YARRA RANGES PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C177 …€¦ · “Restructure Plan for Old and Inappropriate Subdivisions”, which states that: …a permit may be granted to allow land

YARRA RANGES PLANNING SCHEME

AMENDMENT C177

REVIEW OF THE RESTRUCTURE

OVERLAY 2019

TECHNICAL REPORT

Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme Amendment C177 – Review of the Restructure Overlay 2019: Technical Report 2

CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5

2.0 Deletion of redundant land in the Restructure Overlay ............................................................ 5

Lots that have previously been consolidated to meet the intent of the Restructure Overlay ............. 5

Lots that have previously been resubdivided in a way that meets the intent of the Restructure

Overlay .......................................................................................................................................... 5

RO119 land except 9 Silverleaf Place, Healesville ...................................................................... 7

Single lots in the Restructure Overlay with no restructure or other requirements ............................. 9

Regional Strategy Plan Amendment 29 ..................................................................................... 10

Translation into the New Format Planning Scheme ................................................................... 12

Planning Panel report into the New Format Planning Scheme 1999 .......................................... 12

Consistency of deletion of single lots in Restructure Overlay with the Regional Strategy Plan.... 14

Conclusion on single lots .......................................................................................................... 14

3.0 Short Reports on Inaccuracies ............................................................................................. 15

RO9 - 32 Dunstan Crescent, Tremont and 1 Mt Dandenong Tourist Road, Tremont ..................... 16

RO28 - 20, 22A, 22 The Serpentine, Tecoma ............................................................................... 17

RO31 - 65-71 Monbulk Road, Belgrave (Part Lot 68 LP8952) ....................................................... 18

RO35 - 32-34 Royal Street, Upwey (CP158889 PScoresby) ......................................................... 19

RO37 – Blackwood Street/Grandview Grove, Tecoma .................................................................. 20

RO40 - Part of 25 Centre Road, Upwey (CP159945 Ca 70K PNarree Worran) ............................. 21

RO45 - 88 Park Drive, Belgrave (Lot 36 LP11646 Ca 70G PNarree Worran) ................................ 22

RO46 - 49 Temple Road, Selby (Lot 7 LP12496 Ca 37 PNarree Worran, Part Lot 1 LP12496 Ca 37

PNarree Worran) .......................................................................................................................... 23

RO47 - Part of 13 Batesleigh Road, Selby 3159 (CP159455 Ca 35/38 PNarree Worran) .............. 25

RO49 – 61, 63, 65 and 67 McNicol Road, Tecoma ....................................................................... 26

RO62 - 8 Menzies Road, Menzies Creek 3159 (Lot 3 LP18302 Sec A Ca PT40 PNarree Worran) 28

RO65 - 521 Mt Dandenong Tourist Road, Olinda (Lot 2 LP5988 Ca 2 PMonbulk) ......................... 29

RO73 - Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (83 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 4

TP840113 Ca PT63A PScoresby), 90 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 2 TP840113 Ca


PT63A PScoresby), 94 Ferndale Road, Upwey (Lot 1A LP7158 Ca PT63A PScoresby), 175-191A

Glenfern Road, Upwey (2020\PP3279 (Crown Allotment 2020 Parish of Narree Worran))............. 31

RO73 - Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully 83 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferndale Road (Lot 5

TP840113 Ca PT63A PScoresby), 85 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 3 TP840113 Ca

PT63A PScoresby), 89 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 1 TP840113 Ca PT63A

PScoresby), 81 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 9 TP840113 Ca PT63A PScoresby), 79

Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 3 PS424205 Ca PT63A1 PScoresby), 77 Ferndale Road,

Upper Ferntree Gully (Lot 2 PS424205 Ca PT63A1 PScoresby), 75 Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree

Gully (Lot 1 PS424205 Ca PT63A1 PScoresby), 6 Oakdale Road, Upwey (Lot 4 PS424205 Ca

PT63A1 PScoresby), 10 Oakdale Road, Upwey (Lot 5 PS424205 Ca PT63A1 PScoresby) .......... 32

RO90 - 53 Whitegum Drive, East Warburton (Lot 32 LP58791 Ca PTS42&42D PWarburton) ....... 33

RO105 - Blacksands Road, Three Bridges ................................................................................... 34

RO106 - Land north of Yarra Street, Powelltown .......................................................................... 37

RO106 - 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, and 31 Yarra Street and 21 Blake Street , Powelltown.. 38

RO108 – 17 Birdwood Avenue and 18 Kalamunda Terrace, Healesville ....................................... 41

RO109 - 45 Bridges Road, Healesville (PC374131) ...................................................................... 42

RO109 - 136 Healesville-Yarra Glen Road, Healesville ................................................................ 43

RO120 - 75 Thompsons Road, Montrose 3765 (Part Lot 8 LP9536 Ca PTCA 65B&76

PMooroolbark) ............................................................................................................................. 44

RO120 - 105 Thompsons Road, Montrose 3765 (Lot 1 LP21658 Ca PTCA 76 PMooroolbark) ...... 46

RO120 - Former lot on the north side of Jasper Road, Kalorama .................................................. 47

Restructure Overlay 131 (6, 10 and 20 Wilson Street, 275-279 Maroondah Highway and ‘The

Nook’, Healesville ........................................................................................................................ 48

RO133 - Rymers Road/Hazeldene Road, Gladysdale ................................................................... 53

Riverside areas that are inaccurately mapped due to changing river/stream alignments ............... 58

RO36 - Torry Hill Road, Upwey ................................................................................................. 58

RO73 - Oakdale road/Ferndale road, Upper Ferntree Gully ....................................................... 59

RO101 - Fisherman Drive, Reefton ........................................................................................... 60

4.0 Changes to “Other Requirements” ........................................................................................ 61

RO10 - Titania Crescent/Mt Dandnenong Tourist Road, Ferny Creek ........................................... 61

RO33 - Ropley Grange, Upper Ferntree Gully .............................................................................. 61

RO42 - Carrington Court/Bay Street, Tecoma............................................................................... 61


RO43 - Nation Avenue/Borang Avenue, Selby .............................................................................. 61

RO44 - Eveline Road/Belgrave-Gembrook Road, Selby ............................................................... 61

RO45 - Belgrave-Gembrook Road/Arbor Avenue, Selby ............................................................... 62

RO46 - Temple Road/Currajong Avenue, Selby ........................................................................... 62

RO51 - Mount Morton Road/Osborne Avenue, Belgrave South .................................................... 62

RO63 - Belgrave-Gembrook Road/Menzies Road, Menzies Creek ............................................... 62

RO67 - Colehurst Crescent/Allison Crescent, Sassafras ............................................................... 62

RO73 - Oakdale Road/Ferndale Road, Upper Ferntree Gully ....................................................... 62

RO74 - Batesleigh Road, Selby .................................................................................................... 63

RO93 - Earle Street, Launching Place .......................................................................................... 63

RO98 – Story Road, Warburton .................................................................................................... 64

RO116 - Mt Lebanon Road, Chum Creek ..................................................................................... 64

RO133 - Rymers Road/Hazeldene Road, Glaydsdale ................................................................... 64

5.0 Land in Public Zones ............................................................................................................ 64

RO84 - 1 Fisherman Drive, Reefton (Ca 9C PManango)............................................................... 65

RO105 - Blacksands Road, Three Bridges ................................................................................... 65

Removal of the Restructure Overlay from other publicly zoned land .............................................. 68

RO30 - Lot 29 Glen Harrow Heights Road, Belgrave 3160 (Lot 29 LP8235 Ca 42/45 B PNarree

Worran) .................................................................................................................................... 68

RO30 - Part of 70-70A Monbulk Road, Sherbrooke 3789 (42B~B\PP3279 (Crown Allotment 42B

Section B Parish of Narree Worran) .......................................................................................... 69

RO43 - 1/1 Minak Road, Selby 3159 Restructure Overlay (PART CP161005 Ca PT 85/87

PNarree Worran) ...................................................................................................................... 70

RO43 - 104 Belgrave-Gembrook Road, Selby 3159 (Part Lot 19 LP6696 Ca 1 PNarree Worran,

Lot 20 LP6696 Ca 1 PNarree Worran) ...................................................................................... 71

RO59 - 31A Selby-Aura Road, Menzies Creek (Lot 25 LP50678 Ca 39 PNarree Worran).......... 72

RO120 - Former lot on the north side of Jasper Road, Kalorama ............................................... 73


1.0 INTRODUCTION

Yarra Ranges Council is proposing a Planning Scheme Amendment to the

Restructure Overlay.

A Background Report has been written to explain the background and rationale for

the proposed changes. To accompany that Report, this document provides much of

the technical analysis underpinning the proposed changes.

The chapters that follow explain some of the main themes of the proposal in a

detailed way, expanding on the general explanations in the Council Report.

2.0 DELETION OF REDUNDANT LAND IN THE RESTRUCTURE

OVERLAY

Redundant land in the Restructure Overlay falls into three basic categories:

Lots that have previously been consolidated to satisfy the intent of the

Restructure Overlay;

Lots that have previously been resubdivided in a way that satisfies the intent

of the Restructure Overlay; and

Single lots in the Restructure Overlay with no restructure or other

requirements.

LOTS THAT HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN CONSOLIDATED TO MEET THE

INTENT OF THE RESTRUCTURE OVERLAY

A review of the Restructure Overlay has found that many of the properties that once

had requirements for land consolidation have now consolidated titles and meet the

intent of the Restructure Overlay. This land can therefore be removed from the

Overlay.

LOTS THAT HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN RESUBDIVIDED IN A WAY THAT

MEETS THE INTENT OF THE RESTRUCTURE OVERLAY

In some cases, boundary realignments and resubdivisions have resulted in land

ownership patterns that vary from the layout shown in the Incorporated Document.

This is permitted by the Restructure Overlay. Clause 45.05 states that:

…a subdivision must be in accordance with a restructure plan for the land

listed in the schedule to this overlay…


The listed restructure plan in the schedule is the Incorporated Document

“Restructure Plan for Old and Inappropriate Subdivisions”, which states that:

…a permit may be granted to allow land to be subdivided in a form which varies from the boundaries shown on a restructure plan, only where the variation from the restructure plan is minor and will not increase the number of dwelling entitlements allowed by the Restructure Plan.

Land that has been subdivided in this way has therefore met the intent of the

Restructure Overlay and is redundant. A list of these properties is included below:

Land description Restructure Overlay number

Resubdivision details

25 William Road, The Patch and William Road, The Patch

RO19 Part of the restructure lot on the west tip has been divided from the balance of the property and made into a road to improve a corner. Done as part of PS432330 in 2000, where the road segment is designated as ‘R1’ (244sqm).

8 & 10 Two Bays Crescent, Selby

RO44 Resubdivided with a portion of Two Bays Crescent in 2012 to form Lots 1 and 2 of PS6649749.

66 and 70 Olinda-Monbulk Road, Olinda

RO66 Boundary re-alignment was approved 10/11/98, creating two lots varying from the land ownership plan shown in RO66, but with no further lots created, consistent with the Restructure Overlay provisions. Application No. PE98/1020.

230 and 234 Big Pats Creek Rd, Big Pats Creek

RO88 Boundary realignment approved in 2006 for three lots - Lots 1-3 of PS625042.

10 & 12 Hall Rd, McMahons Creek

RO91 Resubdivided in 1996 to create two lots –Lots 1 and 2 on PS346463.

1605A and 1609 Don Rd, Don Valley

RO97 Resubdivided in 1991 to create two lots - Lots 1 and 2 of PS300438.

32-34 and 36-38 Dorothy Street, Healesville

RO112 Previously lots 74 and 75 on PS53622. Boundary realignment in 2002 to create Lots 1 and 2 of PS505358, meeting the intent of the Restructure Overlay in a different layout. Planning permit YR-2002/1545.

2 Dorothy St and 23 Ryans Rd, Healesville

RO112 Previously CP165529 and Lot 57 on LP53622. Boundary realignment in 2006 to create Lots 1 and 2 of PS 541722, meeting the intent of the Restructure Overlay in a different layout. Planning permit YR-2006/597.


78 Graceburn Ave and 74 Graceburn Ave, Healesville

RO113 Previously lots 37-40 of LP54134. Consolidated into two separate properties with a different configuration than shown in RO113, but with the same effect.

6 Barkers Road and 315 Chum Creek Road, Chum Creek

RO116 Resubdivided from lots 1 and 3 of LP72227 in 2005 to create lots 1 and 2 of PS536745 Ca PT46C PTarrawarra.

13 Chaffer Street, Chum Creek

RO116 Consolidated with a piece of closed road in 2000 (PC363475), meeting the intent of the Restructure Overlay in a different layout.

All land in RO119 except 9 Silverleaf Place, Healesville

RO119 All land other than 9 Silverleaf Place has met the intention of the Restructure Overlay.

Part of the redundant area was subdivided into 13 lots in 1999 (via planning permit PE98/9871). The subdivision considered restructure issues and resulted in a management plan being attached to the relevant land titles via a Section 173 Agreement setting out building envelopes, vegetation requirements, etc.

The remaining part of the redundant area was consolidated into 1 lot in 1999. Further detail provided below.

RO119 LAND EXCEPT 9 SILVERLEAF PLACE, HEALESVILLE

Restructure Overlay 119 relates to land at Silverleaf Place, east of the township of

Healesville. The Overlay restructure plan shows a subdivision of the land into 100

lots restructured to 15 lots.

The majority of this land has met the requirements of the Restructure Overlay and is

redundant. Figure 3b indicates an area that was subdivided into 13 lots in 1999 (via

planning permit PE98/9871). The subdivision considered restructure issues and

resulted in a management plan being attached to the relevant land titles via a

Section 173 Agreement setting out building envelopes, vegetation requirements, etc.

A smaller area to the west is shown as consolidated into 1 lot in 1999. A further small

area to the east remains (9 Silverleaf Place) as four lots from the original 1918

subdivision of this land and has not met the intentions of the Overlay, which requires

the four lots to be consolidated into one.

The areas shown as resubdivided and consolidated have satisfied the intended

purpose of the Restructure Overlay and can therefore be removed.


Figure 1: RO119 as shown in the Incorporated Document

Figure 2: RO119 redundant areas

Figure 3: RO119 current lot layout


SINGLE LOTS IN THE RESTRUCTURE OVERLAY WITH NO

RESTRUCTURE OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS

There are a large number of single lots in the Restructure Overlay which have no

land use or development requirements. They are referred to here as ‘single

restructure lots’ as they have no requirement to be consolidated with adjoining land

unlike other land in the Restructure Overlay. The Overlay essentially directs on the

one hand that they need to be restructured, but on the other hand that they are, in

themselves, suitable to accommodate a dwelling without any restructure occurring,

which is contradictory.

Research has revealed that the contradiction arises from the way the restructure

controls were expressed in the former Shires of Lillydale, Sherbrooke, Healesville

and Upper Yarra, and particularly how the restructure requirements were translated

into the New Format Planning Scheme in July 2000.

In all of the former planning schemes, the restructure planning controls were

originally implemented by means of zone controls. By their nature, zones address a

wider range of considerations than overlay controls, which can focus on a narrowly

defined development issue such as landslip, flood, fire risk, etc. Restructure zone

controls in the former Shires therefore contained tables of uses, application

requirements and other information typical of zones.

Regulation of single restructure lots is logical in a zone, where use and development

of the single lot would be subject to a number of considerations and processes.

However, it is illogical to include a single restructure lot in an overlay where the

defining purpose is to bring about consolidation of lots.

The following is a summary of the approach taken in relation to each former Council

area in the interim Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme (1996-2000), at the time

immediately preceding the introduction of the New Format Planning Scheme:

Lillydale: The relevant control, the ‘Residential Restructure Zone’, included a table of

uses, referral requirements, and direction on matters such as advertising and car

parking. It also contained building requirements for site cover, slope, flood risk,

landslip risk, fire risk, sewer and drainage infrastructure, and other considerations.

Healesville: The relevant controls were the ‘Management Plan Zone (MPZ)’ and the

‘Deferred Development Zone’ (DDZ). The MPZ created a management plan to direct

appropriate future development, including land size per dwelling, building envelopes,

access, drainage and other requirements. It also included standard permit conditions

relating to stormwater, erosion, landslip, and siting of buildings, and had a table of

uses. The relevant requirements were shown visually on plans, many of which are

still among the modern Restructure Overlay plans. The DDZ identified land that was

considered unsuitable for development pending further investigation to determine


what form of development may be appropriate (i.e. areas awaiting a management

plan). It included a very restrictive table of uses.

Upper Yarra: The relevant control was known as the Restructure Residential No. 1

Zone, and had a table of uses, application requirements, and a number of standard

conditions for development relating to building siting and form, sewerage and

stormwater arrangements, access, vegetation and other requirements. There was

also a Residential No. 2 Zone which prohibited all development or vegetation

clearing.

Sherbrooke: While the Shire of Sherbrooke had originally used a zone to implement

restructure requirements, in 1994 an Amendment to the Scheme changed this to an

overlay—the ‘Restructure Overlay’. In addition to consolidation requirements, the

Overlay included other specific requirements for a small proportion of land areas (for

building siting and form, access, utility services, landslip, landscaping, and other

matters). Being an Overlay, the Sherbrooke restructure controls were more limited in

scope and intent than those of the other former Shires. The Restructure Overlay did

not include a table of uses, application requirements, or standard development

conditions, as found in controls of the other Shires.

Prior to the use of an Overlay from 1994, the relevant restructure zones in

Sherbrooke were known as the Residential Restructure Zone and the Rural

Restructure Zone. Amendment L61, approved on 14 July 1994 made the relevant

changes to the Sherbrooke Scheme. Amendment L61 was a large and controversial

amendment that replaced the local section of the planning scheme. Its aims were to

make the planning scheme a more user friendly document by rationalising planning

controls, presenting information in plain English, and also to bring the scheme into

compliance with the Regional Strategy Plan subsequent to Amendment 29 to that

document. In rationalising the zone controls, it was considered that use of an overlay

for restructure requirements would meet the above aims more effectively.

REGIONAL STRATEGY PLAN AMENDMENT 29

Regional Strategy Plan Amendment 29 was approved by Governor in Council on 29

June 1992.

The Regional Strategy Plan (RSP) refers to areas needing lot restructure or other

strategies to guide appropriate future development as ‘Special Study Areas’.

Amendment 29 changed the approach of the RSP to these areas. Prior to

Amendment 29, a previous version of the RSP had been in operation dating back to

October 1982. The 1982 version included requirements for Special Study Areas to

prepare ‘management programs’. The management programs, which required

agreement from the Authority, addressed matters such as:


(i) The most appropriate use for the area;

(ii) The degree and nature of development that may be allowed, if any;

(iii) Means of achieving satisfactory development, either through restructuring

or other methods;

(iv) The level and type of servicing required if residential development is to be

allowed;

(v) Equity considerations for owners of land;

(vi) Any additional areas which should be purchased; and

(vii) Any other relevant matter

These management programs were required to take the form of a written statement

(or other form of presentation) explaining the appropriate future use and

development of relevant areas. After the management programs had been agreed to

by the Authority, their requirements were required by the RSP to be incorporated into

planning schemes. Given the expansive nature of the management programs, the

use of a zone to govern appropriate land use and development outcomes was a

logical choice. All four former Shires integrated management programs into their

planning schemes by means of zones.

However, Amendment 29 to the RSP significantly simplified the approach taken to

Special Study Areas. Rather than requiring that planning schemes to be used as the

means to implement entire management programs, Amendment 29 stated:

1. Where “old and inappropriate” subdivisions have been identified in the local section of Planning Schemes or through an agreement between the Authority and a Council in the Region, a restructure plan or management program must be prepared which addresses any potential environmental problem…

This change allowed restructure requirements to be incorporated into planning

schemes more quickly and easily than had previously existed, by allowing

preparation of a ‘restructure plan’ to simply show land areas needing consolidation in

order to appropriately accommodate a dwelling, rather than the more comprehensive

requirement for a ‘management program’ that had previously existed.

The approval of Sherbrooke L61, which changed Sherbrooke’s restructure control

from a zone to an overlay, shows that at the time of its approval in 1994, it was

thought that restructure plans alone were a sufficient planning instrument to ensure

appropriate development in many affected areas, and that in these instances the

more comprehensive ‘management plans’ were no longer required.

The use of an overlay in Sherbrooke also appears to reflect State Government

thinking of the time. In August 1993 the Minister for Planning and Local Government

announced a program of significant reforms to the planning system in Victoria. A key


pillar of the reforms was a need for fewer, more consistent, performance based

zones.

TRANSLATION INTO THE NEW FORMAT PLANNING SCHEME

At the time of the translation of the former Shire’s planning schemes into the new

format planning scheme, all former restructure controls were grouped together into

the modern Restructure Overlay, which closely resembled the former Sherbrooke

approach to restructure requirements in form and content. The more expansive

aspects of the controls in the other three former Shires were not carried across into

the new format scheme. The use of an overlay rather than a zone allowed a

narrower focus on the restructure requirements, with content such as tables of uses

and application requirements being deferred to whichever State standard zone came

to apply to a particular area.

This approach reflected the position of the State Government during the time of the

introduction of Victoria Planning Provisions, that “…zones should provide broad

discretion to permit a wide range of land uses rather than rely on prohibitions (Yarra

Ranges New Format Planning Scheme Panel Report, 1999, p.359).” Within the suite

of Victoria Planning Provision tools available to construct the New Format Yarra

Ranges Planning Scheme, only an overlay tool (rather than a zone) was available to

achieve restructure requirements.

PLANNING PANEL REPORT INTO THE NEW FORMAT PLANNING

SCHEME 1999

Council’s General Issues Report on Restructure Areas, attached to the Planning

Panel Report on the New Format Planning Scheme, explained:

The conversion of the current restructure provisions to an overlay format has made it necessary for the planning scheme to show an underlying zone to cover the area occupied by the subdivision. The choice of zones applied under the exhibited planning scheme for these sites has been based on the zoning of surrounding land. The relevant policy designation under the RSP has been used to clarify the choice of appropriate zone where a number of different zones surround the land occupied by the subdivision.

Beyond this commentary, the Panel Report does not explicitly discuss the translation

from restructure zones to an overlay. However, some additional information is

provided by Council’s submission to the Panel, which states:

…A further challenge (in translating and rewriting the planning scheme) was that the current planning scheme is essentially an amalgamation of four quite different planning schemes, which now constitute the four ‘chapters’ in the [then] current Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme. These are based on the four


municipalities of Healesville, Lillydale, Sherbrooke and Upper Yarra, which now comprise the Shire of Yarra Ranges.

In establishing the program for rewriting the current planning scheme, the Council adopted a position of putting in place a ‘policy neutral’ translation of the existing planning schemes. This was in recognition of the:

Recent approval of two major reviews of local planning schemes (Am L106 to the Lillydale Planning Scheme and Am L61 to the Sherbrooke Planning Scheme) in the newly amalgamated Shire

Need to implement the Regional Strategy Plan, and the legislative requirement for planning schemes in the Shire to be consistent with it

…The process of the rewrite of the Planning Scheme sought to:

Analyse the existing planning scheme ‘chapters’, and the provisions of the Regional Strategy Plan, so as to have a rationalised Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme position, from which to proceed with the translation under the Victoria Planning Provisions

Translate the rationalised Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme in accordance with the Victoria Planning Provisions, and provide approaches that would reconcile any differences between them and the Regional Strategy Plan…

…The differences between land use and development provisions across chapters were resolved by adopting the provisions that were most closely aligned with the Regional Strategy Plan, having regard to the objective and strategic outcomes put forward in the Municipal Strategic Statement…

The New Format Planning Scheme employed an Incorporated Document to explain

restructure requirements, rationale, and restructure plans. The written form of the

Incorporated Document is virtually identical to the form of the Restructure Overlay in

the former Shire of Sherbrooke introduced by Amendment L61.

Submissions 43, 53 and 74 to the Planning Panel on the New Format Scheme

Three submissions to the Planning Panel on the New Format Planning Scheme were from owners of land shown as single restructure lots seeking to have the Restructure Overlay removed from their land given that no restructure requirements applied.

The first was submission 43, which related to the owner of land at 105 Thompsons Road, Montrose (Lot 1 LP21658 Ca PTCA 76 PMooroolbark) primarily seeking to clarify the zone applying to her land. In making its recommendation, Council recommended that:

…the land not be shown as within the Restructure Overlay 120, as no restructuring is required given that the land is already consolidated into one parcel (lot 1 LP21658). A house already exists on the land and there is no


potential for additional dwellings or subdivision of the land under the Rural Living provisions.

The second related to land at 75 Thompsons Road, Montrose (Part Lot 8 LP9536 Ca PTCA 65B&76 PMooroolbark). Submission 53 sought confirmation on future zoning. Council’s recommendation was that the land could have the Restructure Overlay removed as it was a single restructure lot with no restructure requirements.

The third was submission 74, which related to two pieces of land at 53 and 55 Belgrave-Gembrook Road, Belgrave, each shown in exhibited Restructure Overlay 39 (RO39) as single restructure lots. Council recommended removal of the Restructure Overlay from this land given that no restructure requirements applied, which was subsequently upheld.

The Panel recommendations supported Council’s recommendations in all three cases, which indicates that the removal of the Restructure Overlay from land shown as single restructure lots was considered an obvious planning scheme rationalisation at the time, provided that there would be no further potential for dwellings or subdivision.

CONSISTENCY OF DELETION OF SINGLE LOTS IN RESTRUCTURE

OVERLAY WITH THE REGIONAL STRATEGY PLAN

The deletion of single lots in Restructure Overlay plans does not contradict the

objectives of the RSP, which states (p.51, 2014):

Subdivision restructure programs, as identified in local sections of planning schemes, should be continued.

The expression of ‘restructure programs’ in the Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme

today is the Restructure Overlay. While the Restructure Overlay contains valid and

ongoing restructure requirements for many land areas, there are no further

requirements for the vast majority of single lots. These land parcels have therefore

satisfied the requirements of the Restructure Overlay and can be removed.

CONCLUSION ON SINGLE LOTS

A review of the history of planning schemes and the Regional Strategy Plan (RSP)

has shown that the use of zone controls to govern the ‘Special Study Areas’

identified by the RSP, was a consequence of the RSP’s requirement that planning

schemes implement written management plans for the relevant areas. Amendment

29 to the RSP changed this by removing the need for management plans.

Subsequently, Amendment L61 to the Sherbrooke Planning Scheme changed the

restructure control from a zone to an overlay in 1994, in line with strategic thinking of

the time from the State Government to rationalise planning controls. The other three


former Shires continued to operate with zones until the introduction of the New

Format Planning Scheme in July 2000, which implemented the Restructure Overlay

for Yarra Ranges.

With the change from restructure zones to an overlay, a contradictory situation was

created whereby a large number of single restructure lots came to be included in the

modern Restructure Overlay even though they have no requirement to be

consolidated with other lots, or restructured in any way.

Unfortunately, Planning Panel reports for both Sherbrooke L61 and the New Format

Planning Scheme do not comment in any substantial way on this contradiction, other

than the above examples of single restructure lots recommended to have the

Restructure Overlay removed in response to submissions 43, 53 and 74 to the

Planning Panel on the New Format Planning Scheme in 1999.

Continuing with work to rationalise the Restructure Overlay, in the way intended by

Council and the Planning Panel in 1999, is consistent with the objectives of the

Planning Scheme, the Regional Strategy Plan, and the requirement for Council’s to

regularly review planning schemes under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

3.0 SHORT REPORTS ON INACCURACIES

The review of the Restructure Overlay also seeks to clarify a number of anomalies

and ambiguities. These largely derive from the time when the four former Schemes

were combined to form the Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme in 2000. At that time, the

RO, along with other planning controls, was converted from a hard copy format to an

electronic one. However, the newly created electronic mapping included a number of

errors. In some cases, properties were included in the Restructure Overlay which

had never been shown in the Incorporated Document. In other cases, properties

were omitted in error.

Council’s Strategic Planning Department has researched these cases in detail by

looking into the history of the restructure maps and any Amendments that have been

made over time to them. Any changes to the maps that are not the result of Planning

Scheme Amendments are concluded to be errors. Changes are proposed to improve

the clarity and transparency of the Restructure Overlay in these cases, which are

explained below.

Some cases have also been identified where the shape of lots on Restructure Maps

do not correspond with the shape of lots on property and land titles. In these cases,

Strategic Planning has concluded the original Restructure Maps have been

inaccurately drafted. Accordingly, it is proposed to correct the inaccuracies by

mapping the Restructure Overlay and Restructure Maps in alignment with property

title boundaries.


RO9 - 32 DUNSTAN CRESCENT, TREMONT AND 1 MT DANDENONG

TOURIST ROAD, TREMONT

The boundaries of the Restructure Overlay have been incorrectly mapped to apply to

land a 1 Mt Dandenong Tourist Road, Tremont, which is PCRZ zoned land owned by

the State Government. The mapping of the Incorporated Document excludes this

land from the Restructure Overlay.

The incorrect Restructure Overlay boundaries are accompanied by incorrect

boundaries of the PCRZ and GWAZ1 between the two properties.

It is proposed to align the Restructure Overlay boundaries to property boundaries, as

the Restructure Overlay is intended to apply, and to correct the zone boundaries to

also align to property boundaries. Figure 1: Incorrect area of Restructure Overlay (black dotted line). Restructure Overlay is shown by the olive colour

Figure 2: Incorporated Document showing correct restructure area

Figure 3: Incorrect Zone boundaries between dark green PCRZ and light green GWAZ1. Property boundary shown with red outline.


RO28 - 20, 22A, 22 THE SERPENTINE, TECOMA

The land is shown in the Incorporated Document as having the Restructure Overlay applying, but is not mapped in the Restructure Overlay in planning scheme mapping.

The omission of the Restructure Overlay is an error. It has not been removed from the planning scheme by any amendments.

It is proposed to correct the mistake by showing the Restructure Overlay applying in planning scheme mapping as intended.

Figure 1: Restructure Overlay boundaries of RO28 in the planning scheme (olive colour). Subject land shown by black dotted land.

Figure 2: Restructure Overlay as shown in Incorporated Document, with subject land highlighted in pink


RO31 - 65-71 MONBULK ROAD, BELGRAVE (PART LOT 68 LP8952)

The entire property is shown in planning scheme mapping as having the Restructure Overlay applied, however the Incorporated Document only applies the Restructure Overlay to part of the property.

There have been no amendments to the scheme that have changed the Restructure Overlay on this property, so the planning scheme mapping is incorrect.

It is proposed to show the Restructure Overlay boundaries consistent with the Incorporated Document as intended.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping of RO31, with part of the Restructure Overlay area (shown in olive green, not mapped in the Incorporated Document - shown in black dotted lines).

Figure 2: Incorporated Document map, with subject land highlighted in pink


RO35 - 32-34 ROYAL STREET, UPW EY (CP158889 PSCORESBY)

Current use: contains a dwelling on land of 1953sqm. Zoned Low Density Residential Zone.

This land is shown in the Incorporated Document as being a single restructure lot in Restructure Overlay 35, however planning scheme mapping does not show the land as within the Restructure Overlay.

The land has not had the Restructure Overlay removed by any Amendments to the Planning Scheme, and should therefore be mapped as within RO35.

The land is a single lot, previously consolidated, shown in the Incorporated Document as forming one restructure lot. It does not have restructure or other requirements under the Overlay.

The land is zoned Low Density Residential Zone (LDRZ), meaning that subject to a planning permit, two dwellings are permitted per lot. The removal of the Restructure Overlay would therefore theoretically allow an additional dwelling. However, Clause 21.04-1 of the Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme contains policy directing that a second dwelling not be allowed, as follows:

Proposals for residential use and development of land should meet the following criteria… On land within the Low Density Residential Zone, a second dwelling only be constructed on a site which has an area of at least 8,000 square metres.

The land has an area of 1953sqm, well below the threshold recommended by the Clause for consideration of second dwellings.

It is proposed to show the Restructure Overlay applying to the land in planning scheme mapping in order to correct the error that was made when the New Format Planning Scheme was implemented, and consistent with the intent of the overlay. The Restructure Map is also proposed to be updated to ensure it is consistent with title/cadastral boundaries.

Figure 1: Current Planning Scheme mapping not showing the Restructure Overlay (olive green colour) on the land (shown as black dotted line)


Figure 2: The Incorporated Document showing the Restructure Overlay on the land (highlighted in pink)

RO37 – BLACKWOOD STREET/GRANDVIEW GROVE, TECOMA

RO37 affects four former parcels situated between Grandview Crescent and

Carrington Court in Tecoma, as shown in Figure 1.

The intention of the restructure appears to provide for two houses side by side,

accessed from Grandview Crescent and situated near Grandview Crescent. The

land on the east side near Carrington Court is low lying, heavily treed, and has a

drainage easement running through it.

The land adjoining Carrington Court (7 Carrington Court, or PC364798) was formerly

two lots (lots 8 and 9 of LP8931), but was consolidated into one lot in 2004. The two

lots on the west side of the Restructure Map facing Grandview Court (lots 120 and

121 of LP8931, or 5 Grandview Court), are in the same ownership.

Given that the land ownership pattern now allows for two dwellings on the land

affected by RO37, consistent with the Restructure Overlay intentions, it is considered

reasonable to change the Restructure Map so that the required lot consolidation

reflects the current ownership pattern, as shown in Figure 2. This would mean that

only lots 120 and 121 would need to be consolidated in order for all land in RO37 to

meet the intent of the Restructure Overlay.

As 7 Carrington Court is currently vacant, an application for a dwelling on this land

would need to satisfy all parts of the planning scheme, including the Bushfire

Management Overlay and Erosion Management Overlay, and would need to achieve

appropriate vehicle access and drainage. Reticulated sewer is currently available in

the area, which is in the Low Density Residential Zone.


Figure 1: The Incorporated Document showing the land included in RO37

Figure 2: Proposed Restructure Map for RO37 changed to reflect current ownership of the land.

RO40 - PART OF 25 CENTRE ROAD, UPWEY (CP159945 CA 70K

PNARREE WORRAN)

Current use: Contains a dwelling on land of 4270sqm, zoned Low Density

Residential Zone.

Part of this land is shown in planning scheme mapping as within Restructure Overlay

40, however it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.

The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. There have been

no amendments to the planning scheme that have added the Restructure Overlay to

this land. This is considered a mapping error.

It is proposed to correct the error by showing the Restructure Overlay does not apply

to this land.


Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows the Restructure Overlay applying to part of CP159945 (lot boundary shown in black dotted line, Restructure Overlay shown in olive green colour)

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document shows no Restructure Overlay applying (lot shown in pink)

RO45 - 88 PARK DRIVE, BELGRAVE (LOT 36 LP11646 CA 70G

PNARREE WORRAN)

Current use: Contains a dwelling on land of 1020sqm, zoned Low Density Residential Zone.

This land is shown in planning scheme mapping as within Restructure Overlay 45, however it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.

The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. There have been no amendments to the planning scheme that have added the Overlay to this land. This is considered a mapping error.

It is proposed to correct error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not apply to this land.


Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows the land in the RO

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document does not show the Restructure Overlay applying (subject land highlighted in pink).

RO46 - 49 TEMPLE ROAD, SELBY (LOT 7 LP12496 CA 37 PNARREE

WORRAN, PART LOT 1 LP12496 CA 37 PNARREE WORRAN)

This land is shown in RO46 as a single restructure lot shown as Lot 7 (Figure3), meaning there are no smaller lots within it that need consolidation. However, in fact two lots exist as shown in Figure 1:

There is no subdivision history on file for the property, however the smaller lot (Part Lot 1) appears to have been subdivided from Lot 1 of LP12496 to the north.

It is unclear whether the Restructure Overlay is intended to apply only to lot 7, or to Lot 7 and Part Lot 1. The restructure lot clearly extends to the north of Lots 6 and 8 of LP12496 adjoining it, and applies to the land occupied by part Lot 1. However the representation of this lot in RO46 states ‘7’, meaning that it is intended to apply only to Lot 7.


Restructure plans have shown the property in the same way since at least 1982, when it was part of the Restructure Residential Zone in the Sherbrooke Planning Scheme.

Information on the title shows that there was an application in 1960 for Part Lot 1 and Lot 7 to be shown together on a consolidated certificate of title (instrument A984023), meaning that the two lots existed prior to the creation of the Restructure Overlay. There is uncertainty over whether RO46 did not show part Lot 1 but should have, or whether RO46 did not intend to apply to part lot 1 and simply showed the boundaries of lot 7 inaccurately. Either way, RO46 appears to have been created inaccurately.

Given that there is an existing house on part Lot 1 that achieves its access to Temple Road through Lot 7, it is most likely that the two lots were intended to be consolidated by RO46. The representation of the restructure lot in RO46 is therefore considered to be inaccurate, and should show two lots to be consolidated.

It is proposed to correct the error by showing the restructure lot as two separate lots with a consolidation requirement.

Figure 1: The property (red outline) showing Lot 7 and part Lot 1

Figure 2: Planning Scheme mapping shows only Lot 7 affected by the Restructure Overlay (olive green colour)


Figure 3: Incorporated Document shows the land labelled as ‘7’, meaning Lot 7, but geographically covering the area of part Lot 1 as well.

Figure 4: Aerial showing house constructed on part Lot 1.

RO47 - PART OF 13 BATESLEIGH ROAD, SELBY 3159 (CP159455 CA

35/38 PNARREE WORRAN)

Current use: Contains undeveloped, well treed land which is part of a residential property, area of 860sqm, zoned GWAZ1.

This land is shown in planning scheme mapping as within Restructure Overlay 47, however it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.

The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. There have been no amendments to the Scheme that have added the Overlay to this land. This is considered a mapping error.

It is proposed to correct the error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not apply to this land.


Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows part of the land (property outline in red) affected by the Restructure Overlay (olive green colour)

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document shows the land (highlighted in pink) as not affected by the Restructure Overlay

RO49 – 61, 63, 65 AND 67 MCNICOL ROAD, TECOMA

The four lots at 61, 63, 65 and 67 McNicol Road, Tecoma are in the Low Density Residential Zone and each contain one dwelling.

The lots shown in the Incorporated Document as having the Restructure Overlay applying are lots 130 and 131 on LP12419, which are 65 and 67 McNicol Road, Tecoma. These lots are not mapped in the Restructure Overlay in planning scheme mapping. Instead, lots 128 and 129 on LP12419, which are 61 and 63 McNicol Road, Tecoma, have been mapped in the Restructure Overlay in planning scheme mapping.

It is proposed to correct the mistake by showing the Restructure Overlay in planning scheme mapping applying to 65 and 67 McNicol Road as intended and removing the Restructure Overlay from 61 and 63 McNicol Road, Tecoma.


Figure 1: Lots 128,129, 130 and 131 on LP12419, known as 61, 63, 65 and 67 McNicol Road, Tecoma, respectively (highlighted in pink).

Figure 2: Planning Scheme mapping showing Restructure Overlay applying to 61 and 63 McNicol Road, Tecoma (olive green colour. 61, 63, 65 and 67 McNicol Road, Tecoma are shown by the black dotted line.

Figure 3: The Incorporated Document showing that the Restructure Overlay should apply to 65 and 67 McNicol Road, Tecoma (lots 128 and 129 on LP12419) (highlighted in pink) as not affected by the Restructure Overlay


RO62 - 8 MENZIES ROAD, MENZIES CREEK 3159 (LOT 3 LP18302 SEC

A CA PT40 PNARREE WORRAN)

Current use: Contains a dwelling on land of 1971sqm. Zoned Green Wedge A Zone Schedule 1.

This land is shown in the planning scheme as within Restructure Overlay 62, but it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.

The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. There have been no amendments to the planning scheme that have added the Restructure Overlay to the land. This is considered a mapping error.

It is proposed to correct the error by showing that the Restructure overlay does not affect the subject land.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows the land (black dotted outline) in the Restructure Overlay area (olive green colour)

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document does not show the land (highlighted in pink) in the Restructure Overlay


RO65 - 521 MT DANDENONG TOURIST ROAD, OLINDA (LOT 2 LP5988

CA 2 PMONBULK)

Current use: Contains one dwelling, land size of 1693sqm. Zoned Green Wedge A Zone Schedule 1.

This property is comprised of two lots, being Lots 1 and 2 on LP5988 Ca 2 PMonbulk. A dwelling is constructed on the property, which is sited across both lots.

The Incorporated Document shows both lots as making up Restructure Overlay 65, with a requirement that the lots consolidate in order for a dwelling to be accommodated. However, planning scheme mapping does not show Lot 2 (the southern most lot) as within RO65.

Lot 2 has not been removed from RO65 by any amendments made the Planning Scheme, and should therefore be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay.

Planning Controls

The land is zoned Green Wedge A Zone Schedule 1, which provides for the use and development of land for rural living opportunities. Other overlays that apply are the Bushfire Management Overlay, the Erosion Management Overlay, and the Significant Landscape Overlay, all of which cover the entire property.

Site Description

Lot 2 is 704sqm, smaller but similar in size to some nearby land parcels in the GWAZ1. Topography is sloping, falling roughly 9 metres from west to east over a distance along the south boundary of 41 metres. There is a sharp fall (an escarpment) to the road of roughly 3 metres adjacent to the south-east corner of the lot. The property has no sewer connection. Vehicle access occurs from Everest Crescent approximately 30 metres from the intersection in Mt Dandenong Tourist Road. The land is heavily treed with a mix of native and exotic species.

Permit History

There is no planning permit history on file for the property, although a building permit was issued for a dwelling in 1992 (ref: 30575/1991/0).

Scheme History

The land’s inclusion in restructure controls dates back to at least 1987 when it was included in the Residential Restructure Zone (plan 82) by an Interim Development Order imposed by the Minister for Planning over the entire Shire of Sherbrooke. The reason for the creation of restructure requirements is now unknown, but likely due to one or more of the following:

the slope of the site and drainage;

potential for landslip;

fire hazard;


the capacity of the site to contain waste; and

the effect provision of services would have on vegetation and landscape qualities

As the Restructure Overlay is not shown to affect lot 2 in planning scheme mapping, the owners could now demolish the existing dwelling, and sell/develop each lot independently.

It is proposed to correct the Planning Scheme by showing RO65 as applying to lot 2

in planning scheme mapping as part of a restructure lot with Lot 1, as intended by

RO65.

Figure 1: - Planning Scheme Restructure Overlay mapping shows lot 2 with no Restructure Overlay (Restructure Overlay shown by olive green colour affecting Lot 1, Lot 2 shown by black dotted outline).

Figure 2: Incorporated Document includes Lot 2 in the Restructure Overlay area

Figure 3 - Aerial image


RO73 - FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY

(83 FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY (LOT 4 TP840113 CA

PT63A PSCORESBY), 90 FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY

(LOT 2 TP840113 CA PT63A PSCORESBY), 94 FERNDALE ROAD,

UPWEY (LOT 1A LP7158 CA PT63A PSCORESBY), 175-191A GLENFERN

ROAD, UPWEY (2020\PP3279 (CROWN ALLOTMENT 2020 PARISH OF

NARREE WORRAN))

The above properties are shown in planning scheme mapping as partly affected by the Restructure Overlay. However, the Incorporated Document does not include these properties in the Overlay. The Incorporated Document applies the Overlay to areas north of Ferndale Road in this area, however the areas shown in Figure1 below are all south of Ferndale Road.

The land in Figure1 should not be included in the Restructure Overlay. There have been no amendments to the Scheme which have specifically included this land in the Overlay.

It is intended to correct the error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not affect the land shown below in Figure 1:

It is noted that land in this area south of Ferndale Road is shown as a proposed reserve. There are no implications of this for planning decision making so the reference is not useful. Council has a Recreation and Open Space Strategy, which describes the PPRZ area as ‘Glen Fern Valley Bushlands’, managed by Parks Victoria, which provides opportunities for relaxation, bushwalking and nature appreciation in a varied bushland environment ranging from riparian forest and wetlands along Ferny Creek to woodlands and grasslands on the slopes. It also accommodates Sherbrooke Archers Club. The Strategy finds that the provision of open space in Precinct G: Upwey and Tecoma, is ‘relatively good’ and that there is an opportunity to partner with Parks Victoria to encourage more nature-based tourism. Given that there is existing strategic open space planning that applies to this area, the reference to the ‘proposed reserve’ in the Restructure Overlay appears unnecessary.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping showing some areas south of Ferndale Road (in black dotted outline) affected by the Restructure Overlay (olive green colour).


Figure 2: The Incorporated Document shows that the lot consolidation requirements of the Restructure Overlay do not apply in this area. Relevant land highlighted in pink.

RO73 - FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY

83 FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNDALE ROAD (LOT 5 TP840113 CA


(LOT 3 TP840113 CA PT63A PSCORESBY), 89 FERNDALE ROAD,

UPPER FERNTREE GULLY (LOT 1 TP840113 CA PT63A PSCORESBY),

81 FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY (LOT 9 TP840113 CA


(LOT 3 PS424205 CA PT63A1 PSCORESBY), 77 FERNDALE ROAD,

UPPER FERNTREE GULLY (LOT 2 PS424205 CA PT63A1 PSCORESBY),

75 FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY (LOT 1 PS424205 CA

PT63A1 PSCORESBY), 6 OAKDALE ROAD, UPWEY (LOT 4 PS424205

CA PT63A1 PSCORESBY), 10 OAKDALE ROAD, UPWEY (LOT 5

PS424205 CA PT63A1 PSCORESBY)

This land is single lots in RO73 with no restructure requirements. The land does however have two other requirements that apply, namely:

No house may be constructed on any lot until:

arrangements for the provision of adequate vehicle access and utility services to the lot have been made to the satisfaction of the responsible authority;

a geotechnical report has been prepared to the satisfaction of the responsible authority where the house is to be established on a building envelope with a slope of more than 20 per cent.

The first requirement is addressed by the Green Wedge Zone that applies to the properties. The second requirement is addressed by the Erosion Management Overlay. Given this, these requirements are considered redundant and the land can be removed from the RO.


Figure 1: Planning scheme mapping showing the area that is considered redundant (in red outline)

RO90 - 53 WHITEGUM DRIVE, EAST WARBURTON (LOT 32 LP58791 CA

PTS42&42D PWARBURTON)

This land is shown in the planning scheme as within Restructure Overlay 90, but it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.


It is proposed to correct the error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not affect the subject land.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping showing the land (black dotted outline) in the Restructure Overlay (olive green colour)

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document does not include the land (land highlighted in pink)


RO105 - BLACKSANDS ROAD, THREE BRIDGES

Current use: Dwellings on semi-cleared land adjoining the Little Yarra River, with

some Crown land. Zoned part Green Wedge Zone Schedule 5 and part Public

Conservation Zone.

Restructure Overlay 105 (RO105) applies to land on Blacksands Road, Three

Bridges. There is a discrepancy between the Incorporated Document and planning

scheme mapping regarding the area of land affected by RO105. As shown in Figure

1, the Incorporated Document applies only to Crown Allotments 80D1-D4, which is

heavily treed, ecologically significant land on the edge of the Little Yarra River.

However, planning scheme mapping also includes the privately owned land to the

south (Crown Allotment 80F), an unmade government road reserve, and two further

Crown allotments (80D5 and 80D6) as included within RO105, as shown in Figure 2

below.

The Planning Panel Report on the New Format Planning Scheme from 1999 reveals

that the owner of lots 80D1-4 made a submission at the time seeking for these lots to

be shown as a separate Restructure Lot, rather than being included in a Restructure

Lot with lots 80D5, 80D6, and part of the unmade government road, as was

previously required under the former Upper Yarra Planning Scheme (Figure 3). The

reason for this was that lots 80D5 and 80D6 (see Figure 4 for diagram of lots) were

owned by the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, which was

unwilling to sell, thereby preventing the land at 80D1-D4 from being developed with a

dwelling. Council’s position was that prevention of the land from development was

unreasonable given DNRE’s reluctance to purchase the land, and Council therefore

recommended:

That Council support submission no. 301, Estate of FB Arnoldt, and modify Restructure Plan Restructure Overlay 105 as follows:

Show CA’s 80D1-D4 as a single restructure lot

Show CA80F as a separate restructure lot

Exclude the DNRE land comprising CA 80D5, 80D6 and the unused road from the Restructure Overlay

Change the zoning of the DNRE land from Rural RUZ-40 to Public Conservation and Resource Zone.

The Panel supported Council’s position in its recommendation.

Subsequently, the Incorporated Document was modified to show only one

Restructure Lot for Restructure Overlay 105, affecting lots 80D1-D4 (Figure 1). This

is the same as the current Incorporated Document’s reference to RO105. While the

omission of lot 80F as a separate restructure lot would seem to contradict the


Panel’s recommendation, 80F in this instance would be a single lot with no

restructure or other requirements, and therefore redundant.

Since the implementation of the New Format Planning Scheme, planning scheme

mapping has continued to show the entire RO105 area previously shown in the

Upper Yarra Planning Scheme as applying to RO105 (lots 80D1-6, 80F and the

unmade road), which contradicts the Incorporated Document and creates uncertainty

over the intentions of RO105, which is an error.

It is proposed to:

Delete the Restructure Overlay from Lot 80F, as this is a single restructure lot

with no restructure requirements. There is no purpose in the Restructure

Overlay applying to this land.

Delete the Restructure Overlay from lots 80D5 and 80D6, and the unmade

Government Road, as intended by the Panel Report on the New Format

Planning Scheme. Lot 80D5 is zoned Public Conservation and Resource

Zone.

Retain only Lots 80D1-80D4 in the Restructure Overlay, consistent with what

is now shown in the Incorporated Document.

Rezone Lot 80D6 , which is Crown land, from Green Wedge Zone to Public

Conservation and Resource Zone as intended by the Council and the

Planning Panel on the New Format Scheme.

RO105 is identified in the RSP as a Special Study Area (SSA). Chapter 11 – Special

Study Areas of the RSP has the purpose of ensuring that potentially serious

environmental and social impacts resulting from inappropriate subdivision

development are overcome. SSA are identified in the RSP as requiring further work

to address issues relating to inappropriate subdivisions.

Identifying this SSA in the Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme as RO105 achieves the purpose and policy of the RSP, including the need to continue subdivision restructure programs. Where land is in accordance with a restructure plan, removing it from the Restructure Overlay is consistent with the RSPs intent to restrict new development in sensitive areas.


Figure 1: Restructure Overlay plan from Incorporated Document

Figure 2: Planning Scheme mapping for RO105 (Restructure Overlay area shown in olive green)

Figure 3: Former Upper Yarra Planning Scheme restructure plan

Figure 4: Lot layout


RO106 - LAND NORTH OF YARRA STREET, POWELLTOWN

This land is in Planning Scheme mapping as within Restructure Overlay 106 in Powelltown. However, the visual representation of this Restructure Overlay in the Incorporated Document is very unclear, and does not show land parcel boundaries consistent with title information. RO106 appears to only include part of 2 and 4 Yarra Street, and does not include 8 Blake Street at all.

Given the lack of clarity, and the fact that these properties already contain single dwellings, the continuing application of the Restructure Overlay has no purpose, as more than one dwelling on a lot would be prohibited under the Green Wedge A Zone.

The Restructure Plan below appears to show a consolidation requirement for land north of Yarra Street, but it is very unclear what land it refers to, or what the consolidation requirements are.

The Restructure Plan cannot achieve any further goal of limiting development, as the properties each contain a dwelling per lot and they are zoned GWAZ1, where only one dwelling per lot is allowed.

It is noted that the Restructure Overlay shows a slight realignment of Yarra Street to the south of 2 and 4 Yarra Street. The intention is thought to be to create some separation between Yarra Street and the dwellings at 2 and 4 Yarra Street, which are constructed to the road reserve boundary. Given that the houses have existed in this form for decades, and no known attempt has been made to satisfy this road realignment requirement, either by Council or private property owners, it is considered unnecessary and suitable for removal.

It is therefore proposed to remove the Restructure Overlay from this land.

Figure 1: The Incorporated Document showing the area of 2 and 4 Yarra Street and 8 Blake Street, Powelltown.


Figure 2: Title boundaries of land in vicinity of 8 Blake Street (lot 11).

Figure 3: Planning Scheme mapping of 2 and 4 Yarra Street and 8 Blake Street, Powelltown (black dotted outine, Restructure Overlay area shown by olive green colour)

RO106 - 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, AND 31 YARRA STREET AND

21 BLAKE STREET , POWELLTOWN

These properties in Powelltown face north onto Yarra Street, with the exception of 21 Blake Street, which faces west onto Blake Street. At the rear of Yarra Street, there is an old laneway previously used for collection of toilet-pans, as shown in Figure 1:

The laneway is grassed and adjoins large areas of open bushland to the south, zoned PCRZ. Some parts of the laneway have been incorporated into nearby properties and built on, as seen in Figure 2.

The Restructure Overlay plan in Figure 1 requires properties facing Yarra Street to consolidate their titles with sections of the closed road adjoining. However, the purpose of this requirement is unknown as the original file for this Restructure Plan


has been destroyed. The consolidation does not appear to relate to the creation of additional land per property for septic tanks, as the land slopes upwards to the south where the laneway is located.

There is no clear reason for the consolidation requirement and it is considered redundant. Should the owners of the land, the State Government, wish to sell the land in sections to land owners as the Restructure Overlay plan suggests, this can be done without the Restructure Overlay continuing to apply.

Ambiguity is also caused by poor drafting of the plan, which can be interpreted to require 9 Yarra Street and 21 Blake Street to consolidate or that the thick line to identify the lots as single lots is incomplete (Figure 3). There is no clear reason for the consolidation requirement and it is similarly considered redundant.

The existence of the Restructure Overlay is an ongoing burden for the land owners, which appears unreasonable given that lack of apparent cause for the consolidation requirement. It is proposed to remove the Restructure Overlay from the majority of these properties, with the exception of 1 and 3 Yarra Street. These properties have a consolidation requirement, which is clear and will be retained. However the requirement for this land to also consolidate with a section of the closed road is proposed to be removed.

The future application of the Restructure Overlay is shown in Figure 4: It will simply require 1 and 3 Yarra Street to consolidate titles. The Restructure Overlay will continue to show the rear laneway as closed, meaning that adjoining owners can apply to DELWP to purchase sections of it if they choose, but will be under no obligation to do so.

Figure 1: Laneway in RO106 shown as ‘closed road’.


Figure 2: Aerial image showing closed road in red outline.

Figure 3: Unclear drafting of Restructure Map relating to 9 Yarra Street and 21 Blake Street. A closed road separates these parcels of land.

Figure 4: Proposed application of the RO, with one restructure lot affecting 1 and 3 Yarra Street shown by thick black outline. The Restructure Overlay will continue to show the laneway as closed.


RO108 – 17 BIRDWOOD AVENUE AND 18 KALAMUNDA TERRACE,

HEALESVILLE

These parcels are shown in the Incorporated Document as being single restructure

lots in RO108, however are not shown in planning scheme mapping as within the

Restructure Overlay.

RO108 was amended in 2013 via C109Pt1, which sought to delete its redundant

parts. Despite C109Pt1 deleting the two parcels being from the Restructure Overlay,

they remain identified as restructure lots in the Incorporated Document.

Therefore, it is proposed to correct this error by changing the Incorporated Document to remove 17 Birdwood Avenue and 18 Kalamunda Terrace from the RO108 Restructure Map.

Other parcels to be removed from RO108 are either lots that have been consolidated according to the Restructure Map or single lots with no restructure requirement. Such situations are documented in Chapter 2.0 of this report.

Figure 1: RO108 Restructure Map showing 17 Birdwood Avenue and 18 Kalamunda Terrace, Healesville as being in Restructure Overlay (pink highlight).

Figure 2: Planning Scheme mapping showing the land is not in RO108 (black dotted outline).


RO109 - 45 BRIDGES ROAD, HEALESVILLE (PC374131)

This entire land area is shown in planning scheme mapping as within the Restructure Overlay, however the Incorporated Document shows only the eastern half of the property in RO109.

The land was consolidated in 2013. Prior to this, it was known as lot 20 and 21 of LP6667, or 45 and 65 Bridges Road, Healesville respectively. It is the former 65 Bridges Road that is not shown by the Incorporated Document as within RO109.

RO109 was amended in 2013 via C109Pt1, which sought to delete its redundant parts. The exhibited Amendment proposed to delete the Restructure Overlay from 65 Bridges Road. This was later recognised as an error because the Restructure Overlay intent was for 45 and 65 Bridges Road to be consolidated. Consequently, the approved Amendment intended to include 65 Bridges Road in a restructure lot with 45 Bridges Road. Despite this, on approval of C109Pt1, the amended Incorporated Document omitted 65 Bridges Road in error. Planning Scheme mapping correctly showed both properties affected. As mentioned, the two properties were later consolidated.

It is proposed to correct the error by changing the Incorporated Document to show all of PC374131 as within RO109, and able to accommodate two dwellings within a building envelope area along Bridges Road, as intended.

Figure 1: Incorporated Document - PC374131 land highlighted in pink - dotted line indicating land that is not now mapped as affected by RO109.

Figure 2: Planning Scheme mapping - subject land shown in black dotted outline, Restructure Overlay in olive green colour.


Figure 3: Version of the Incorporated Document prior to C109Pt1, subject land highlighted in pink

RO109 - 136 HEALESVILLE-YARRA GLEN ROAD, HEALESVILLE

Planning Scheme mapping shows RO109 applying to this property, but the Incorporated Document does not show the Restructure Overlay applying.

Amendment C109Pt1 rationalised RO109 by removing its redundant parts. It did not seek to remove 136 Healesville-Yarra Glen Road from the Overlay, although the property appears to have met the intent of the Overlay at the time, being a single restructure lot with no restructure requirements.

The Incorporated Document should show RO109 applying to 136 Healesville-Yarra Glen Road in a separate restructure lot to adjoining land at 120 Healesville-Yarra Glen Road. However it omits 136 Healesville-Yarra Glen Road.

As 136 Healesville Yarra Glen Road has no restructure requirements, there is no purpose in correcting the Incorporated Document to show that RO109 applies to this property. It is a redundant part of the Restructure Overlay and can be removed.

It is proposed to change planning scheme mapping and the Incorporated Document to show that Restructure Overlay 109 does not apply to this land.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping, subject land shown in black dotted outline, Restructure Overlay shown in olive green colour


Figure 2: The incorporated Document not showing the land in the Restructure Overlay (highlighted in pink)

Figure 3: Version of the Incorporated Document prior to C109Pt1, showing the land as a single restructure lot (lot boundaries appear incorrect in the Incorporated Document).

RO120 - 75 THOMPSONS ROAD, MONTROSE 3765 (PART LOT 8

LP9536 CA PTCA 65B&76 PMOOROOLBARK)

Current use: Contains one dwelling on a heavily treed site of 3160sqm. Zoned part Green Wedge A Zone 1 and part Public Conservation and Resource Zone.

This property is shown in the Incorporated Document as being a single restructure lot in Restructure Overlay 120. However, it is not shown as being in RO120 in planning scheme mapping. The land half zoned Public Conservation and Resource Zone and half Green Wedge A Zone Schedule 1, even though it is privately owned and should not have a public zoning.

The inclusion of this property in the Incorporated Document is an error. In the Planning Panel report on the New Format Planning Scheme, 1999, both Council and the Panel recommended that the Restructure Overlay be removed. The Panel explained that as it is a single restructure lot, there is no restructuring required (submission 53).

When the New Format Planning Scheme was implemented in July 2000, the land was no longer shown with a Restructure Overlay. However, it has remained shown in the Incorporated Document in error.

It is proposed to remove the land from the Incorporated Document. Concurrent Planning Scheme Amendment C166 seeks to rezone the entire land area to Green Wedge A Zone Schedule 1 to reflect its private ownership.


Figure1: Incorporated Document showing Restructure Overlay affected area - highlighted in pink

Figure 2: Planning scheme mapping with no Restructure Overlay on the land - Restructure Overlay area shown in olive green, subject land shown in black dotted outline. Zoning is half Green Wedge A Zone (light green) and half Public Conservation and Resource Zone (dark green).

Figure 3: Aerial image


RO120 - 105 THOMPSONS ROAD, MONTROSE 3765 (LOT 1 LP21658 CA

PTCA 76 PMOOROOLBARK)

Current use: Contains one dwelling on land of 0.6 hectares. Zoned Green Wedge A Zone Schedule 1.

This property is shown in the Incorporated Document as being a single restructure lot in Restructure Overlay 120. However, it is not shown as in RO120 in planning scheme mapping.

The inclusion of this property in the Incorporated Document is an error. In the Planning Panel report on the New Format Planning Scheme, 1999, both Council and the Panel recommended that the Restructure Overlay be removed. The Panel explained that as it is a single restructure lot, there is no restructuring required (submission 43).

When the New Format Planning Scheme was implemented in July 2000, the land was no longer shown with a Restructure Overlay. However, it has remained shown in the Incorporated Document in error.

It is therefore proposed to correct the error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not affect the subject land.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows no Restructure Overlay (olive green) affecting the land

Figure 2: Incorporated Document shows the land (highlighted pink) in the Restructure Overlay area.


RO120 - FORMER LOT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF JASPER ROAD,

KALORAMA

This land is shown in the Incorporated Document as being a single restructure lot in RO120. However it has long since been acquired by the State Government as part of previous land buy backs in the Dandenong Ranges. It no longer exists as a lot, but has been consolidated into larger PCRZ land holdings. It forms part of two of these holdings.

Given that it is parkland, State Government owned, part of a previous buyback program, and has since been consolidated into other larger land holdings, there is no need to maintain a restructure requirement. It is therefore proposed to remove the Restructure Overlay from this land.

Figure 1: Land in Restructure Overlay (olive green)

Figure 2: Incorporated Document

Figure 3: Current pattern of lot boundaries, showing zoning (PCRZ in dark green)


RO121 – DODDS ROAD, OLINDA

A small portion of land along the eastern boundary of 24 Nicholson Street, Olinda is shown in the planning scheme as within Restructure Overlay 121, but is not shown in the Incorporated Document.


It is proposed to correct the error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not affect the subject land.

The Restructure Map has also been updated to remove land parcels and closed roads from the map, which are owned by the State Government and have been incorporated into the Dandenong Ranges National Park. These parcels are generally located to the north and west of land in the Green Wedge A Zone – Schedule 1.

Figure 1: Planning scheme maps showing a portion of 24 Nicholson Street (red line) in RO121(olive green).

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document does not show 24 Nicholson Street (highlighted in pink) requiring to be consolidated with adjoining land.


RO131 – 6, 10 AND 20 WILSON STREET, 275-279 MAROONDAH

HIGHWAY AND ‘THE NOOK’, HEALESVILLE

Current use: Contains some vacant, cleared land along the Grace Burn, as well as a restaurant and a Council Reserve. Zoned part Urban Floodway Zone, part General Residential Zone.

RO131 is shown in the Incorporated Document, but not in Planning Scheme mapping. It is a restructure lot comprised of 6 lots needing to be consolidated into one in order to accommodate a dwelling.

The land was not recommended to have the Restructure Overlay removed in any amendments to the Planning Scheme. It should therefore be shown as within the Restructure Overlay in Planning Scheme mapping.

The entire area of Restructure Overlay 131 was previously zoned Deferred Development Zone in the Shire of Healesville Planning Scheme, meaning land that was deemed as unsuitable for development until a ‘Management Plan’ had been approved, which would govern how the land restructure should take place.

A likely explanation is that when the New Format Planning Scheme mapping was created in electronic form in about 2000, this land was simply missed from the Restructure Overlay in error.

The rationale for the application of restructure controls many years ago most likely relates to flood risk. The land is affected by an Urban Floodway Zone and a Land Subject to Inundation Overlay.

The Restructure Overlay is intended to apply south and west of the Grace Burn. Over time, the course of the Grace Burn has changed, which explains the change in how RO131 has been mapped over time (Figs 2 and 3 below).

RO131 is comprised of the following properties:

Figure 1: Land in RO131


20 Wilson Street, Healesville (Sec O Ca 2 PGracedale, Sec O Ca 3 PGracedale); 10 Wilson Street, Healesville (Sec O Ca 4 PGracedale); 6 Wilson Street, Healesville (Sec O Ca 5 PGracedale)

The majority of these properties are zoned Urban Floodway Zone, with a narrow strip of land along the Grace Burn on the east boundary zoned General Residential Zone Schedule 1, which appears to be a mapping error.

The land is vacant and subject to severe flooding. As the land is in an Urban Floodway Zone, no dwellings or commercial buildings can be developed. Permissible uses are limited to agriculture, road, uses in 62.01, and some leisure and recreation uses.

271-273 Maroondah Highway, Healesville 3777 (Sec O Ca 6 Pgracedale, Sec O Ca 7 PGracedale)

This property is comprised of two lots (Sec O Ca 6 PGracedale, and Sec O Ca 7 PGracedale). The majority of the land is zoned Urban Floodway Zone, with a narrow strip of land along the Grace Burn on the east boundary zoned General Residential Zone Schedule 1, which appears to be a mapping error.

The land accommodates a restaurant, which predates the New Format Planning Scheme and has existing use rights. The land is subject to severe flooding.

‘The Nook’ Council owned Reserve, and 275-279 Maroondah Highway, Healesville

Mapping of the Restructure Overlay east of 271-273 Maroondah Highway is very

poor. It is intended to apply to land south of the Grace Burn, as was shown in the

former Healesville Planning Scheme (figure 2), however the New Format Planning

Scheme changed the mapping in the Incorporated Document, likely in response to a

changing alignment of the Grace Burn (figure 3). The more recent Incorporated

Document mapping shows parts of the Healesville RSL on the east side of the Grace

Burn, zoned GRZ1, as within the Restructure Overlay. This is considered an error

(Figure 4).

To the east of 271-273 Maroondah Highway, Healesville is a small parcel of Council

owned land, known locally as ‘the Nook’. It is shown in the former Shire of

Healesville Planning Scheme as within the restructure plan area. This land is

classified as a government road, however it is used as a reserve. The recently

adopted Healesville Structure Plan has an action (3.14) to review the zoning of

Council owned properties and correct any anomalies to reflect the current land uses.

Amendment C163 proposes to rezone this land to Public Park and Recreation Zone

as a separate amendment to implement the recommendations of the Healesville

Structure Plan. Given this, it is proposed to remove the Restructure Overlay from this

public land.


It is recommended to correct the planning scheme by showing the land described

above as within the Restructure Overlay in areas where it is west and south of the

Grace Burn, with the exception of land in the Nook and 275-279 Maroondah Hwy, as

shown in Figure6 below.

There is little purpose including the Nook, given that it is Council owned and will be

rezoned to PUZ6.

Figure 2: Former Shire of Healesville mapping of the restructure plan

Figure 3: New Format Planning Scheme mapping of RO131 in the Incorporated Document


Figure 4: Aerial image

Figure 5: Portion of land owned by RSL south of the Grace Burn


Figure 6: Land proposed for retention in the Restructure Overlay shown striped

RO133 - RYMERS ROAD/HAZELDENE ROAD, GLADYSDALE

Current use: Dwellings on semi cleared land, adjoining large forested areas. Zoned

Rural Conservation Zone Schedule 3.

This land was formerly made a Restructure Plan in the Upper Yarra Planning

Scheme in 1985 to recognise houses and leases that been created when the land

was originally settled as a co-operative in 1958. Hence, the restructure lots shown

are based on dwellings constructed rather than property ownership.

The former version of the restructure plan (Figure 1) applies to a larger area than the

current version (Figure 2). The purpose of the former version was to assist in the

conversion of leases into cluster titles (a type of title for subdivided land setting out

each party’s land and any common property areas).

With Amendment C103 to the Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme, much of this former

version was deleted and deemed to have met the requirements of the restructure

control. The part that remained affected by the restructure controls (Lots 8 and 9 on

CS1740 - see Figure 3), is the same as that now shown in the Restructure Overlay.

The specific purpose of Am103 was to allow Lot 9 to be subdivided (subject to a

planning permit) into 4 lots so that each existing dwelling would have its own land

title.


Lot 8 in Figure 3 is now a single restructure lot and has no benefit from continued

inclusion in the Restructure Overlay.

Lot 9 in Figure 3 contains 4 restructure lots, which would imply greater development

potential than the Rural Conservation Zone Schedule 3, and is a contradiction in the

planning scheme. It is clear that when the New Format Planning Scheme was

created in 2000, there was an intention to allow for subdivision of this land generally

in accordance with RO133. One of the few changes made by the Minister for

Planning to the exhibited New Format Scheme was to modify this restructure plan

into its current form to meet the above intention.

When the NFPS was implemented, the land was originally put into an Environmental

Rural Zone Schedule 3 (ERZ3), which had a subdivision requirement that new lots

created must be an average of 60 hectares. Lot 9 has a total area of 25 hectares,

which would not allow subdivision.

Therefore, the contradiction that currently exists between the Restructure Overlay

and the zone is not new, and was deliberately created when the New Format

Scheme came into operation in July 2000. The intention of the Restructure Overlay

was to indicate that despite the subdivision provisions of the zone, the land may be

further subdivided (subject to a planning permit) in order to recognise the existing

dwellings on the land.

Since Amendment L103 was approved, green wedge policy and law has developed

via the Green Wedge Protection Act 2003 and amendments to the Planning and

Environment Act 1987. The subdivision of this land now cannot occur without

ratification from Parliament under Section 46AF of the Planning and Environment Act

1987. Therefore, the original intent of using the Restructure Overlay to indicate

subdivision potential of this land is no longer possible to achieve by a decision of

Council alone.

It is proposed to keep the land in RO133, and to add the following wording to the

Restructure Plan to clarify its intention:

This restructure plan was implemented by Amendment L103 to the Yarra

Ranges Planning Scheme on 4 February 1999.

The land in this area was settled as a co-operative in 1958. The original

restructure control from the former Shire of Upper Yarra was intended to

provide separate lots for each lease and house in the co-operative.

Ownership of much of the land originally in the restructure plan has been

resolved and that land has consequently been removed from the restructure

map.


The restructure map shows subdivision potential of the land at 65A St

Benedicts Drive, Gladysdale (9\CS1740) into four lots, despite the provisions

of the applicable zone. It was the intention of Amendment L103 to show this

subdivision potential.

Figure1a: Former restructure plan in Upper Yarra Planning Scheme


Figure1b: Current restructure plan


Figure1c: Title of subdivision


RIVERSIDE AREAS THAT ARE INACCURATELY MAPPED DUE TO

CHANGING RIVER/STREAM ALIGNMENTS

There are a number of instances where the Restructure Overlay has become inaccurate over time due to watercourses changing alignment, as well as inaccurate mapping:

RO36 - TORRY HILL ROAD, UPWEY

RO36 extends along the Ferny Creek for a distance of 360 metres. The application

of the Restructure Overlay is inaccurate for many of the properties, and does not

correspond to property title boundaries.

The Restructure Overlay is clearly intended to apply north of the Ferny Creek. Its

application to small areas of properties to the south of the creek is illogical (there is

little purpose in requiring properties to the north to consolidate with small land areas

on the opposite side of a creek).

It is proposed to correct the inaccuracies by mapping the Restructure Overlay in

alignment with title boundaries (Figure 1). It is also proposed to change the

requirement for 4-6 Torry Hill Road to consolidate with Council owned land to the

south and east at 58 Glenfern Avenue. These lots form part of a larger parcel of land

owned by Council, which consists of lots on both sides of the creek (Figure 2).

In addition, it is proposed to align zone boundaries of the Public Conservation and

Resource Zone and the Low Density Residential Zone with property boundaries to

correct anomalies at 12-14, 16, 18, and 20 Torry Hill Road, Upwey.

Figure 1: Property boundaries between properties either side of the creek shown by black dotted line.


Figure 2: Council owned land at 58 Glenfern Avenue, Upwey (shown by red line).

RO73 - OAKDALE ROAD/FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY

RO73 extends along the Ferny Creek for a distance of 640 metres. The application

of the Restructure Overlay is inaccurate for many of the properties, and does not

correspond to property title boundaries.

The Restructure Overlay is clearly intended to apply north of the Ferny Creek. Land

to the south is public parkland and zoned Public Park and Recreation Zone.


alignment with title boundaries.

Figure 1: Boundary between private properties and PPRZ land shown by black dotted line, Restructure Overlay area shown by olive green colour.


RO101 - FISHERMAN DRIVE, REEFTON

RO101 extends along the Yarra River for a distance of 1.4 kilometres. The

application of the Restructure Overlay is inaccurate for many of the properties, and

does not correspond to property title boundaries.


alignment with title boundaries. There is no purpose in the Restructure Overlay

applying to areas of the Yarra River zoned Public Conservation and Resource Zone.

Figure 1: Boundary between private properties and the Yarra River shown by black

dotted line.


4.0 CHANGES TO “OTHER REQUIREMENTS”

The Incorporated Document refers to a number of other requirements besides lot

consolidation. The Incorporated Document has requirements for building envelopes,

creation of easements, closure of roads (sometimes with consolidation requirements

for particular properties), site coverage, and others. In general this Amendment

avoids removing the Restructure Overlay from properties where these ‘other

requirements’ apply. However, a review of these requirements has led to some

proposed rationalisations and changes as set out below:

RO10 - TITANIA CRESCENT/MT DANDNENONG TOURIST ROAD,

FERNY CREEK

Land shown as a closed road through 12 Oberon Ave, Ferny Creek has been closed

and consolidated into privately owned land. This closed road can therefore be

deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO33 - ROPLEY GRANGE, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY

Land shown as a closed road adjoining 27-29 and 30 Ropley Grange, Upwey has

been closed and consolidated into privately owned land. This closed road can

therefore be deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO42 - CARRINGTON COURT/BAY STREET, TECOMA

Land shown as a closed road within 3 Sandells Road and 14 Bay Street, Tecoma

has been bought and is in private ownership. The closed road has no consolidation

requirement. This road can therefore be deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO43 - NATION AVENUE/BORANG AVENUE, SELBY

Land shown as a closed road within 20 Argonne Pde, Selby has been closed and

consolidated into privately owned land. This closed road can therefore be deleted

from the Restructure Overlay.

RO44 - EVELINE ROAD/BELGRAVE-GEMBROOK ROAD, SELBY

Land shown as a closed road within 2 Eveline Rd and 3 Selby-Aura Rd, Selby 20

Argonne Parade, Selby has been closed and consolidated into privately owned land.

This closed road can therefore be deleted from the Restructure Overlay.


RO45 - BELGRAVE-GEMBROOK ROAD/ARBOR AVENUE, SELBY

Land shown as a closed road adjoining properties from 3 Byrne Street to 22

Colombo Road, Belgrave has been closed and is now in Council ownership. This

closed road can therefore be deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO46 - TEMPLE ROAD/CURRAJONG AVENUE, SELBY

Land shown as a closed road through 2 Montana Grove, Selby has been closed and



A carriageway easement is needed on land at 1 Maskells Hill Road, Selby to provide

vehicle access to the adjoining land at 91 Temple Road, Selby, to Maskells Hill Road

due to the slope of the land. This is the only possible purpose for a carriageway

easement on 1 Maskells Hill Road, since land to the south (3 Maskells Hill Road) has

easy vehicle access to Maskells Hill Road). Detail added to clarify the purpose of this

carriageway easement.

RO51 - MOUNT MORTON ROAD/OSBORNE AVENUE, BELGRAVE

SOUTH

The restructure plan shows a carriageway easement that needs to be created to

provide for vehicle access for 164 and 166 Mt Morton Road to Osborne Avenue.

Access for this property cannot occur to Mt Morton Road. The easement has been

created. The reference to this easement is therefore intended for removal.

RO63 - BELGRAVE-GEMBROOK ROAD/MENZIES ROAD, MENZIES

CREEK

Land shown as a closed road adjoining 227 Belgrave-Gembrook Road, Menzies

Creek has been closed and consolidated into privately owned land. This closed road

can therefore be deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO67 - COLEHURST CRESCENT/ALLISON CRESCENT, SASSAFRAS

This Restructure Overlay map is within the area covered by RO4. It is therefore

proposed to add this to RO4 and delete RO67 in order to rationalise the Overlay.

RO73 - OAKDALE ROAD/FERNDALE ROAD, UPPER FERNTREE GULLY

Restructure Plan 73 states that “a dwelling must not be constructed on any lot until a geotechnical report has been prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible


Authority where the house is to be established on a building envelope with a slope of more than 20 per cent”. This control on development was put in place prior to the implementation of the Erosion Management Overlay (EMO), which has updated and replaced the requirement. It is therefore proposed to remove this.

Restructure Plan 73 also states that “no house may be constructed on any lot until arrangements for the provision of adequate vehicle access and utility services to the lot have been made to the satisfaction of the responsible authority”. As all land in RO73 is in a Green Wedge Zone, and Clause 35.04-2 (Use of land for a dwelling) now covers the above requirements, this can be deleted from RO73.

Restructure Plan 73 also refers to a “proposed reserve” south of Ferndale Road on an unspecified area of land. This land has not been purchased by Council in the period since the requirement was created by the Restructure Overlay, estimated to be 1996. The land is not affected by a Public Acquisition Overlay and Council has no current plans to acquire it. It is therefore proposed to remove this reference.

Restructure Plan 73 shows a closed road through 95-99 Ferndale Road and 103 Ferndale Road. Simultaneously, a carriageway easement is shown to be created in the same area, effectively replacing the road. Previous advice to Council from the CFA indicates this road needs to be retained. Detail is added to clarify that the road may only be closed if a carriageway easement is created to maintain public access through this area.

RO74 - BATESLEIGH ROAD, SELBY

Land shown as a closed road within 55 Batesleigh Road, Selby has been closed and



RO93 - EARLE STREET, LAUNCHING PLACE

Land shown to be consolidated with adjoining properties is “Earle Street”, an

unconstructed subdivisional road. RO93 does not currently show the section of Earle

Street intended for closure as being formally closed, meaning that adjoining owners

cannot apply to Council to purchase the land for the purposes of consolidation with

their land. The owner of 137 Barak Drive, Launching Place has approached Council

with an interest in buying the section of Earle Street directly adjoining that property. It

is therefore proposed to close a small section of Earle Street to enable this.

Requirements for lot consolidation and easement creation will continue to be shown

by RO93 and will be implemented when applications by adjoining owners are made

to purchase the land.


RO98 – STORY ROAD, WARBURTON

Land shown as a reserve on RO98 has been consolidated into private land. Council

has no intent to acquire this land and the Restructure Overlay has no restructure

requirement. This land can therefore be deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO116 - MT LEBANON ROAD, CHUM CREEK

Land shown as a closed road within 21 Chaffer Street, Chum Creek has been closed

and consolidated into privately owned land. This closed road can therefore be

deleted from the Restructure Overlay.

RO133 - RYMERS ROAD/HAZELDENE ROAD, GLAYDSDALE

A note is proposed to be added to this restructure plan to provide information about

the history and origins of the restructure control, as well as its current meaning.

RO133 provides for land to be subdivided in a way that varies from the provisions of

the relevant zone, and requires ratification by parliament under Section 46AF of the

Planning and Environment Act, which is contradictory. This change does not seek to

rectify the contradiction but simply to provide some explanation for future reference.

5.0 LAND IN PUBLIC ZONES

The removal of the Restructure Overlay from one piece of land at 1 Fisherman Drive,

Reefton (Ca 9CPManango) will mean that subdivision potential is increased. The

removal of the Restructure Overlay would allow for subdivision of land outside the

Urban Growth Boundary into smaller lots, or more lots, which would ordinarily need

parliamentary ratification under S46AF of the P&E Act.

However, discussion with officers of the Department of Environment, Land, Water

and Planning has indicated that due to the public ownership and the unlikelihood of

future subdivision, no ratification is needed.

In addition, the rezoning of one property (Lot 80D6, Blacksands Road, Three

Bridges), owned by the State Government, to a public zone, will similarly add a

potential for subdivision, but given this is public land, there is no need for

parliamentary ratification for this change. It is appropriate for publicly owned land to

be in a public zone. The land’s current zoning is an identified error in the Scheme, as

explained below under “RO105 - Blacksands Road, Three Bridges”.


RO84 - 1 FISHERMAN DRIVE, REEFTON (CA 9C PMANANGO)

This is vacant Crown Land. It is a single lot (previously consolidated) with no

requirements for restructure or consolidation with other land, and is therefore a

redundant part of the Restructure Overlay.

The land is zoned Public Use Zone Schedule 1 (Service and Utility).

Figure 1:- Planning Scheme zone mapping showing the land (black dotted line).

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document

RO105 - BLACKSANDS ROAD, THREE BRIDGES

Current use: Dwellings on semi-cleared land adjoining the Little Yarra River, with

some Crown land. Zoned part Green Wedge Zone Schedule 5 and part Public

Conservation Zone.

Restructure Overlay 105 applies to land on Blacksands Road, Three Bridges. There

is a discrepancy between the Incorporated Document and planning scheme mapping

regarding the area of land affected by RO105. As shown in Figure 1, the

Incorporated Document applies only to Crown Allotments 80D1-D4, which is heavily

treed, ecologically significant land on the edge of the Little Yarra River. However,

planning scheme mapping also includes the privately owned land to the south


(Crown Allotment 80F), an unmade government road reserve, and two further Crown

allotments (80D5 and 80D6) as included within RO105, as shown in Figure 2 below.

The Planning Panel Report on the New Format Planning Scheme from 1999 reveals

that the owner of lots 80D1-4 made a submission at the time seeking for these lots to

be shown as a separate Restructure Lot, rather than being included in a Restructure

Lot with lots 80D5, 80D6, and part of the unmade government road, as was

previously required under the former Upper Yarra Planning Scheme (Figure 3). The

reason for this was that lots 80D5 and 80D6 (see Figure 4 for diagram of lots) were

owned by the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, which was

unwilling to sell, thereby preventing the land at 80D1-D4 from being developed with a

dwelling. Council’s position was that prevention of the land from development was

unreasonable given DNRE’s reluctance to purchase the land, and Council therefore

recommended:

That Council support submission no. 301, Estate of FB Arnoldt, and modify Restructure Plan Restructure Overlay 105 as follows:

Show CA’s 80D1-D4 as a single restructure lot

Show CA80F as a separate restructure lot

Exclude the DNRE land comprising CA 80D5, 80D6 and the unused road from the Restructure Overlay

Change the zoning of the DNRE land from Rural RUZ-40 to Public Conservation and Resource Zone.

The Panel supported Council’s position in its recommendation.

Subsequently, the Incorporated Document was modified to show only one

Restructure Lot for Restructure Overlay 105, affecting lots 80D1-D4 (Figure 2a). This

is the same as the current Incorporated Document’s reference to RO105. While the

omission of lot 80F as a separate restructure lot would seem to contradict the

Panel’s recommendation, 80F in this instance would be a single lot with no

restructure or other requirements, and therefore redundant.

Since the implementation of the New Format Planning Scheme, planning scheme

mapping has continued to show the entire RO105 area previously shown in the

Upper Yarra Planning Scheme as applying to RO105 (lots 80D1-6, 80F and the

unmade road), which contradicts the Incorporated Document and creates uncertainty

over the intentions of RO105, which is an error.

It is proposed to:

Delete the Restructure Overlay from Lot 80F, as this is a single restructure lot

with no restructure requirements. There is no purpose in the Restructure

Overlay applying to this land.


Delete the Restructure Overlay from lots 80D5 and 80D6, and the unmade

Government Road, as intended by the Panel Report on the New Format

Planning Scheme. Lot 80D5 is zoned Public Conservation and Resource

Zone.

Retain only Lots 80D1-80D4 in the Restructure Overlay, consistent with what

is now shown in the Incorporated Document.

Rezone Lot 80D6 , which is Crown land, from Green Wedge Zone to Public

Conservation and Resource Zone as intended by the Council and the

Planning Panel on the New Format Scheme.

RO105 is identified in the RSP as a Special Study Area (SSA). Chapter 11 – Special

Study Areas of the RSP has the purpose of ensuring that potentially serious

environmental and social impacts resulting from inappropriate subdivision

development are overcome. SSA are identified in the RSP as requiring further work

to address issues relating to inappropriate subdivisions.

Identifying this SSA in the Yarra Ranges Planning Scheme as RO105 achieves the purpose and policy of the RSP, including the need to continue subdivision restructure programs. Where land is in accordance with a restructure plan, removing it from the Restructure Overlay is consistent with the RSPs intent to restrict new development in sensitive areas.

Figure 1: Restructure Overlay plan from Incorporated Document

Figure 2: Planning Scheme mapping for RO105 (Restructure Overlay area shown in olive green)


Figure 3: Former Upper Yarra Planning Scheme restructure plan

Figure 4: Lot layout

REMOVAL OF THE RESTRUCTURE OVERLAY FROM OTHER PUBLICLY

ZONED LAND

The removal of the Restructure Overlay is proposed for some other land in public

zoning (with no minimum subdivision sizes), however these are land areas not

shown in the Incorporated Document as within restructure lots, meaning that the

Restructure Overlay is not currently controlling their subdivision.

These cases are errors where land has been included in the Restructure Overlay as

a result of mapping oversights.

RO30 - LOT 29 GLEN HARROW HEIGHTS ROAD, BELGRAVE 3160 (LOT

29 LP8235 CA 42/45 B PNARREE WORRAN)

Contains undeveloped land, well treed, owned by VicRoads of 2074sqm. Zoned Public Conservation and Resource Zone.

This land is shown in planning scheme mapping as within the Restructure Overlay, however it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.


The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. There have been no amendments made to the planning scheme which have applied the Overlay to it.

This is considered a mapping error.

It is proposed to correct the error by showing that the Restructure Overlay does not apply to the subject land.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows the land affected by RO30. Subject land in black dotted line and Restructure Overlay area in olive green.

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document shows the land not affected by RO30 (subject land highlighted in pink)

RO30 - PART OF 70-70A MONBULK ROAD, SHERBROOKE 3789

(42B~B\PP3279 (CROWN ALLOTMENT 42B SECTION B PARISH OF

NARREE WORRAN)

Current use: Contains forest, part of Sherbrooke Forest, area of roughly 1830sqm, zoned Public Conservation and Resource Zone.

A small portion of this land is shown in planning scheme mapping as included in the south east corner of Restructure Overlay 30, but it is not shown in the Incorporated Document.


The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. The have been no amendments to the planning scheme that have added the Overlay to the land. It is a mapping error.


Figure 1: The Incorporated Document shows that the Restructure Overlay does not affect the land (shown in pink)

Figure 2: The Planning Scheme mapping shows the Restructure Overlay affecting the land (Restructure Overlay area shown in olive green, subject land in black dotted line)

RO43 - 1/1 MINAK ROAD, SELBY 3159 RESTRUCTURE OVERLAY (PART

CP161005 CA PT 85/87 PNARREE WORRAN)

Current use: Contains undeveloped land of 1021sqm, part of Minak Reserve, zoned Public Park and Recreation Zone.

This land is part of a reserve in Selby. It is shown in planning scheme mapping as being within Restructure Overlay 43, but the Incorporated Document does not show the Overlay applying to this land.


The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. There have been no amendments to the planning scheme which have applied the Restructure Overlay to this land. It is considered a mapping error.

It is proposed to correct the error to show that the Restructure Overlay does not apply to this land.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme shows Restructure Overlay applying to a small portion of Minak Reserve (property boundary of Minak Reserve shown in red outline, Restructure Overlay shown in olive green).

Figure 2: Incorporated Document shows the part of Minak Reserve not affected by the Restructure Overlay (relevant land highlighted in pink)

RO43 - 104 BELGRAVE-GEMBROOK ROAD, SELBY 3159 (PART LOT 19

LP6696 CA 1 PNARREE WORRAN, LOT 20 LP6696 CA 1 PNARREE

WORRAN)

Current use: Contains the Selby CFA on land of roughly 700sqm. Zoned Public Use Zone.


This land is comprised of two lots (Part Lot 19 Part Lot 20 LP6696 Ca 1 PNarree Worran). It is not shown as having Restructure Overlay 43 applied in the Incorporated Document, however planning scheme mapping shows the land with RO43.

The land should not be mapped as within the Restructure Overlay. It has not been added by any amendments to the planning scheme.


Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping shows Restructure Overlay 43 (olive green) affecting the land (black dotted outline)

Figure 2: The Incorporated Document shows that RO43 does not apply to the site (highlighted in pink).

RO59 - 31A SELBY-AURA ROAD, MENZIES CREEK (LOT 25 LP50678 CA

39 PNARREE WORRAN)

This is vacant, heavily treed land owned by Council.

It is shown in planning scheme mapping as included in the Restructure Overlay,

however this appears to be an anomaly. The Incorporated Document mapping does

not show this land in the Restructure Overlay (it is not enclosed by thick black lines,

which denotes a restructure lot, it is simply surrounded by other land that is in

restructure lots). It has not been added by an amendment to the Planning Scheme,


and is likely a mapping error that was made when the Restructure Overlay was

electronically mapped for the first time around 2000.

It is a single lot with no consolidation or restructure requirements, and is therefore a

redundant part of the Restructure Overlay.

Figure 1: Planning Scheme mapping RO59 - subject land in black dotted outline, Restructure Overlay area in olive green.

Figure 2: Incorporated Document - subject land in pink

RO120 - FORMER LOT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF JASPER ROAD,

KALORAMA

This land is shown in the Incorporated Document as being a single restructure lot in RO120. However it has long since been acquired by the State Government as part of previous land buy backs in the Dandenong Ranges. It no longer exists as a lot, but has been consolidated into larger PCRZ land holdings, one of which is 12.3 hectares and the other is 20.2 hectares.

Given that it is parkland, State Government owned, part of a previous buy back program, and has since been consolidated into other larger land holdings, there is no need to maintain a restructure requirement.

It is therefore proposed to remove the Restructure Overlay from this land.


Figure 1: Land in Restructure Overlay (olive green)

Figure 2: Incorporated Document

Figure 3: Current pattern of lot boundaries, showing zoning (PCRZ in dark green)

CHANGES TO THE NAME OF RESTRUCTURE MAPS

To make it easier to identify the locations of sites in the Restructure Overlay, the following changes have been made to the restructure maps in the Incorporated Document:

RO84 – Rename from Fishermans Drive, Armstrong Creek to Armstrong Creek Road, Reefton

RO88 – Rename from Big Pats Creek Road, Starvation Creek to Big Pats Creek Road, Big Pats Creek

RO100 – Rename from Paradise Valley Estate, East Warburton to Elderberry Avenue, East Warburton.

Documents

YARRA RANGES PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C177 …€¦ · “Restructure Plan for Old and Inappropriate Subdivisions”, which states that: …a permit may be granted to allow land