Activity Centres Frequently Asked Questions
Activity Centre Boundaries
What has the Minister for Planning approved?
Where are the five ‘market-ready’ activity centres located?
Why were those five centres chosen and not others?
Why do we need boundaries and criteria to be set by the Minister?
How were the final approved boundaries determined?
What were the outcomes of the Advisory Committee?
What was the response of the Minister?
What opportunity was there for community input before these boundaries were finalised?
Why weren’t all the recommendations of the Advisory Committee agreed to?
Will other centres get boundaries and how will they be finalised?
Will there be an opportunity to comment on boundaries for other centres?
Were Councils consulted or involved in setting the boundaries?
Is there an opportunity for the boundaries to be reviewed?
Activity Centre Zone
What has the Planning Minister done and why?
Why do we need an ACZ, and what’s wrong with the other controls?
How does the Development Framework differ from the framework plan?
Why has the Minister also approved an Activity Centre Zone (ACZ) for Doncaster Hill?
What will happen with translation to the ACZ at the other ‘market-ready’ centres?
What was the role of the pilot councils?
What opportunity was there for residents of Doncaster to comment on this?
How have the controls changed at Doncaster Hill?
What about third party notice, decision and review rights if all applications are now exempt from notification?
Will third party notice, decision and review rights be removed at all other centres?
What opportunity was there for residents at the other four centres to comment?
Will there be an opportunity to review the ACZ controls?
Will the ACZ be applied at other centres and if so which ones?
Activity Centres
So what does all this mean for my local activity centre?
Where are the Neighbourhood Activity Centres?
Will additional centres be identified in the future?
Structure Planning
What are the benefits of structure planning for local government?
Why has structure planning been chosen as the method for planning activity centres?
How does structure planning fit within the council process?
What about existing work that council has undertaken?
How is the council to manage the transition period until a structure plan is complete?
Who is available to assist in site amalgamations?
What centres will be given priority in structure planning?
Do all activity centres need to go through a structure planning process?
Activity Centre Boundaries
What has the Minister for Planning approved?
The Minister for Planning has approved activity centre boundaries for five ‘market-ready’ activity centres – four in metropolitan Melbourne and one at Central Geelong. This will ensure the planning and management of growth is simpler and more effective. He has also approved a consistent methodology and criteria to be used to set boundaries at other activity centres.
Where are the five ‘market-ready’ activity centres located?
The five ‘market-ready’ activity centres are Camberwell Junction, Coburg, Doncaster Hill, Central Geelong and Preston (High Street).
Why were those five centres chosen and not others?
The five ‘market-ready’ activity centres that now have approved boundaries were chosen because they all have completed structure plans and there is a large degree of market interest.
The choice of these centres reflects much of the current implementation work being undertaken by each of these councils to progress activity centre planning and development and the need to have clearer and more effective planning provisions.
Why do we need boundaries and criteria to be set by the Minister?
Many councils have adopted boundaries for their activity centres across metropolitan Melbourne and at key regional centres through structure planning processes. However, different approaches have been taken to determine and set these activity centre boundaries. Setting activity centre boundaries based on a consistent set of criteria will enable controls to be applied more consistently across a range of activity centres.
How were the final approved boundaries determined?
The proposed boundaries have been determined taking into account:
What were the outcomes of the Advisory Committee?
The Advisory Committee had two key tasks:
1. To provide advice on a boundary for each of the five identified ‘market ready’ centres (Camberwell, Coburg, Doncaster Hill, Preston (High Street) and Central Geelong), and
2. To propose criteria and a methodology suitable to define the boundaries of the remaining Activity Centres.
Recommendation 1 – Modifications to exhibited boundaries
Recommendation 2 – A process to review boundaries
Recommendation 3 – A methodology for structure planning
Recommendation 4 – Activity Centre Boundary Criteria
A full copy of the Advisory Committee’s report is available on the Planning Scheme Amendment Panel and Advisory Committee Reports web page.
Page top
What was the response of the Minister?
After considering the advice of the Advisory Committee, the Minister has determined a final boundary for each centre and approved criteria for the establishment of boundaries at other centres. The Minister’s Assessment and Response to the Report of the Advisory Committee outlines the considerations for boundaries of each of the centres and criteria for establishing boundaries at other centres. The Minister’s Assessment and Response to the Report of the Advisory Committee is available on DPCD’s website.
What opportunity was there for community input before these boundaries were finalised?
Communities have had an opportunity to comment on boundaries for each of these centres through council structure planning and amendment processes. In addition, the Department undertook a four-week period of public consultation on proposed boundaries for each of these centres during February and March 2009. Across the five centres, a total of 53 submissions were received, and these were all referred to the Advisory Committee for its consideration. The Advisory Committee undertook its own separate consultation process and submitters had an opportunity to present to the Advisory Committee.
Why weren’t all the recommendations of the Advisory Committee agreed to?
Many of the Advisory Committee’s recommendation have been agreed to. However, the Minister is not supportive of an approach that excludes areas that are not contemplated for significant redevelopment – such as open space and education facilities and residential areas – especially where they are key attractors or features of the centre or are surrounded by other uses appropriate for inclusion within the centre. For this reason, he has not agreed in full to some of the Advisory Committee’s recommendations, which are detailed in the Minister’s Assessment and Response Report available on DPCD’s website.
Will other centres get boundaries and how will they be finalised?
The Government is committed to defining activity centre boundaries at all remaining Central Activities Districts (CADs) and Principal Activity Centres (PACs) over the coming years as well as Major Activity Centres (MACs) as structure plans for these centres are completed. Boundaries for these centres will be finalised through structure planning processes and through the application of new planning controls for the centres.
Will there be an opportunity to comment on boundaries for other centres?
Yes. Through the structure planning and subsequent amendment processes there will be an opportunity to comment on boundaries for other centres.
Were Councils consulted or involved in setting the boundaries?
Yes, each of the respective councils were involved. As a starting point, council adopted structure plan boundaries were reviewed by the Department. Following this, a proposed boundary for each centre was established and exhibited publicly for a one-month period. Following this, Councils had an opportunity to present to the Advisory Committee on the exhibited boundaries. With the exception of Coburg, each of the final approved boundaries are either the same as council’s adopted structure plan boundaries or have been reduced to cover smaller areas (as is the case for Central Geelong and Preston). In the case of Coburg, an additional parcel of land that forms part of the former Coburg High School redevelopment site has been included within the boundary in accordance with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee.
Is there an opportunity for the boundaries to be reviewed?
Yes, in accordance with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee the Minister has agreed to review all boundaries within five years. In addition to this, he has asked that a more immediate review of the Central Geelong boundary be undertaken to investigate areas adjacent to the Geelong Hospital as suggested by the Advisory Committee.
Page top
Activity Centre Zone
What has the Planning Minister done and why?
The Minister for Planning has approved a new Activity Centre Zone (ACZ) for inclusion within the Victoria Planning Provisions. This initiative was identified by the Government in response to the audit of Melbourne 2030 as one of the ways of ensuring that the planning and management of growth at activity centres is simpler and more effective.
Why do we need an ACZ, and what’s wrong with the other controls?
Encouraging development in activity centres will help to more sustainably meet the needs of Victoria’s growing population, taking the pressure off more established neighbourhoods and reducing the pressures for urban sprawl. The ACZ is a centre-wide tool that has been developed specifically for application at CADs, PACs, MACs and Specialised Activity Centres (SACs) in metropolitan Melbourne. The ACZ offers more flexibility than other zones and is better able to be tailored through the Development Framework to achieve the use and development outcomes sought for the centre. By doing this, it will provide far greater certainty to the community and developers.
How does the Development Framework differ from the framework plan?
The Development Framework is the planning framework for the entire centre. For the purpose of the ACZ, a schedule to the zone comprises the Development Framework.
The Framework Plan is the centre-wide plan that is included within the Development Framework.
Why has the Minister also approved an Activity Centre Zone (ACZ) for Doncaster Hill?
When the ACZ was initially announced, five ‘market-ready’ centres were identified as centres where the ACZ would initially be introduced and applied. One of these was Doncaster Hill and it is the first centre to have the ACZ applied.
What will happen with translation to the ACZ at the other ‘market-ready’ centres?
Work is continuing with the other councils to introduce the ACZ at Camberwell Junction, Coburg, Central Geelong and Preston (High Street) over the next couple of months.
What was the role of the pilot councils?
In conjunction with the Department, the pilot councils have provided invaluable input into the development of the ACZ through a working group over the last nine months.
What opportunity was there for residents of Doncaster to comment on this?
For some time now the Manningham City Council has advocated on behalf of its community for a more appropriate zoning solution for Doncaster Hill.
The Manningham City Council has undertaken significant planning work over many years for Doncaster Hill including the development of a structure plan and centre-specific local policies and planning controls. Residents have had an opportunity to input into the planning for the centre through these processes over many years.
The controls that are now in place through the ACZ at Doncaster Hill are generally ‘policy neutral’ and translate existing council policies and controls. Where there have been changes to the controls, they have been made to ensure they remove barriers to delivering on council’s policy objectives for the centre.
Page top
How have the controls changed at Doncaster Hill?
In many instances, there has been no major change to the types of uses that are allowed to occur at Doncaster Hill. Where there have been changes, these have been made specifically to deliver on council’s strategic objectives.
For example, the industrial area at Doncaster Hill has been identified by council as an area where industrial uses are expected to be phased out over time. Council’s policy is for the area to transform into a mixed-use commercial and residential precinct.
The existing industrial zone prohibits these uses without a rezoning. By applying the new ACZ these types of uses can now occur subject to council approval, and consideration of any relevant site contamination and remediation issues through an Environmental Audit Overlay.
What about third party notice, decision and review rights if all applications are now exempt from notification?
Under the previous Business and Comprehensive Development zones, many uses were not subject to third party notice, decision and review rights. Where a use is now exempt from third party notice, decision and review rights it is generally because it is a use that is identified as appropriate within the centre. In some instances, uses that were previously allowed subject to a permit are now prohibited.
In translating existing controls at Doncaster Hill to an ACZ, all buildings and works applications will still be subject to third party notice, decision and review rights in line with council’s former Design and Development Overlay requirements.
Will third party notice, decision and review rights be removed at all other centres?
The Schedule to the ACZ can be used to identify when an exemption to third party notice, decision and review rights does not exist and councils will have the opportunity to identify which uses and form of development it may want to either exempt or not exempt from third party notice, decision and review rights.
What opportunity was there for residents at the other four centres to comment?
Similar to Doncaster Hill, councils for the other four centres have also undertaken significant planning work in recent years through the development of a structure plan and centre or precinct-specific policies and controls.
Residents have had an opportunity to input through the development of these structure plans, policies and controls.
The controls that will be put in place through the ACZ at these centres will seek to be ‘policy neutral’ and translate existing council policies and controls.
Will there be an opportunity to review the ACZ controls?
Yes. The Minister has asked that there be a review of the operation of the ACZ within 12 months after its introduction. This will provide an opportunity to address any issues that may arise or be identified in that time.
Will the ACZ be applied at other centres and if so which ones?
Yes. Once the five pilot councils have an ACZ in place work will commence in conjunction with councils to apply an ACZ at other activity centres over the next few years as part of the Victorian Government’s commitment to managing Melbourne’s growth. The priority for the ACZ will be other CADs and PACs in metropolitan Melbourne, but councils are also encouraged to consider applying an ACZ at their MACs where structure planning has been completed or is underway.
Page top
Activity Centres
So what does all this mean for my local activity centre?
If your local activity centre is a Principal or Major Activity Centre, then you can expect to see more diversity in the kinds of shops and services it provides and increased density in certain sections, with buildings designed to complement their surroundings.
Other improvements will typically include:
Where are the Neighbourhood Activity Centres?
Neighbourhood Activity Centres are dominated by small businesses and shops that provide a local convenience function and are highly accessible by foot or bicycle.
Milk bars, newsagents, pharmacies and small grocery stores are features of Neighbourhood Activity Centres, as are local public transport services that link to one or more Principal or Major Activity Centres.
They serve a small, local area and have an important role in encouraging people to walk or cycle to reach the services they need instead of using the car – an important factor in creating healthier communities and lowering greenhouse emissions.
Will additional centres be identified in the future?
Yes, as the metropolitan area grows, new activity centres are needed to serve new and changing communities.
There is no intention of "freezing" the number of activity centres to what already exists.
Any proposals for a new activity centre or expansion of an existing one would need to accord with activity centre policy.
Twelve new activity centres were identified in A plan for Melbourne’s Growth Areas (2005). These centres are: Casey Central, Hampton Park and Officer (Casey-Cardinia); Craigieburn, Craigieburn Town Centre and Greenvale (Hume); Toolern (Melton); Boardwalk, Laverton, Manor Lakes and Truganina (Wyndham); and Mernda (Whittlesea).
Page top
Structure Planning
What are the benefits of structure planning for local government?
Structure planning can help local government to:
- provide greater certainty to the local community and investors about its expectations for the future form of development in its activity centres
- manage change to ensure activity centres are attractive, vibrant areas to live, work and shop
- ensure economic and social vitality of the area
- make best use of Council resources and focus council investment to best serve the community
Structure planning sets out an integrated vision for the desired future development of a place. It establishes a planning and management framework to guide development and land use change in order to achieve stated environmental, social and economic objectives. These objectives are necessary to ensure the change in activity centres anticipated by Melbourne 2030 is managed appropriately.
It also:
- enables the community and other stakeholders to actively participate in consideration of the future form and function of centres, ultimately helping to secure their confidence in the centre’s development.
- links broad strategic objectives outlined in Melbourne 2030 and the application of suitable mechanisms to facilitate appropriate development.
How does structure planning fit within the council process?
Structure planning should be a whole of Council process, both in its development and implementation. Structure planning should be an input into the development of Council’s corporate plan, in management arrangements and developing budgets and work programs for broader council activities.
Page top
What about existing work that council has undertaken?
Many councils will have already completed strategic work for their activity centres. This work will be important in informing the ongoing structure planning process.
The aim of structure planning is to give effect to the key policies and objectives for activity centres in Melbourne 2030. Existing work should be assessed to determine the extent to which it does this. The advice contained in the Planning Practice Note Structure Planning for Activity Centres will assist with this assessment.
Further work will be required if planning completed by councils to date does not give affect to the key policies and objectives for activity centres in Melbourne 2030.
How is the council to manage the transition period until a structure plan is complete?
Under current State Planning Policy, councils are required to concentrate activity around activity centres and plan them in an integrated way (Clause 17.01 Activity Centres, Clause 12 Metropolitan Development).
Implementation of the activity centres policy and normal council application processes should not be put on hold until a structure plan is complete. The current planning scheme provisions continue to apply. Depending on the stage in the process, the outcomes of the structure planning process may have weight in decision-making.
The purpose of interim provisions for structure plans is to assist the management of change in an activity centre or strategic redevelopment site while a planning authority is finalising a structure plan for the area. Interim provisions for structure plans should normally be sought concurrently with the request for authorisation of a planning scheme amendment to implement the statutory outcomes of the structure plan.
See the Advisory Note on the Interim Provisions for structure plans for further information.
Who is available to assist in site amalgamations?
Part of the structure planning process may involve locating sites that may need to be amalgamated in the future. This early identification will help councils to plan for possible site amalgamations. VicUrban is well positioned to assist Government and private developers in issues of site assembly.
What centres will be given priority in structure planning?
Melbourne 2030 is clear that priority should be given to the Central Activities Districts, Principal and Major Activity Centres, especially those that have good public transport access and that will be essential to the development of the Principal Public Transport Network.
Page top
Do all activity centres need to go through a structure planning process?
It is recognised that many councils have already undertaken structure planning and developed plans, and will not need to start from the beginning.
Further work will be required if planning completed by councils to date does not give affect to the key policies and objectives for activity centres in Melbourne 2030.
The need for structure planning for neighbourhood centres will need to be assessed by each individual council on a case-by-case basis and in most case is not required.
At a municipal level, an activity centre strategy can be helpful in identifying the expected role and function of different types of centres.
How can I get further information?
For further information on boundaries for Activity Centres:
Visit the: Activity Centres Frequently Asked Questions
Phone: 1300 366 356 (local call cost) or TTY +61 3 9603 8806 (8.30am-5pm Monday-Friday)
Email: activity.centres@dpcd.vic.gov.au
Page top