No consideration of alternatives

Good policy requires governments to consider different options before embarking on major change. However, there is little evidence that alternative approaches were explored before the introduction of Victoria’s planning changes.

While the concept of concentrating growth within activity centres has existed in planning policy for many years, the extension of substantial redevelopment into surrounding low-rise residential streets referred to as “walkable catchments” represents a significant departure from previous approaches. The State Government has largely presented widespread upzoning, code-based development controls and the removal of local decision-making as the only way to increase housing supply. Yet a range of alternative strategies exist. These include better utilisation of existing development capacity, locally-led structure planning, targeted growth in appropriate locations, increased housing diversity, improved planning processes, stronger regional development strategies and more detailed modelling of housing capacity.

Independent planning professionals have demonstrated that housing growth can be accommodated through a variety of approaches while retaining greater community involvement, protecting valued neighbourhood character and better aligning growth with infrastructure and services. For example, the planning and urban design group Charter 29 has published a number of reports outlining alternative approaches to accommodating growth while maintaining community participation and place-based planning (visit their website).

The issue is not whether everyone would agree on the same solution. It is that major planning reforms should be informed by a transparent assessment of alternatives, their costs, benefits and trade-offs. Victorians deserve confidence that all reasonable options have been properly considered before irreversible changes are made to their communities and liveability.