Date post: | 26-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | sophia-monroe |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Better Targeting Referrals
Grant ArnoldStatewide Manager, Regional Planning, DSE
GIPPSLAND REFERRAL WORKSHOP
• Putting structure around DSE’s involvement in planning system
• Systematic review of DSE s55 referral triggers– Focus on Schedule to cl.66.04 - Overlays– Not native vegetation
What are we doing?
• Many years since new format PS’s• Gov’t admin ∆’s• Policy ∆’s• Internal studies and external reports • Reducing Red tape• Need to measure value • Resource constraints
Why?
• Statewide– 3,002 total cases (2010/11)
•S55, s52 informal planning permit app’s–Native vegetation (52.17)–Overlays (VPO; ESO; SLO; EMO; SMO; FO; LSIO)–Adjoining owner
•PSA’s•MR(SD)A referrals•Telecommunications
–Responses - 59% No objection
The Facts
0
50
100
150
200
250
ALBU
RY
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILAL
PIN
E R
ESO
RTS
CO
OR
DIN
ATIN
GAL
PIN
E S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILAR
AR
AT R
UR
AL C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
BALL
ARAT
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILBA
NYU
LE C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
BASS
CO
AS
T S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILBA
W B
AW S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILBA
YSID
E C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
BEN
ALLA
RU
RAL
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILBO
RO
ON
DA
RA
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILBR
IMB
ANK
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILBU
LOKE
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
CAM
PASP
E S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILC
ARD
INIA
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
CAS
EY C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
C
ENTR
AL G
OLD
FIEL
DS
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
CO
LAC
-OTW
AY
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
CO
RAN
GA
MIT
E S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILD
ARE
BIN
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILEA
ST G
IPP
SLAN
D S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILFR
AN
KSTO
N C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
GA
NN
AW
AR
RA
SHIR
E C
OU
NC
ILG
LEN
EIR
A C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
GLE
NEL
G S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILG
OLD
EN
PLA
INS
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
GR
EATE
R B
END
IGO
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILG
REA
TER
DAN
DEN
ON
G C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
GR
EATE
R G
EEL
ON
G C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
GR
EATE
R S
HEP
PA
RTO
N C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
HEP
BUR
N S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILH
IND
MA
RSH
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
HO
BSO
NS
BA
Y C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
HO
RSH
AM
RU
RAL
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILH
UM
E C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
IN
DIG
O S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILKI
NG
STO
N C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
KNO
X C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
LA
TRO
BE C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
LOD
DO
N S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILM
ACED
ON
RAN
GES
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
MAN
NIN
GH
AM
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILM
ANSF
IELD
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
MAR
IBYR
NO
NG
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILM
ARO
ON
DAH
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILM
ELB
OU
RN
E C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
MEL
TON
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
MIL
DU
RA
RU
RA
L C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
MIT
CH
ELL
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
MO
IRA
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
MO
NA
SH C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
MO
ON
EE V
ALLE
Y C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
MO
OR
ABO
OL
SHIR
E C
OU
NC
ILM
OR
ELA
ND
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILM
OR
NIN
GTO
N P
ENIN
SU
LA S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILM
OU
NT
ALE
XAN
DER
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
MO
YNE
SHIR
E C
OU
NC
ILM
UR
RAY
SH
IRE
M
UR
RIN
DIN
DI S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILN
ILLU
MB
IK S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILN
OR
THE
RN
GR
AMPI
ANS
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
POR
T PH
ILLI
P C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
PYR
ENEE
S SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
QU
EEN
SCLI
FFE
BO
RO
UG
H C
OU
NC
ILSO
UTH
GIP
PS
LAN
D S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILSO
UTH
ERN
GR
AM
PIA
NS
SHIR
E C
OU
NC
ILST
ON
NIN
GTO
N C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
STR
ATH
BO
GIE
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
SUR
F C
OAS
T SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
SWAN
HIL
L R
UR
AL C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
TOW
ON
G S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILW
AN
GAR
ATT
A R
UR
AL C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
WA
RR
NAM
BOO
L C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
WE
LLIN
GTO
N S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILW
EN
TWO
RTH
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
(NSW
)W
EST
WIM
MER
A SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
WH
ITEH
OR
SE
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILW
HIT
TLES
EA
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILW
OD
ON
GA
RU
RAL
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
ILW
YN
DH
AM C
ITY
CO
UN
CIL
YAR
RA
CIT
Y C
OU
NC
IL
YAR
RA
RA
NG
ES S
HIR
E C
OU
NC
ILYA
RR
IAM
BIA
CK
SH
IRE
CO
UN
CIL
Subject to conditions
Objection
No Objection
Comment Only
Modification (PSA only)
Response distribution by municipality (for the financial year ending June 2011)
Department ResponseBaw Baw
• Gippsland Region – 6 councils– 490 cases (2010/11)– 85% No objections
Gippsland Response Distribution(for the financial year ending June 2011)
0% 8%
85%
1%
6%
No Obj’s
No Obj’s & comment
No Obj’s &Conditions
Objections
• Policy Statement under development –Guide future involvement in planning system– “ “ reviews
• DPCD/MAV project - opportunity to:–collaborate with DPCD–trial a process
How?
• Range of DSE related s55 ‘triggers’• Focus:
–ESO1 – High Quality Agricultural Land–ESO2 – Water Catchment Areas–EMO - Erosion Mgt Overlay
Baw Baw Planning Scheme
• DSE and WG CMA are both s55 referral auth’s – Subdivisions creating lots < 40ha– Intensive animal husbandry
• Trial – simple analysis tool – process
• Outputs– Rec’s on future role of DSE (& CMA) and/or refinements to provisions– Actions to implement – Internal guideline
ESO1 – High Quality Agricultural Land
• With DPCD, identify how best to deliver recommendations:
1. Do nothing2. Letter/Agreement/MoU with council3. Seek ∆ to PS (66.04)4. Seek ∆ when PS next reviewed5. Combo 2 & 4
• Complete analysis for ESO2 and EMO
What next?
• Complete Baw Baw PS pilot• Write up process (Guideline and template)• Roll-out across other DSE regions
–Focus on different triggers or high volume PS’s
• Use learnings and apply in similar circumstances• Continue to work with DPCD to deliver change (i.e.
more efficient; more effective)
Next Steps for DSE?
• Similar or different processes by other Ref Auth’s?• Success? What difference has it made?• How easy was it to achieve?
• How have you been able to focus on ‘high value’ referrals?
Questions?