I I District Centre Review Proiect Report I Asupplement to Cities in the Suburbs: The District Centre Policy for the 7990s I i . I I I I I I I I I I I Deportment of PIaMlngand I Housing GoYMYTl8OI II ~ of VIctoria August 1992 I I DPU G LIBR A RY 111111111111 11 111 11111111111111111111 1111111111 111 I M0021745 I I I Contents I 1. Members of the District Centre Review Project Team 1 . 2. Members of the District Centre Review 1 I Technical Advisory Committee 3. List of submitters 3 I 4. Summary of submissions 5 I 5. Policy references 33 I I I I I I I I I IIlf.CO I 711 . 5522 9404241 0994 5 VIC :V Distirct centre review I supplement project report I D" . o -- D· J J -1 ]'. ' J J ? l J .. ............ .J ., J 'or ( J J . ! J J , ] (.. ~~~2 . 0994 I 5 J I VIC:V ,! supplement. j , I 1. Members of the District Centre Review Proiect Team in I the Department of Planning and Housing Peter McNabb, Project Leader I Gordon Edgar Lynne Jannan Tim Cottrell Russell Guest I Deidre Johnson Richard Walker I Malcolm Weller 2. Members of the District Centre Review - Technical Advisory CommiHee Cr James Barrett I City of Caulfield Municipal Offices Hawthorn Road I Caulfield 3162 Mary Crooks Chairwoman I Social Justice Consultative Council Department of the Premier and Cabinet 2nd Floor, 1 Treasury Place I Melbourne 3002 Mark Curry I Project Manager Consultation and Services Planning i Ministry of Transport 589 Collins Street l Melbourne 3000 Don Larkin I Deputy Chief Executive Officer Victorian Employers' Chainber of Commerce and Industry 50 Burwood Road I Hawthorn 3122 Owen Lennie Chairm;m I Planning Committee . Building Owners and ManagersAssociation of Australia 96 Elizabeth Street I Melbourne 3000 Peter Newman I Associate Professor Director, Institute for Science and ~echnology Policy Murdoch University I Murdoch 6150 I 1 I J ,.... Ron Thomlinson I Government Mfairs Executive Retail Traders' Association of Victoria 2nd Floor, 104 Franklin Street I Melbourne 3000 Victor Szwed I Group Manager Planning and Development City of Sunshine POBox 70 I Sunshine 3020 I -I- I I I I I I I I -I I I I 2 I I 3. List of submitters I Submitter Submission No. I Adamson, William - Resident, City of Ringwood 62 Association of Inner Eastern Councils Inc. 70 A .T. Cocks and Partners Pty. Ltd. on behalf of Sussan 1 Corporation (Aust) Pty. Ltd. I Baillieu Knight Frank (Vic.) Pty. Limited 2 Berwick, City of 9 Box Hill, City of 10173 Bowden, David - Director, Jones Lang Wootton Vic. Pty. Ltd. 84 I (RAPI Seminar 1813192) Building Owners and Managers Association of Australia Limited 78 Brighton, City of 11 Broadmeadows, City of 12 I Caldwell, David - Resident, City of Ringwood 63 Camberwell, City of 65 Camberwell Hawthorn Planning Watch Inc. 54 Caulfield, City of 13 I Centro Properties Limited 75 Coburg, City of 14 Coles Myer Ltd. 3 Contour Consultants Pty. Ltd. on behalf of Westfield Developments 4 I Cranbourne, Shire of 15 Croydon, City of 16 Dandenong, City of 17/18 Department of Labour 38 I Diamond Valley, Shire of 61 Doncaster & Templestowe, City of S8 Essendon, City of 59 Footscray, City of 19/80 Frankston, City of 60 I Gandel Group of Companies 5 Glen Centre Pty. Ltd. 74 Growth Equities Mutual Limited 6 Hames Sharley Australia (on behalf of AMP Society) 7 I Haines, William, Executive Chairman, Hames Sharley Australia 85 (BOMA South-Eastern Forum 2413/92) Hawthorn, City of 20121 Heidelberg, City of 22 I Holdway, Anthony - Resident, City of Ringwood 51 Housing Industry Association VictorialTasmania Division 42 Inner Metropolitan Regional Association 43 Jones, Brian - Chief Executive Officer, City of Camberwell 82 I (RAPI Seminar 1813/92) Kaukas, Yvonne - Resident, City of Ringwood 50 Kennan, The Hon. Jim, Minister for the Arts 64 Kennan, The Hon. Jim, Minister for Major Projects 37 I Kew, City of 23 Kirner, The Hon Joan, Premier of Victoria 41 Knox, City of 24 Lennie, Owen - on behalf of the Building Owners and Managers Association of 83 , Australia Limited (RAPI Seminar 1813192; BOMA South Eastern Forum 24/3/92) Lend Lease Retail Projects Pty. Ltd. 8 , Lillydale, Shire of 25 Local Government Planners Association of Victoria Incorporated 44 I Melbourne, City of 26 Melbourne Western Region Commission 49 Moodie, Matjory - Director. Anthony Moodie & Associates, Pty. Ltd. 86 (RAPI Seminar 18/3/92) I Moorabbin. City of 71 Municipal Association of Victoria 45 Northcote. City of 27 North Eastern Melbol!rne Regional Organisation of Councils 46 I Northern ,Region Commission Inc. 47 North Ringwood By-Pass Group 79 I Oakleigh. City of 66 3 I Office of the Environment, Department of Conservation and Environment 40 I Phillips, Sylvia - Resident, City of Ringwood 52 Public Transport Users' Association 53 Prabran, City of 28 Preston, City of 76 I Retail Traders' Association of Victoria 48 Richmond, City of 29 RingwQod, City of 30/31 Royal Australian Planning Institute (Victorian Division) 67 I Sandon, The Hon. Malcolm, Minister for Police and Emergency Services 68 Sherbrooke, Shire of 55 South Melbourne, City of 32 Springvale, City of 69 I Spyker, The Hon. Peter, Minister for Transport 57172 Sunshine, City of 33 Upper Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges Authority 56 Vic Roads 86 I Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry 77 Waverley, City of 34 Werribee, City of 35 White, The Hon. David, Minister for Manufacturing and Industry Development 39 I Whitney, David - Consultant, Perrott Lyon Mathieson Pty. Ltd. 81 (RAPI Seminar 18/3/92) Whittlesea, City of 36 I I I I I I I ,I I I I I 4 I I I 4. Summary of submissions 1 . A. T. COCKS AND PARTNERS PTY. LTD. ON BEHALF OF SUSSAN CORPORATION I (AUST) PTY. LTD. The current district centre policy is incapable of guiding future commercial, retail and community I development within metropolitan Melbourne. District centre policy objectives have not been achieved due to various physical constraints inhibiting further development opportunities, the static or declining population nodes around the district centre, over-reliance on fixed public transport to serve various centres, limited government I involvement to fund expansion, refurbishment and renovation programs, local political pressures and segregation of land ownership. I The policy has not been able to distinguish the role of large centres outside district centres. It also does not distinguish between the opportunities for further development at the various district centres. While retailing activity in district centres has decreased, retailing activity has increased at regional I shopping centres. District centre policy fails to recognise that some new uses or expanding uses should be located outside district centres. The submission criticises the philosophy of concentrating activity at district I centres using the success of the regional shopping centres as an argument. District centre policy needs to be more direct on a regional and individual centre basis. It should I properly recognise and respond to the cons'traints and opportunities of each of the nominated centres. Large retail and entertainment centres (e.g. Chadstone, etc) should never be district centres. However, because these centres play a vital role in providing the widest range of retailing and entertainment activities (outside a number of outer district centres and Central Melbourne itself) they need to be I recognised in a new retail hierarchy for metropolitan Melbourne. A policy needs to be established which maintains and encourages these centres to continue. District centres should be encouraged to achieve a balance of activities. The diminution in the I importance of retailing as the base activity for property nominated district centres needs to be recognised. Good planning policy for retail activity should include goods and service provision, accessibility to I goods and services, consumer behaviour, transportation systems, land use patterns, local and regional employment structures, local and regional environmental impacts, utilities provision, strategic and I metropolitan policies and the application of policy. District centre policy needs to differentiate between the various centres and the roles and activities they offer. I Regional shopping centres at middle suburban locations have been more successful than district centres with respect to retailing activity and have assumed a secondary role to Central. Melbourne .. The hierarchy of retailing activity in Melbourne is: (1) Central Melbourne, (2) Regional Shopping I Centres, (3) District Centres, (4) Community Shopping Centres, and (5) a combination of the above. The role of regional shopping centres has changed to include entertainment and leisure activities with I retailing. Regional shopping centres should not be designated as district centres. However, they do have worthy attributes such as their higher retail service provision, high accessibility, wide range of services provided and entertainment function. They should be complementary to district centres. I Their designation as 'regional activity centres' should not mean that expansion can be approved automatically. District centres should be recognised to provide a wide range of activities to service their local and I . regional catchments. District centres should not be primarily retail. They are better suited for commercial activities (office development) due to their location in relation to public transport and the I fragmentation of land ownership. I 5 District centres close to Highpoint City should stay designated as district centres but their designation cannot imply a superior status to Highpoint City with regards to retailing and entertainment. 2 BAILLIEU KNIGHT FRANK (VIC.) PTY. LIMITED I Central Melbourne should remain the prime metropolitan focus for all activities. The number of district centres should be reduced. I Proposals for major development outside district centres should be rigorously examined and permitted only after an examination of their real costs. I Statutory authorities should be required to make submissions on rezonings .