay Schedule 1 (DDO1) in providing decision guidelines. Precinct or neighbouring areas that would change not recommend that the Amendment be guidance for the Arts Precinct and the The changes to MSS relate to Clauses 21.04 the context in which the Amendment is to be abandoned, but rather that further strategic work interaction between DDOs and the strategic Settlement), 21.08 (Economic Development), considered. planning work being undertaken in respect of be undertaken to strengthen and refine the 21.10 (Infrastructure) and 21.13 (Urban Renewal Am C308 which proposes the introduction of new proposed a new Design and Development Amendment, with such revisions to be the subject Areas) and comprise relatively minor wording urban design provisions for the Central City and Overlay proposed within Am C308 (Central City of further public notification. additions to recognise and support the role of the Southbank has progressed since October 2018. and Southbank Urban Design). Arts Precinct and provide a policy basis for The Panel’s key findings in relation to the content ■ Identify and address the future needs of arts increased legibility and the provision for arts, Am C308 has been exhibited and was considered and structure of the Amendment are summarised institutions within the Arts Precinct, as distinct culture and creative industries in the lower levels by a Panel in March 2019. below. from transferring existing zone provisions that of buildings in the precinct. Overall, the Panel was supportive of Am C308 In general terms, the Panel supported the apply to the Southbank area of Melbourne as a Whilst the changes respond to the Panel’s which proposes to: following aspects of the exhibited Amendment and whole. recommendations, some of the recommendations ■ Replace the existing Schedule 1 to the Design refinements suggested through the Panel process: ■ Consider whether transitional provisions are are open to different interpretations and in other and Development Overlay (Active Street ■ The introduction of a specific schedule to the required and what the effect of the Amendment cases an alternative approach is proposed by Frontages) with a revised schedule may be on existing planning permits. Council. My assessment of the suitability of the Capital City Zone (CCZ) for the Melbourne Arts ■ Delete the policy at Clause 22.01 ‘Urban changes is discussed in Section 2.5 of this Precincts. Design in the Capital City Zone’ and translate addendum. ■ The concept of seeking floor space for creative 2.2 What has changed in the the policies of this clause into requirements in industries within the lower four levels of new revised version of Amendment 2.3 Has there been any Schedule 1 to the Design and Development buildings through the inclusion of as-of-right C323 Overlay arts and creative uses within the CCZ Schedule The revised version of the Amendment that was relevant change to the planning ■ Delete Schedule 4 (Weather Protection – 7 and making accommodation and office uses re-exhibited included a number of wording or physical context since the Capital City Zone) of the Design and (if not associated with creative industries) refinements to Schedule 7 to the CCZ as well as Panel last considered Am Development Overlay and incorporate the permit-required uses. amendments to various clauses in the Municipal C323? provisions of that schedule into Schedule 1. ■ The additions to local planning policy Strategic Statement (MSS) and the schedule to From my observations there have been no Some modifications were suggested by the Panel recommended in my original evidence, subject Clause 66.04 to include Creative Victoria as a changes in the physical context of the Arts to delete policy at Clause 22.20 (CBD lanes), and to further notification. recommending referral authority for applications Precinct since the Panel considered Am C323 in Schedule 3 to the DDO (Traffic Conflict Frontages ■ for use and development in the first four storeys of The addition of a definition of ‘creative October 2018 that raise any new issues for – Capital City Zone) and incorporate these a building. industries’ in the CCZ Schedule as proposed by consideration in this matter.

provisions into the new DDO Schedule 1, as well 2.4 What issues have been 2.5 Does the revised version of I am not convinced that there is a specific as refinements to the wording and structure of raised by submitters? Am C323 deliver an appropriate character to the arts precinct that can be easily DDO1 and the Melbourne Design Guide which defined and the delivery of appropriate land use A total of 12 submissions were made in response underpins the new control. planning outcome? outcomes allied with good urban design consistent to the re-exhibition of the Amendment, on behalf In this section I have firstly considered the with the approach to the whole Central City should I am instructed that Council is currently of a range of cultural and business organisations, changes made in response to the Panel’s Interim deliver appropriate outcomes considering the Panel’s recommendations and is property owners and private individuals. Report and then considered the additional issues likely to put a further report to the Future Finally, I note that transitional provisions have not Of these, the majority either support the raised in submissions. Melbourne Committee towards the end of this been included in the revised CCZ7 control. In my Amendment or provide qualified support subject to year. 2.5.1 Amendments in response to view, it would be logical for such provisions to be some suggested refinements to address particular added for planning permits that have been In broad terms, I maintain the view expressed in issues and concerns (some of which are beyond Interim Panel Report granted in the precinct and remain ‘live’ but have my original evidence statement that the land use the scope of this Amendment). Overall I am supportive of the changes made in not yet been acted upon. This is likely to be provisions in the proposed CCZ7 are compatible the revised Amendment and the way in which it I note that majority of the concerns relate to relevant to only a small number of existing with and complementary to the urban design responds to the Panel’s commentary, subject to matters already considered by the Panel, planning permits. However, it would avoid a directions in the exhibited Am C308, particularly some further minor revisions. particularly those that relate to the effect of situation where a developer is required to seek as they relate to the lower levels (first four storeys) making accommodation and office uses permit- In relation to the strategic policy basis to the new further permission for office and accommodation of buildings. required within the first four storeys of buildings. controls, I agree with the thrust of the Panel’s use within the first four storeys of buildings where Clearly, there will need to be a resolution of the commentary that there is scope for more these uses are already included within existing In addition to detailed suggestions regarding detailed wording of the final controls under both comprehensive policy to be developed to support approvals. wording and the like, additional issues raised in amendments to ensure inconsistencies are the arts, culture and creative sectors generally this round of exhibition include: avoided. However, this detailed work is most and the Arts Precinct specifically. However, I see 2.5.2 Issues raised in submissions logically undertaken once Council has resolved ■ The suggestion from existing cultural these possible initiatives as beyond the scope of The following commentary relates to the new the final form of Am C308 to be submitted to the institutions that development in the precinct Am C323 which has been conceived principally to issues raised in relation to the re-exhibited Minister for Planning for approval. should be subject to ‘reverse amenity’ or ‘agent address a specific land use challenge for the Arts amendment. of change’ principles in relation to noise. Precinct. In the meantime, the proposed changes to the Noise ■ Clause 22.01 (Urban Design in the Capital City Concern that Creative Victoria in its role as a I do note that in general I prefer the more Submissions on behalf of existing cultural Zone Policy) and the current Schedule 1 to the referral body is highly unlikely to ever support comprehensive MSS additions suggested in the institutions in the precinct have suggested that the Design and Development Overlay (DDO1) are applications for Section 2 uses within the first Creative Victoria amended versions tabled at the CCZ7 control ought to include ‘reverse amenity’ or necessary to ensure the new CCZ7 control is four levels of buildings and that achieving original hearing (4 October 2018 versions) to the ‘agent of change’ type provisions to protect appropriately referenced in the event that Am permits for discretionary uses will be re-exhibited versions which give the arts precinct existing cultural and arts venues and ensure that C323 is gazetted prior to Am C308. challenging. slightly less prominence. the onus of acoustic mitigation is on the ■ The effect of the proposed controls on the In relation to the suggestion that the CCZ7 control developers of new residential buildings. capability to lease space within the first four more fully identify the unique and preferred This is an approach that has been introduced in storeys of buildings. character of the Arts Precinct, I note that the zone recent years in relation to live music venues I address these issues in the following section of schedule is primarily concerned with land use through the provisions of Clause 53.06 (Live this addendum in addition to the issues raised issues, with references to design primarily relating Music and Entertainment Noise) to protect live previously by the Panel. to the way in which land use is read within the music venues from encroachment by noise precinct. sensitive residential uses.

There is a logic to an approach to the precinct This is a relevant issue for the Arts Precinct as it whereby CCZ7 guides land use, DDO60 guides develops further as a mixed use area, to ensure built form matters, and the forthcoming C308 that existing arts and cultural activities are not controls (new DDO1) guide more detailed urban curtailed by new noise-sensitive residential uses. design matters, particularly in relation to the lower I consider the amended application requirements levels of a building.

which include requirements for residential valuable link between the creative sector and the industry occupier has been identified and proposals to assess and mitigate existing noise development industry. secured whose needs are met by the

sources adequately address this issue within the development; Effect on leasing capability context of a CCZ Schedule. ■ The concern raised relates to the ability for Whether a demonstrated attempt has been Further protection could be sought separately by developers or building owners to find viable made to engage with the creative and cultural venues used for the performance of music by tenants for floorspace within the lower four storeys sector to identify potential occupiers. seeking to become listed in Clause 2.0 of the of buildings, given a potentially limited pool of Schedule to Clause 53.06 as a venue to which creative and cultural occupiers. this Clause applies. Effectively what CCZ7 establishes is a preference Creative Victoria as referral authority for a range of arts and cultural activities and It is clear from Creative Victoria’s work in pursuing associated uses (including office uses associated planning controls and its involvement in the with such activities) within the first four storeys. planning process for recent developments in the However, alternative uses can be considered if a Arts Precinct that it seeks to take an active role in permit is applied for. pursuing the delivery of additional space for arts, A range of matters would need to be taken into creative and cultural uses. account by a decision maker in assessing whether The question of Creative Victoria being made a such discretionary uses could be supported within referral authority was considered by the Panel the first four storeys. during the original hearing and the Panel agreed These may include matters such as the extent of that this should occur. any creative or arts floorspace provided; the It is no doubt the case that Creative Victoria’s quality and fit-out of such space; and whether it primary aim in considering development within the meets the needs of a specific identified first floor storeys of buildings will be to maximise organisation or body. It may also be relevant to the delivery of space for arts, creative and cultural consider whether the applicant can demonstrate uses. that a genuine effort has been made to engage with the arts and creative sector to identify However, its role as a recommending referral potential occupiers and their requirements. authority means that its response is not determinative. Consideration of such matters will assist the decision-maker in determining whether alternative Rather, the responsible authority must consider (Section 2) uses in the first four storeys is the any Creative Victoria advice or response in supportable and whether only partial provision of making its decision, in conjunction with the full arts, cultural and/or creative industry space is range of relevant planning considerations, but is justified. not obliged to refuse the application or to include any conditions recommended by Creative Victoria. In my view it would be prudent to add decision guidelines to address these circumstance to The value of making Creative Victoria a formal require consideration of: referral body is that its advice and input can be obtained as a matter of course not just in regard to ■ Whether any provision has been made for arts, the quantum of creative or arts floorspace to be cultural or creative industries within the provided, but also in relation to the nature of the development; space and its suitability for arts and creative ■ The extent and quality of fitout of any such activities. They may also be able to assist in space within the building; identifying potential occupiers and providing a ■ Whether a specific arts, cultural or creative

In conclusion I am supportive of the re-exhibited 3 Conclusion version of Amendment C323 subject to some further refinements to address the following principal issues:

■ Amend the MSS wording changes so that they reflect the more comprehensive additions suggested in the Creative Victoria amended versions tabled at the original hearing (4 October 2018 versions). ■ Insert transitional provisions for planning permits that have been granted but not yet acted upon. ■ Include additional decision guidelines into CCZ7 to further guide decision-making for Section 2 uses within the first four storeys of building, to require consideration of: − Whether any provision has been made for arts, cultural or creative industries within the development;

− The extent and quality of fitout of any such space within the building;

− Whether a specific arts, cultural or creative industry occupier has been identified and secured whose needs are met by the development; and

− Whether a demonstrated attempt has been made to engage with the creative and cultural sector to identify potential occupiers.

C A Heggen BTRP FPIA

Appendix A: Existing controls

The Amendment area is affected by the complementary services and activities for provisions of the Melbourne Planning Scheme local residents and visitors. (the Planning Scheme). An overview of the ■ To support the growth of creative industry relevant statutory and strategic provision that sectors and disciplines such as music and apply to the proposal are set down below. preforming arts, fashion, film, television and radio, digital and print media, architecture, C1 Zoning design and visual arts. The site is located within the Capital City Zone ■ To provide for a diversity of art and cultural – Schedule 7 (Melbourne Arts Precinct) uses within the first four storeys of CCZ7) pursuant to Clause 37.04. buildings, including studios, workshops, galleries and rehearsal, performance and A zone map extract has been provided at events spaces. Figure A1. The purpose of CCZ is: ■ To provide for commercial and residential ■ To implement the Municipal Planning uses above the first four storeys of MAP 8 Strategy and the Planning Policy buildings and development which Framework. MAP 11 maximises pedestrian access, provides for ■ To enhance the role of Melbourne’s central active street frontages and integration with city as the capital of Victoria and as an area the public realm. of national and international importance. Schedule 7 establishes a table of uses with a Figure A2 – extract of DDO1 map ■ To recognise or provide for the use and range of arts and related uses in Section 1 (no development of land for specific purposes permit required). Accommodation and Office as identified in a schedule to this zone. are Section 1 uses on the condition that they ■ To create through good urban design an are not within the first four storeys (16m) attractive, pleasurable, safe and stimulating above ground level. Schedule 7 is an interim environment. control that expires on 31 March 2019. The head control for the CCZ enables a table of uses to be set out in a Schedule to the C2 Overlays zone, as well as application requirements, A combination of five overlays affect the exemptions from notice and review and Amendment area, as follows: decision guidelines. ■ Various schedules to the Design and A permit is required to construct a building or Development Overlay (DDO) affect parts construct or carry out works unless the of the Amendment area. Pursuant to MAP 8 schedule to this zone specifies otherwise. Clause 43.02, The purpose of the DDO is: − MAP 11 The purpose of Schedule 7 - Melbourne Arts To implement the Municipal Planning Precinct, is: Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework. MAP 8 ■ To maintain and enhance the Melbourne − MAP 11 Arts Precinct as a significant arts and To identify areas which are affected by cultural precinct of State significance. specific requirements relating to the design and built form of new ■ To develop Sturt Street and surrounds as development. an arts and performance spine with Figure A1 – extract of zone map Figure A3 – extract of DDO3 map

Appendix A: Existing controls continued

The following schedules affect the − To conserve and enhance heritage − To protect water quality in accordance Amendment area: places of natural or cultural significance. with the provisions of relevant State − Schedule 1 – Area 3 - Major Pedestrian Environment Protection Policies, − To conserve and enhance those Areas and Key Pedestrian Routes within particularly in accordance with Clauses elements which contribute to the CCZ1 (DDO1). This schedule addresses 33 and 35 of the State Environment significance of heritage places. active street frontages and opportunities Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria). for engagement with pedestrians. A map − To ensure that development does not − To ensure that development maintains or extract is provided at Figure A2 adversely affect the significance of improves river and wetland health, (previous page); heritage places. waterway protection and flood plain − Schedule 3 – Traffic Conflict Frontage − To conserve specified heritage places by health. (DDO3). DDO3 objectives are to promote allowing a use that would otherwise be

pedestrian flow, safety and amenity and prohibited if this will demonstrably assist

to minimise conflict between pedestrians with the conservation of the significance and vehicles. A map extract is provided of the heritage place. MAP 8 MAP 8 at Figure A3 (previous page). ■ MAP 11 A Land Subject to Inundation Overlay MAP 11

− Schedule 60 - Area7 (Arts Centre) (LSIO) affects the southern part of the (DDO60A7), Area 4a (DDO60A4A) (Sturt Amendment area as shown at Figure A7. Street) and Area 4b (DDO60A4B) Pursuant to Clause 44.04. The purpose of (Dodds Street). DDO60 design the LSIO is: Figure A4 – extract of DDO60 map Figure A5 – extract of DDO27 map objectives aim to ensure the suitability of − To implement the Municipal Planning new developments to each areas Strategy and the Planning Policy context. A map extract of DDO60 Areas Framework. has been provided at Figure A4 and − To identify land in a flood storage or − Schedule 27 – City Link Exhaust Stack flood fringe area affected by the 1 in 100 Environs (DDO27). DDO27 design year flood or any other area determined objectives are to ensure that land by the floodplain management authority. developed in this area are not adversely − To ensure that development maintains affected by the stack, or affect the stack. the free passage and temporary storage A map extract is provided at Figure A5. of floodwaters, minimises flood damage, ■ Heritage Overlays (HO391 – 102-118 is compatible with the flood hazard and Sturt Street, South Melbourne and affected local drainage conditions and will not HO5 – South Melbourne Precinct) affect cause any significant rise in flood level or parts of the area as shown at Figure A6. flow velocity. MAP 8 MAP 8 Pursuant to Clause 43.0, the purpose of − To reflect any declaration under Division MAP 11 MAP 11 HO is: 4 of Part 10 of the Water Act, 1989 − To implement the Municipal Planning where a declaration has been made. Strategy and the Planning Policy

Framework. Figure A6 – extract of HO map Figure A7 – extract of LSIO map

Appendix A: Existing controls continued

■ Parking Overlays – Schedule1 – Capital City Link Tulla Widening Project. City Zone - Outside the Retail Core (PO1) − To ensure that the display of a Business and Schedule 12 – Residential identification sign on land no longer Development in Specific Inner City Areas required for the Melbourne City Link (PO12) affect the Amendment area as Project or the Exhibition Street Extension shown at Figure A8. Pursuant to Clause Project is limited to a level that does not 45.09, the purpose of the PO is: compete with the display of signs shown − To implement the Municipal Planning on the plan titled "Melbourne City Link Strategy and the Planning Policy Project - Advertising Sign Locations Framework. November 2003". − To facilitate an appropriate provision of car parking spaces in an area.

− To identify areas and uses where local car parking rates apply. MAP 8 MAP 8 − To identify areas where financial MAP 11 MAP 11 contributions are to be made for the provision of shared car parking.

■ A Road Closure Overlay (RXO) affects Southbank Promenade as shown at Figure Figure A8 – extract of PO map Figure A9 – extract of RXO map A9. Pursuant to Clause 45.04, the purpose of the RXO is: − To implement the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework.

− To identify a road that is closed by an amendment to this planning scheme.

■ A City Link Project Overlay (CLPO) affects part of the Amendment area as shown at Figure A10. Pursuant to Clause 45.07, the purpose of the CLPO is: − To implement the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework.

− To ensure the efficient construction, operation and maintenance of the Melbourne City Link Project, the Exhibition Street Extension Project and MAP 8

Figure A10 – extract of CLPO map

Appendix B: Re-Exhibited CCZ Schedule 7

Appendix B: Re-Exhibited CCZ Schedule 7 continued

Appendix C: Witness statement

Name and Address Qualifications Areas of expertise Investigations and research Declaration Catherine Anne Heggen ■ Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning, ■ Extensive urban design advice to architects In preparing this addendum I have reviewed: In accordance with Planning Panels Victoria’s Message Consultants Australia Pty Ltd Melbourne University 1982 and project managers involved in medium Guide to Expert Evidence, I declare that I ■ The Interim Panel Report dated 3 2/398 Smith Street, Collingwood 3066 ■ Fellow, Planning Institute of Australia and high density housing and other built have made all the inquiries that I believe are December 2018. ■ Fellow, Victorian Planning and form projects. desirable and appropriate and no matters of ■ The revised Amendment C323 documents Environmental Law Association ■ Strategic and statutory planning advice to significance which I regard as relevant have to exhibited in July 2019. commercial and institutional clients as well my knowledge been withheld from the Panel. Professional experience as government and alpine management ■ The current planning controls and policies ■ Current Position: Director, Message I prepared this report with assistance from authorities on a range of residential, of relevance to the Amendment. Consultants Australia Pty Ltd Mathew Furness, Associate Director at environmental, tourism, cultural heritage ■ The current status of other strategic ■ 1985 – Current: Town Planning Consultant Message Consultants Australia Pty Ltd. and urban character issues. planning initiatives including Amendment ■ 1982 – 1985: Town Planner in local ■ Consulting advice to a wide range of C308 t the Melbourne Planning Scheme. government and regional authorities private sector and government clients . (Australia & overseas) addressing the management of urban I confirm that my instructions are to: Professional appointments development and rural land use. ■ ■ Review the re-exhibited Amendment C323 1996 – 2002: Member, Victoria’s Heritage ■ Project planning and coordination of Council Institutional Master Plans. material and provide my opinion regarding its merits in light of my evidence on the C A Heggen ■ 1998 – 2002: Chair, Victoria’s Heritage ■ Experience in the preparation of originally exhibited version and the issues BTRP FPIA Council environmental management plans and raised in the Interim Panel Report. ■ 1998 – 2002: Trustee, Melbourne Heritage Environment Effects Statements for ■ Restoration Fund extractive industry. Recommend any further changes or refinements to the Amendment as ■ 2001 & 2002: Jury Member, Stonnington ■ Preparation and presentation of evidence necessary. Urban Design Awards before VCAT, and various government ■ 2001: Jury Member, Australian Institute of appointed independent panels and advisory Summary of opinions Landscape Architects (Vic Chapter) Awards committees. My conclusions are summarised in the ■ 2003: Jury Member, Planning Institute of Expertise to prepare this report preamble and conclusion of this report. Australia (Vic Division) Awards Professional qualifications and expertise in ■ 2004 – ongoing: Member, Heritage urban design and town planning, including: Committee to the Building and Estates ■ Urban design and building form impact Committee – University of Melbourne assessment. ■ 2005 – 2012: Member, Building Committee ■ Ongoing involvement in a range of – Queen Victoria Women’s Centre residential, mixed use, institutional, ■ 2011 Member, Ministerial Advisory commercial and extractive industry Committee on Planning System Reform development proposals.

■ Ongoing involvement in cultural heritage, urban character and visual and landscape impact issues. ■ Experience in new community development, greenfield subdivision projects and institutional Master Plans. ■ Specialist experience in medium and high density housing issues.