Submission by
City of Port Phillip
as Planning Authority
Part A
11 August 2015
Contents
PART A................................................................................................................................................1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .......................................................................................2
1.1
Summary of the Amendment ........................................................................................................................ 2
1.2
Structure of Council’s submission................................................................................................................ 3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................................................4
2.1
Land affected by the Amendment ................................................................................................................ 4
2.2
History of the SBO in Port Phillip ................................................................................................................ 4
2.3
Floodplain Management .................................................................................................................................. 6
POLICY CONTEXT ...................................................................................................................8
3.1
Planning and Environment Act 1987 ............................................................................................................ 8
3.2
State Planning Policy Framework ................................................................................................................. 8
3.3
Local Planning Policy Framework ............................................................................................................... 11
3.4
Plan Melbourne ............................................................................................................................................... 11
PROPOSED AMENDMENT C111 ...........................................................................................13
4.1
Purpose and effect of Amendment ............................................................................................................ 13
4.2
Special Building Overlay Provisions ........................................................................................................... 14
4.3
VicSmart and the SBO .................................................................................................................................. 16
4.4
Development of SBO schedules ................................................................................................................. 17
4.5
Planning Permit Exemptions ........................................................................................................................ 18
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................19
5.1
6.
7.
8.
Strategic Assessment Guidelines ................................................................................................................ 19
AUTHORISATION AND PUBLIC EXHIBITION .................................................................22
6.1
Council decision to prepare amendment ................................................................................................. 22
6.2
Ministerial Authorisation .............................................................................................................................. 22
6.3
Overview of Exhibition ................................................................................................................................. 22
6.4
Exhibition Process .......................................................................................................................................... 24
6.5
Council consideration of submissions ....................................................................................................... 26
SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED ......................................................................................................27
7.1
Location of submissions ................................................................................................................................ 27
7.2
Effect of the Amendment ............................................................................................................................. 28
7.3
Submitter positions on the Amendment .................................................................................................. 28
7.4
Issues raised in submissions ......................................................................................................................... 30
7.5
Response to submissions.............................................................................................................................. 33
CHANGES TO THE AMENDMENT ......................................................................................34
8.1
Further Technical Review ............................................................................................................................ 34
8.2
Changes to the Amendment ....................................................................................................................... 35
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................36
Figures
Figure 1 – History of the SBO and flood modelling in Port Phillip ....................................................................... 5
Figure 2 – Location of Submissions............................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 3 – Number of submissions by change to the SBO proposed ................................................................ 28
Figure 4 – Quantum of issues raised in submissions .............................................................................................. 31
PART A
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 1
1.
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
1.1 Summary of the Amendment
Amendment C111 to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme has been prepared by the Port Phillip City
Council (the planning authority for this amendment) (in part) at the request of and with the assistance of
Melbourne Water.
The amendment applies extensively to land within the City of Port Phillip that has been identified by
Melbourne Water and Council as being liable to inundation in a 1 in 100 year storm event. The land
affected is shown on the proposed planning scheme maps that form part of this amendment.
The amendment implements revised flood modelling for the City of Port Phillip which has been recently
undertaken by both Melbourne Water and Council.
Specifically, the amendment proposes to change the Port Phillip Planning Scheme as follows:
1. Replace the Special Building Overlay (SBO) maps with updated maps to reflect the revised flood
extent (land subject to inundation in a 1 in 100 year storm event).
2. Replace the existing schedule to the SBO with three new schedules that distinguish between
areas subject to inundation in relation to the ‘main’ drainage system (Melbourne Water drains)
and the ‘local’ drainage system (Council drains), and establish additional planning permit
exemptions for certain areas where Melbourne Water is the nominated drainage authority.
The schedules are referred to as SBO1, SBO2 and SBO3 and the areas to which each schedule
applies is defined on the planning scheme (SBO) maps. Each schedule defines what permit
exemptions apply to the relevant areas.
Schedule 1 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO1) covers the Melbourne Water drainage
system and nominates Melbourne Water as the Determining Referral Authority. All applications
for development in this overlay are referred to Melbourne Water to assess and provide the
appropriate permit conditions and floor levels.
Schedule 2 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO2) covers the local drainage system and
Council is the responsible authority for drainage. Council assesses all applications for
development in this overlay and provides appropriate permit conditions and floor levels.
Schedule 3 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO3) is much the same as SBO1, except that a
planning permit will be required in more limited circumstances – such as when a building or
extension is constructed with a floor level below the flood level or the construction of a
basement. Melbourne Water is the Determining Referral Authority. All applications for
development in this overlay (not exempted from needing a permit) are referred to Melbourne
Water to assess and provide the appropriate permit conditions and floor levels.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 2
1.2 Structure of Council’s submission
This submission has been prepared having regard to Practice Note 46 – Strategic Assessment Guidelines for
Preparing and Evaluating Planning Scheme Amendments (DTPLI, July 2014).
The submission is structured as follows:
Part A
This part is provided prior to the hearing and contains the following:
1. Introduction and overview
2. Background information (including a chronology of events)
3. Policy context
4. Proposed Amendment C111
5. Strategic assessment
6. Authorisation and Public Exhibition
7. Submissions Received (including identification of issues raised in submissions)
8. Changes to the Amendment (in response to issues raised in submissions)
Part B
This part will be delivered at the Panel Hearing and is required to contain the following information (as
set out in Panel Directions dated 31 July 2015):






A summary of key issues raised in submission
Council’s position on the Amendment having considered submissions
An explanation of the methodology undertaken to prepare the URS Modelling Report
A response to submissions and specifically whether the mapping has been reviewed at submitter
properties in response to the submissions on specific sites
How the Amendment deals with ‘minor coverage’ of the SBO where only a small percentage or
width of a property is proposed to be included in the overlay
Council’s program, outside the Amendment (if any) to address flooding maintenance and capital
expenditure issues identified in submissions.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 3
2.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.1 Land affected by the Amendment
The amendment applies extensively to land within the City of Port Phillip that has been identified by
Melbourne Water and Council as being liable to inundation in a 1 in 100 year storm event. The land
affected is shown on the proposed planning scheme maps that form part of this amendment. Figure 2 on
page 27 shows the extent of the proposed SBO.
The proposed revisions to the SBO will result in:



Approximately 400 properties no longer being covered by the SBO;
Approximately 10,100 properties being covered by the SBO for the first time (1,800 in SBO1
and 8,300 in SBO2);
Approximately 17,400 properties remaining in the SBO (noting that approximately half of these
include some revision to the extent of the SBO over an individual property). 12,000 are in
SBO1, 4,100 are in SBO2 and 1,100 are in SBO3.
These numbers include all affected properties, including individual units within a building.
No individual property is covered by more than one schedule (e.g. SBO1 and SBO2) to ensure there is a
clear distinction between responsibilities of the relevant drainage authorities.
2.2 History of the SBO in Port Phillip
The City of Port Phillip was first Council in Victoria to introduce the Special Building Overlay (SBO) into
its planning scheme in 1998. This was followed by Brimbank, Moonee Valley, Wyndham, Nillumbik,
Yarra and Hobsons Bay. All but three planning schemes in the state now have at least one overlay or
zone that relates to flooding.
The Special Building Overlay was introduced into the Port Phillip Planning Scheme, together with the
creation of the New Format Planning Scheme (NFPS) on 29 October 1998. The NFPS incorporated a
number of early amendments adopted by Council in that year, including Amendment L63 that sought to
introduce the SBO. Amendment L63 had been exhibited in May1998 and no submissions were received.
In addition to introducing the SBO, Amendment L63 proposed to introduce two local schedules to the
SBO to distinguish between areas where Melbourne Water and Council are the relevant drainage
management authority (SBO1 and SBO2 respectively). However, these schedules were never
implemented and currently the SBO is shown as a single shape. Council maintains in-house GIS maps
that distinguish between SBO1 and SBO2, and there has been an arrangement between the
organisations that applications in SBO2 areas won’t be referred to Melbourne Water. This arrangement
was renewed in 2014 following the introduction of VicSmart (which, amongst other things, streamlined
applications triggered by the SBO).
A further amendment (C42) was proposed in 2004 to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme to introduce a
wider range of planning permit exemptions in the schedule to the SBO. However, Amendment C42 was
not progressed because the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) at the time was
preparing Amendment VC34, which proposed changes to the parent clause to the SBO to provide a
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 4
wider range of planning permit exemptions, most of which were almost identical to the exemptions
proposed in Council’s local amendment. Amendment VC34 was gazetted on 22 September 2005.
Revised flood modelling was prepared for Council for local drainage areas by URS Pty Ltd in 2010 and
2011, with the finalised report received in December 2011.
Parallel to this process, Council, Melbourne Water and the Victorian State Emergency Service (VicSES)
prepared a Flood Management Plan, which was finalised in March 2012. Actions stemming from this plan
were to update the SBO in the Port Phillip Planning Scheme after the Melbourne Water flood modelling
had been completed for Elwood Canal, Shakespeare Grove and Byron Street main drains (known
collectively as ‘Catchment 7’) and for Council to complete flood modelling for Council drains.
Figure 1 – History of the SBO and flood modelling in Port Phillip
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 5
2.3 Floodplain Management
Port Phillip Flood Management Plan (2012)
Council and Melbourne Water developed a Flood Management Plan (FMP) in March 2012. The purpose
of the plan is to:




Assist the City of Port Phillip and Melbourne Water to undertake their flood management responsibilities
and ensure that suitable measures have been (or are being) implemented where possible to manage the
existing and future risks associated with flooding.
Ensure the objectives of the Port Phillip and Westernport Region Flood Management and Drainage
Strategy can be effectively implemented in the City of Port Phillip in a coordinated and effective manner
at a local level, within an integrated flood management framework.
Assist the City of Port Phillip address their climate change concerns and commitments to future flood
management and drainage effectiveness through linkage with the City of Port Phillip’s Climate
Adaptation Plan - Climate Adept City.
Foster preparedness for flood events and enhancing the ability to respond to floods in an informed and
appropriate manner within the City of Port Phillip and its communities.1
The Action Plan (embedded in the FMP) identifies a number of actions against the issues and gaps
identified in the FMP. In relation to ensuring planning schemes are kept up to date, an action requires:
“Melbourne Water and CoPP to update MW flood overlays (SBOs) in the Port Phillip Planning Scheme
after the flood modelling has been completed for Elwood Canal, Shakespeare Grove and Byron Street
Main Drain, including public exhibition which will raise awareness.” 2
Draft Flood Management Strategy – Port Phillip and Westernport (2015)
This document has been prepared for consultation by Melbourne Water with a view to replacing the
existing Port Phillip and Westernport Region Flood Management and Drainage Strategy (2007).
The emphasis in this draft document is on prevention, rather than response and recovery – with three
identified objectives and corresponding targets to be achieved by 2021: 3
1. The right information is available at the right time to people who need it.
a. 65% of catchments and coasts are flood-mapped, and current and future risks are
assessed to an agreed standard, starting with priority catchments; information is made
publicly available.
b. 100% of available public flood risk information is made accessible to help everyone
understand and manage their flood risks.
c. 30% of people directly affected by flooding are aware of their flood risks and know what
to do. 4
2. Flood risks are addressed to reduce impacts and get the best social, economic and
environmental outcomes.
a. Agreed flood management approaches are being delivered in 100% of highest-priority
areas to address the likelihood or consequences of flooding.
1
Port Phillip Flood Management Plan (Melbourne Water & City of Port Phillip, 2012), p5
Ibid, p44
3
Draft Flood Management Strategy – Port Phillip and Westernport (Melbourne Water, 2015), p8
4
A survey is currently being carried out by Melbourne Water to establish a baseline for the current awareness
level.
2
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 6
3. Land, water and emergency planning agencies work together to manage flooding.
a. By 2021, locally and regionally appropriate flood management approaches will be
collaboratively developed for 40% of catchments and coasts, taking into account current
and future risks.
Revised Draft Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy (2015)
In 2015 the State Government prepared a Revised Draft Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy (2015),
with a view to replacing the Victoria Flood Strategy (1998). The Revised Draft has four key parts:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Assessing flood risks and sharing information
Avoiding or minimising future risk
Reducing existing risks
Managing residual risks
Whilst the Revised Draft is still under review, the emphasis in the document (particularly in Part 2) is
towards a greater role for integrated planning and ensuring that all agencies are aware of their
responsibilities.
Proposed Policy 13b in this document states:
LGAs with areas at risk of a 1% Annual Exceedance Probability flood must ensure that their Planning
Scheme contains:


the objectives and strategies for mitigating the risk in the Municipal Strategic Statement
the appropriate zones and overlays.5
Note: Copies of these plans and strategies are available in APPENDIX 1.
5
Revised Draft Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy (DELWP, 2015), p35
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 7
3.
POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 Planning and Environment Act 1987
The Amendment implements the following objectives of planning in Victoria:



Providing for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land – s4(1)(a)
To secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living, and recreational environment for all
Victorians and visitors to Victoria – s4(1)(c)
Balancing the present and future interests of all Victorians – s4(1)(g)
In seeking to further the objectives of planning in Victoria, Section 6(2)(e) of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (‘the Act’) provides that a planning scheme may:

Regulate or prohibit any use or development in hazardous areas or in areas which are
likely to become hazardous areas.
Amendment C111 will contribute towards the achievement of the objectives of planning by enabling
Council and Melbourne Water to manage development in flood prone areas to minimise the hazards
and risks which would otherwise be posed by flooding.
3.2 State Planning Policy Framework
The amendment is consistent with the objectives of the State Planning Policy Framework, in particular:
Clause 11 (Settlement)
Planning is to recognise the need for, and as far as practicable to contribute towards:










Health and safety.
Diversity of choice.
Adaptation in response to changing technology.
Economic viability.
A high standard of urban design and amenity.
Energy efficiency.
Prevention of pollution to land, water and air.
Protection of environmentally sensitive areas and natural resources.
Accessibility.
Land use and transport integration.
Planning is to prevent environmental problems created by siting incompatible land uses close together.
Planning is to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing settlement patterns, and
investment in transport and communication, water and sewerage and social facilities. [Emphasis added]
Assessment
The Amendment is consistent with Clause 11 as it will introduce development controls to assist with
minimising the hazards and risk to life and property caused by flooding.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 8
Clause 13 (Environmental Risks)
Planning should adopt a best practice environmental management and risk management approach which aims
to avoid or minimise environmental degradation and hazards. Planning should identify and manage the potential
for the environment and environmental changes, to impact upon the economic, environment or social well-being
of society.
Clause 13.02-1 (Floodplain management)
Objectives
To assist the protection of:

Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard.

The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways.

The flood storage function of floodplains and waterways.

Floodplain areas of environmental significance or of importance to river health.
Strategies

Identify land affected by flooding, including floodway areas, as verified by the relevant floodplain
management authority, in planning scheme maps. Land affected by flooding is land inundate by the 1 in
100 year flood event or as determined by the floodplain management authority.

Avoid intensifying the impacts of flooding through inappropriately located uses and developments.

Locate emergency and community facilities (including hospitals, ambulance stations, police stations, fire
stations, residential aged care facilities, communication facilities, transport facilities, community shelters
and schools) outside the 1 in 100 year floodplain and, where possible, at levels above the height of the
probable maximum flood.

Locate developments and uses which involve the storage or disposal of environmentally hazardous
industrial and agricultural chemicals or wastes and other dangerous goods (including intensive animal
industries and sewage treatment plants) must not be located on floodplains unless site design and
management is such that potential contact between such substances and floodwaters is prevented,
without affecting the flood carrying and flood storage functions of the floodplain.
Assessment
The amendment is consistent with the objectives of Clause 13 (including Clause 13.02-1) as it will
ensure that development on land subject to flooding protects waterway and floodplain health.
Clause 14 (Natural Resource Management)
Clause 14.02-1 (Water: Catchment planning and management)
Objective
To assist the protection and, where possible, restoration of catchments, waterways, water bodies,
groundwater, and the marine environment.
Strategies
Protect water catchments and water supply facilities to ensure the continued availability of clean, high-quality
drinking water.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 9
Consider the impacts of catchment management on downstream water quality and freshwater, coastal and
marine environments.
Retain natural drainage corridors with vegetated buffer zones at least 30m wide along each side of a
waterway to maintain the natural drainage function, stream habitat and wildlife corridors and landscape
values, to minimise erosion of stream banks and verges and to reduce polluted surface runoff from adjacent
land uses.
Undertake measures to minimise the quantity and retard the flow of stormwater runoff from developed
areas.
Encourage measures to filter sediment and wastes from stormwater prior to its discharge into waterways,
including the preservation of floodplain or other land for wetlands and retention basins.
Ensure that works at or near waterways provide for the protection and enhancement of the environmental
qualities of waterways and their instream uses.
Ensure land use and development proposals minimise nutrient contributions to waterways and water bodies
and the potential for the development of algal blooms.
Require the use of appropriate measures to restrict sediment discharges from construction sites. [Emphasis
added]
Clause 14.02-2 (Water: Water quality)
Objective
To protect water quality.
Strategies
Protect reservoirs, water mains and local storage facilities from potential contamination.
Ensure that land use activities potentially discharging contaminated runoff or wastes to waterways are sited
and managed to minimise such discharges and to protect the quality of surface water and groundwater
resources, rivers, streams, wetlands, estuaries and marine environments.
Discourage incompatible land use activities in areas subject to flooding, severe soil degradation, groundwater
salinity or geotechnical hazards where the land cannot be sustainably managed to ensure minimum impact
on downstream water quality or flow volumes.
Prevent the establishment of incompatible land uses in aquifer recharge or saline discharge areas and in
potable water catchments.
Encourage the siting, design, operation and rehabilitation of landfills to reduce impact on groundwater and
surface water.
Assessment
The amendment is consistent with the objectives of clause 14.02 as it will assist in the protection of life,
property and community infrastructure from flood hazard, maintain the natural flood capacity of rivers,
streams and floodways and ensure the flood storage function of floodplains is achieved.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 10
3.3 Local Planning Policy Framework
The amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Local Planning Policy Framework, in particular:
Clause 21.05-4 (Physical Infrastructure)
Key Issues
Physical infrastructure includes roads, footpaths, cycle-ways, kerbs and channels, street furniture, signage,
street trees, bridges, Council-owned buildings and open space areas, drainage, playgrounds, and waste and
recycling facilities.
Planning for the provision of new infrastructure will need to consider the impacts of an increasing population
in order to meet the needs of the current and future population of all abilities, as well as visitors.
It is important that infrastructure is carefully designed to minimise environmental impacts on the bay and
waterways. It is also important that damage to physical infrastructure is minimised through the appropriate
design and siting of new development.
The primary goal for stormwater management in the City of Port Phillip is to develop and maintain
ecologically sustainable waterways including Albert Park Lake and the Bay, and protect recognised values
associated with these waterways whilst minimising adverse flooding. On-site retention of stormwater is
therefore important. [Emphasis added]
Objectives and strategies
[…]
2. To improve the quality of all stormwater discharged into Port Phillip Bay.
2.1 Reduce stormwater run-off in the design of new developments by measures including limiting the
extent of impervious area and managing both stormwater quality and quantity from the site.
3. To reduce the effects of stormwater discharge, in terms of pollution and flooding.
3.1 Promote water sensitive urban design principles in the design of public infrastructure.
3.2 Require Environmental Management Plans for large developments.
Assessment
The amendment supports and implements the Local Planning Policy Framework by implementing a range
of objectives and strategies contained in Clause 21 (Municipal Strategic Statement) relating to floodplain
management, improving the quality of stormwater discharged into Port Phillip Bay, and reducing the
effects of stormwater discharge in terms of pollution and flooding.
3.4 Plan Melbourne
The amendment is consistent with Ministerial Direction No. 9 – Metropolitan Strategy (as amended on
30 May 2014) pursuant to Section 12 of the Act, requiring planning authorities to have regard to the
Metropolitan Strategy (Plan Melbourne).
Plan Melbourne states that we need to: “value and use Melbourne’s rain fall to minimise water price
increases, improve the health of waterways and bays, reduce urban flooding, enhance our liveability and amenity,
and build Melbourne’s expertise in whole-of-water cycle management – a key capability of the 21st century.”
Direction 5.5 of Plan Melbourne requires us to “integrate whole-of-watercycle management to deliver
sustainable and resilient urban development” in order to, amongst other things, “minimise the impact of
flooding”.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 11
Assessment
By improving and implementing more accurate flood shape modelling, Council and Melbourne Water
can better plan for future flood impacts, contribute to broader plans for whole-of-watercycle
management with other governments and agencies, and can reduce through planning permit applications,
the impacts of flooding within the municipality.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 12
4.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT C111
4.1 Purpose and effect of Amendment
Amendment C111 is required to update the Special Building Overlay to reflect revised flood modelling
undertaken by Council and Melbourne Water.
The Special Building Overlay (SBO) is a Victoria Planning Provision (VPP) that identifies land in urban
areas that is liable to inundation (flooding) by overland flows from the drainage system. SBOs are based
upon the extent of overland flooding that would result from a 1 in 100 year storm event.
The purpose of the SBO is to ensure that new development is designed to maintain the free passage and
temporary storage of floodwaters, to minimise flood damage and not cause any significant rise in flood
level or flow velocity that may adversely affect existing properties. It also seeks to protect water
quality.
Including the SBO in the planning scheme enables drainage and flooding issues to be addressed early in
the development process (through triggering a planning permit for buildings and works) rather than only
at the later building permit stage. The SBO does not prevent development but rather, through requiring
a planning permit, ensures that development is sited and designed to minimise the impact of flooding.
The SBO was first introduced into the Port Phillip Planning Scheme in 1998, covering both main drains
(Melbourne Water) and local drains (Council).
Melbourne Water has recently developed more advanced methods of mapping and modelling to
determine land susceptible to flooding. The same mapping and modelling methods have been used by
Council to model local drains. Melbourne Water and Council (as the authorities responsible for the
main and local drainage systems respectively) prepare drainage survey and floodplain data that is then
reflected in the planning scheme via the SBO. This review of the flood extent now needs to be reflected
in the Port Phillip Planning Scheme via a revised Special Building Overlay.
Amendment C111 proposes to make the following changes to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme:
1. Replace the Special Building Overlay (SBO) maps with updated maps to reflect the revised flood
extent (land subject to inundation in a 1 in 100 year storm event).
2. Replace the existing schedule to the SBO with three new schedules that distinguish between
areas subject to inundation in relation to the ‘main’ drainage system (Melbourne Water drains)
and the ‘local’ drainage system (Council drains), and establish additional planning permit
exemptions for certain areas where Melbourne Water is the nominated drainage authority.
The schedules are referred to as SBO1, SBO2 and SBO3 and the areas to which each schedule
applies is defined on the planning scheme (SBO) maps. Each schedule defines what permit
exemptions apply to the relevant areas.
Schedule 1 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO1) covers the Melbourne Water drainage
system and nominates Melbourne Water as the Determining Referral Authority. All applications
for development in this overlay are referred to Melbourne Water to assess and provide the
appropriate permit conditions and floor levels.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 13
Schedule 2 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO2) covers the local drainage system and
Council is the responsible authority for drainage. Council assesses all applications for
development in this overlay and provides appropriate permit conditions and floor levels.
Schedule 3 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO3) is much the same as SBO1, except that a
planning permit will be required in more limited circumstances – such as when a building or
extension is constructed with a floor level below the flood level or the construction of a
basement. Melbourne Water is the Determining Referral Authority. All applications for
development in this overlay (not exempted from needing a permit) are referred to Melbourne
Water to assess and provide the appropriate permit conditions and floor levels.
It should be noted that no individual property is covered by more than one schedule (e.g. SBO1 and
SBO2) to ensure there is a clear distinction between responsibilities of the relevant drainage authorities.
A copy of all amendment documentation is available in APPENDIX 2.
4.2 Special Building Overlay Provisions
Purpose
The purpose of the Special Building Overlay is:




To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including
the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.
To identify land in urban areas liable to inundation by overland flows from the urban drainage system as
determined by, or in consultation with, the floodplain management authority.
To ensure that development maintains the free passage and temporary storage of floodwaters,
minimises flood damage, is compatible with the flood hazard and local drainage conditions and will not
cause any significant rise in flood level or flow velocity.
To protect water quality in accordance with the provisions of relevant State Environment Protection
Policies, particularly in accordance with Clauses 33 and 35 of the State Environment Protection Policy
(Waters of Victoria).
Planning Permit Requirements
A planning permit is required in the Special Building Overlay (SBO) to construct a building, construct or
carry out works, including:








A fence.
Roadworks.
Bicycle pathways and trails.
Public toilets.
A domestic swimming pool or spa and associated mechanical and safety equipment if associated with
one dwelling on a lot.
A pergola or verandah, including an open-sided pergola or verandah to a dwelling with a finished floor
level not more than 800mm above ground level and a maximum building height of 3 metres above
ground level.
A deck, including a deck to a dwelling with a finished floor level not more than 800mm above ground
level.
A non-domestic disabled access ramp.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 14
Exemptions apply to these requirements, including exemptions where the floodplain management
authority has agreed in writing that the flowpath is not obstructed, and (importantly) states that an
exemption applies if a schedule to the SBO specifically states that a permit is not required.
The existing schedule to the SBO states that:
A permit is not required to construct the following:


An open sided carport, or other open sided structure such as a verandah or pergola.
A fence that is the same height and constructed of similar materials as an existing fence.
The proposed Schedules 1 and 2 to the SBO in Amendment C111 will retain these exemptions.
Additional exemptions are proposed in Schedule 3. (As shown in APPENDIX 2)
Referral of Applications
Clause 44.05-5 states that an application must be referred to the relevant floodplain management
authority under Section 55 of the Act unless in the opinion of the responsible authority, the proposal
satisfies requirements or conditions previously agreed to in writing between the responsible authority
and the floodplain management authority.
Clause 66 to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme states that an application under the SBO within the
waterway management district of Melbourne Water Corporation must be referred to Melbourne
Water Corporation and that they are a Determining Referral Authority.
The decision by a Determining Referral Authority to impose conditions or to object to an application
referred to it is binding on the Responsible Authority – i.e. those conditions must be contained on any
permit issued or the application must be refused if the Determining Referral Authority objects to the
application.
The proposed Schedules to the SBO in Amendment C111 state in Section 2.0 whether Melbourne
Water is a referral authority (for Schedules 1 and 3) (repeating similar wording in the parent clause at
44.05-5) and states the following in Schedule 2 (covering Council’s drainage system):


No referral authority specified
An application will be considered by the City of Port Phillip as the authority responsible for local drains.
This approach is the same as proposed in Amendment C101 to the Banyule Planning Scheme and
drafted in consultation with Melbourne Water and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and
Planning (DELWP).
Local councils (including those within the waterway management district of Melbourne Water) are
responsible for managing local drainage infrastructure in catchments of less than 60 hectares, including
ownership and maintenance of drainage assets.6
As Council is the authority responsible for these local drainage assets, it is also responsible for
maintaining these to a standard that accommodates flows from 1 in 5 year flood events, and responsible
for mapping the 1 in 100 year flood events.
The provision of Schedule 2 is appropriate and clearly delineates responsibilities between Council and
Melbourne Water, and makes appropriate use of the Victoria Planning Provisions.
6
Principles for Provision of Waterway and Drainage Services for Urban Growth (Melbourne Water, 2007), p5
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 15
Decision Guidelines
The following decision guidelines apply (in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65) when the
Responsible Authority is considering a planning application triggered by the Special Building Overlay:








The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal
Strategic Statement and local planning policies.
Any local floodplain development plan.
Any comments from the relevant floodplain management authority.
The existing use and development of the land.
Whether the proposed use or development could be located on flood-free land or land with a lesser
flood hazard outside this overlay.
The susceptibility of the development to flooding and flood damage.
Flood risk factors to consider include:
o The frequency, duration, extent, depth and velocity of flooding of the site and accessway.
o The flood warning time available.
o The danger to the occupants of the development, other floodplain residents and emergency
personnel if the site or accessway is flooded.
The effect of the development on redirecting or obstructing floodwater, stormwater or drainage water
and the effect of the development on reducing flood storage and increasing flood levels and flow
velocities.
Interaction with other Land Management Overlays and Zones
The Port Phillip Planning Scheme only utilises the Special Building Overlay and no other land
management overlays, and does not use the Urban Floodway Zone (UFZ).
4.3 VicSmart and the SBO
The Special Building Overlay is listed as a State VicSmart application in Table 2 of Clause 92.04, thereby
triggering the VicSmart assessment process as prescribed in Clause 91.
A planning application is eligible for the VicSmart assessment when:


All planning permit triggers are listed in Clause 92 (State VicSmart applications) and/or the
schedule to Clause 94 (local VicSmart applications – although it should be noted that Council
has not populated any of the schedules to the VicSmart clauses)
All application requirements have been met in Clause 93 (and/or the schedule to Clause 95 if
local VicSmart applications apply).
VicSmart applications are eligible for a streamlined assessment process, including the ability for the
applicant to lodge an Application for Review with VCAT if Council has not determined the application
within 10 business days from lodgement.
In relation to the Special Building Overlay, the information requirements and decision guidelines are set
out in Clause 93.08.
Importantly, Clause 93.08 states that if a referral is required to the floodplain management authority,
then current (within 3 months) written advice must be provided with the application.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 16
Amendment C111 would require that applications in areas covered by SBO1 or SBO3 would need to be
sent to Melbourne Water prior to lodging the application with Council (and written advice from
Melbourne Water provided with the application) in order to be eligible for VicSmart assessment.
VicSmart applications are exempted from the notice requirements in Section 52(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d),
the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act.
All applications triggered only by the Special Building Overlay are similarly exempted from the same
notice, decision and review rights of the Act – with the exception of Section 52(1)(c), which states:
“to any person to whom the planning scheme requires it to give notice”
The planning scheme does not make any special provision for further notice in relation to applications in
SBO areas – so for all intents and purposes, there is no practical difference between the notice, decision
and review requirements between applications in SBO areas not eligible for VicSmart and applications
that are eligible for VicSmart.
The introduction of VicSmart provides a greater necessity to clearly articulate, using schedules, which
applications need to be referred to Melbourne Water and those that can be handled exclusively by
Council – as applicants will need to make this distinction prior to lodging a permit.
Copies of the relevant VicSmart clauses are included in APPENDIX 3.
4.4 Development of SBO schedules
As discussed in Section 2.2 of this report, Council has maintained (since the introduction of the SBO
into the planning scheme) in-house GIS maps that distinguish between “SBO1” (Melbourne Water) and
“SBO2” (Council) areas within the existing SBO, and there has been an arrangement between the
organisations that applications in “SBO2” areas won’t be referred to Melbourne Water.
Interested parties (i.e. purchasers of property, agents, etc) are advised whether a property is in “SBO1”
or “SBO2” through information provided on Property Information Statements issued under Building
Regulation 326 (together with advice as to whether the property is liable to flooding).
The introduction of multiple schedules to the SBO seeks to formalise this arrangement and to
transparently advise which agency is responsible for providing flood level information and determining
suitable planning permit conditions.
The schedules were developed with adherence to Planning Practice Notes 10 and 12, and were
discussed with the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (now Department of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning) prior to seeking authorisation.
The proposed Schedule 3 to the SBO was developed upon the request of and in consultation with
Melbourne Water, including the extensive exemptions (discussed in Section 4.5 below).
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 17
4.5 Planning Permit Exemptions
Exemptions from requiring a planning permit for specified buildings and works are nominated in the
parent clause to the Special Building Overlay (as discussed in Section 4). One of these exemptions
allows for additional exemptions to be listed in a schedule. The existing exemptions in the schedule will
be carried over to the new Schedules 1 and 2 (SBO1 and SBO2). Copies of the proposed schedules are
in APPENDIX 2 and the existing schedule is provided in APPENDIX 3.
Melbourne Water have identified some areas where the flood levels are relatively stable and the
provision of additional planning permit exemptions in these areas would reduce the need for planning
permits and referrals to Melbourne Water. These areas are reflected as SBO3 and there are
approximately 1,100 affected properties, all of which are currently covered by the existing SBO.
The following exemptions (i.e. where a permit is not required) are proposed in SBO3:

Construction of a building (not a garage, out-building or public toilets) of less than or equal to
10 metres in height (excluding building services) where the floor levels are constructed to a
minimum of 2.4 metres to Australian Height Datum and containing no underground car parking
or basement.

Construction of a garage where the floor levels are constructed to a minimum of 150mm above
the applicable flood level.

Extensions to existing buildings where the floor levels are constructed no lower than the
existing floor levels.

Construction of a fence, pergola or verandah, open-sided structure, deck, a domestic swimming
pool or spa and associated mechanical and safety equipment, a tennis court, an out-building (not
a garage), a non-domestic disabled access ramp, public toilets, bicycle paths and trails and tram
stops (including tram shelters) and associated infrastructure.

Carrying out of works if the relevant floodplain management authority has agreed in writing that
the flowpath is not obstructed.
Melbourne Water identified a series of scenarios where a planning permit should be required and where
a referral should be made to Melbourne Water. The proposed exemptions in SBO3 reflect everything
that doesn’t fit within any of these scenarios.
No submissions raised any issues with the planning permit exemptions proposed in SBO3.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 18
5.
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT
5.1 Strategic Assessment Guidelines
Practice Note 46 – Strategic Assessment Guidelines for Preparing and Evaluating Planning Scheme Amendments
(DTPLI, July 2014) (refer to APPENDIX 6) states that a only a brief assessment is required for
amendments applying a land management overlay where there is clear basis for its application (e.g.
where information is available to show that the land is subject to flooding).
Why is an amendment required?
Melbourne Water has recently developed more advanced methods of modelling and mapping to
determine land susceptible to flooding. The same mapping and modelling methods have been used by
Council to model local drains. This review of the flood extent now needs to be reflected in the Port
Phillip Planning Scheme via a revised SBO.
The amendment is also required to clearly distinguish between areas subject to inundation in relation to
the ‘main’ drainage system (Melbourne Water drains) and the ‘local’ drainage system (Council drains).
At the request of Melbourne Water, many existing areas covered by the SBO (not in Catchment 7),
have been put into another schedule (SBO3) in order to establish additional planning permit
exemptions.
Does the amendment implement the objectives of planning and address any
environmental, social and economic effects?
Environmental Effects
The Amendment will minimise the potential detrimental environmental effects of overland flooding by
requiring that the impacts on drainage be assessed at an early stage of the development approval
process. This will reduce the impact of new buildings and works on the free flow and storage of
floodwaters.
Social and Economic Effects
The amendment will have positive social and economic effects by ensuring that issues relating to
drainage are identified at an early stage in the development approval process.
The amendment will minimise damage caused by a 1 in 100 year flood by requiring a permit for buildings
and works located within areas subject to inundation. The controls will assist in minimising the personal,
social, community and financial losses that result from the effects of flooding.
The amendment will provide greater awareness and transparency of flood risks and impacts.
Does the amendment comply with the requirements of any Minister’s Direction applicable
to the amendment?
The amendment is consistent with Minster’s Direction No. 9 – Metropolitan Strategy (as amended 30
May 2014) pursuant to Section 12 of the Act - that requires planning authorities to have regard to the
Metropolitan Strategy (Plan Melbourne).
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 19
Plan Melbourne states that we need to: “value and use Melbourne’s rainfall to minimise water price
increases, improve the health of waterways and bays, reduce urban flooding, enhance our liveability and
amenity, and build Melbourne’s expertise in whole-of-water cycle management – a key capability of the
21st century.”
Plan Melbourne also has a direction (Direction 5.5) to “integrate whole-of-watercycle management to
deliver sustainable and resilient urban development” in order to, amongst other things, “minimise the
impact of flooding”.
By improving and implementing better flood shape modelling, Council and Melbourne Water can better
plan for future flood impacts, contribute to broader plans for whole-of-watercycle management with
other governments and agencies, and can reduce through planning permit applications, the impacts of
flooding within the municipality.
The amendment is also consistent with the Ministerial Direction on the Form and Content of Planning
Schemes under Section 7(5) of the Act.
Does the amendment support or implement the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)?
The amendment has been assessed against the objectives of the State Planning Policy Framework and is
consistent with the principles of State Policy, in particular Clause 13.02-1 (Floodplain Management) and
Clause 14.02 (Water)
In relation to these policies, the amendment will assist in the protection of life, property and community
infrastructure from flood hazard, the natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways,
and will protect the flood storage function of floodplains and waterways.
State Planning Policy places a clear onus on Responsible Authorities to ensure that flooding and drainage
information is clearly shown in planning schemes and taken into consideration as part of the planning
process. The proposed amendment will assist in the achievement of this intent.
Refer to earlier policy discussion in Section 3 for more information.
Does the amendment support or implement the Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF),
and specifically the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS)?
The amendment supports and implements the Local Planning Policy Framework by implementing a range
of objectives and strategies contained in Clause 21 - Municipal Strategic Statement relating to floodplain
management, improving the quality of stormwater discharged into Port Phillip Bay, and reducing the
effects of stormwater discharge in terms of pollution and flooding.
Does the amendment make proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions?
The Victoria Planning Provisions include a number of overlay controls for identifying areas subject to
inundation, including the Special Building Overlay which is applied to the overland flow paths of natural
drainage depressions that have been developed for other uses.
The purpose of this control includes ensuring that development maintains the free passage and
temporary storage of floodwaters, minimises flood damage, is compatible with the flood hazard and local
drainage conditions and will not cause any significant rise in flood level or flow velocity.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 20
How does the amendment address the views of any relevant agency?
The amendment has been prepared at the request of Melbourne Water and reflects updated flood
mapping information which has been prepared and provided by this authority.
Eleven (11) government agencies and utilities were directly notified about the amendment. Two (South
East Water and Melbourne Water) have provided a written response in support of the amendment.
What impact will the new planning provisions have on the administrative costs of the
responsible authority?
A planning permit is only triggered if the buildings and/or works proposed on a site are fall within the
area of the land covered by the SBO. This would include any requirement to refer the application to
Melbourne Water under Section 55 of the Act.
There are very few properties in Port Phillip that are unencumbered by an existing overlay (e.g. a
Heritage Overlay) or where a planning permit would not already be required under the zone to
construct a building or extension.
887 properties across Port Phillip currently contain a single dwelling in a residential zone on a lot of
500m² or more and not encumbered by an existing overlay (and therefore would not trigger a planning
approval for new development or extension). The proposed SBO would affect 320 of these sites (which
equates to 1.5% of the total properties proposed to be included in the SBO by Amendment C111 for
the first time). Furthermore, not all of these sites are encumbered in the same way by the proposed
SBO and many are only partially affected.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 21
6.
AUTHORISATION AND PUBLIC EXHIBITION
6.1 Council decision to prepare amendment
At its meeting on 9 December 2014, Council resolved to:




Prepare Amendment C111 to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme to implement the review of
Special Building Overlay by updating the planning scheme maps to reflect the revised flood-shape
and introducing new schedules to the Special Building Overlay;
Request the Minister for Planning to authorise the preparation and exhibition of Amendment
C111 to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme, pursuant to Section 8A of the Act; and
Place Amendment C111 to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme on public exhibition, subject to
Ministerial authorisation.
Notes that Amendment C111 does not factor in climate change related sea level rise.
A copy of the Council Report and Minutes from this meeting is available in APPENDIX 5.
6.2 Ministerial Authorisation
Ministerial Authorisation to prepare Amendment C111 was sought by Council on 17 December 2014.
As no response was provided, the amendment was deemed to be authorised pursuant to Section 8A(7)
of the Act on 5 January 2015. This was confirmed via email from DTPLI officers on 14 January 2015. A
copy of authorisation correspondence is available in APPENDIX 2.
6.3 Overview of Exhibition
Decision to give notice pursuant to Section 19(1B)
Council determined that it would have been impractical to directly notify both owners and occupiers of
affected properties.
Section 19 of the Act establishes the statutory process for exhibition of planning scheme amendments.
This includes; direct notification to all owners and occupiers of land affected, the opportunity for any
affected person to make written submissions, and potential for a review by an independent planning
panel.
Under Section 19(1A) of the Act, Council is not required to give notice to each owner and occupier if it
considers the number impractical to notify them all individually. The Act then requires Council to take
reasonable steps to ensure that public notice of the proposed amendment and the opportunity to make
submissions is given in the area affected by the amendment.
Prior to further refinement of the mailing lists, it was estimated that if we were to directly notify both
affected property owners and affected property occupiers, the number of letters would be around
58,000. Directly notifying only property owners was estimated to reduce this figure by 20,000. Further
refinement to the mailing lists involved reducing the number of letters sent to an owner of multiple units
in a single building, and providing customised letters to owners of a large number of properties (e.g.
DHS) with an accompanying list of the changes to each property they own. This refinement reduced the
number of letters by approximately 45%.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 22
Furthermore, as the SBO introduces controls relating to future development on affected properties, the
control is of primary relevance to property owners who would undertake such works.
Letters to owners would be tailored to advise whether the property is proposed to be included in the
SBO for the first time, remain in the SBO, be removed from the SBO, or where the flood-shape
(extent) over the property has changed. They would also inform owners which schedule is proposed to
be applied (i.e. SBO1, SBO2 or SBO3).
Occupiers of affected properties received information about Amendment C111 through Council’s
‘Divercity’ publication (March/April edition) and a Public Notice in the Port Phillip Leader. The Divercity
article would advise of proposed Amendment C111 and offer general information on Council’s
initiatives relating to flood management/mitigation.
We communicated this to our representative at DTPLI when the amendment was being prepared and
they were comfortable with the approach.
At its meeting on 9 December 2014, Council resolved (in addition to the resolutions listed in Section
6.1 above) to advise the Minister for Planning that:
Pursuant to Section 19 (1A) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council considers it impractical
to notify all owners and occupiers individually of Amendment C111, and will limit direct notification to
property owners.
Council will give notice of the amendment in accordance with Section 19(1B) of the Act (including giving
notice in a paper circulating within the affected area inviting submissions to be made) and will also
undertake a range of non-statutory consultation measures to ensure awareness of the proposed
amendment amongst occupiers of affected properties.
Required statutory processes undertaken




Public notice in the Government Gazette (5 March 2015)
Direct notification to affected property owners with customised letters, a double-sided flyer
giving more information and the formal notice. Mailed between 25 and 27 February 2015.
Direct mail to prescribed ministers and relevant authorities and agencies. Mailed on 27 February
2015.
Display of the amendment, including supporting documentation, throughout the exhibition
period:
o At all of Council’s ASSIST offices and libraries
o On the City of Port Phillip website
o Amendment documentation on the Planning Scheme Amendments Online website
Non-statutory processes undertaken
In addition to the required statutory process, Council undertook a number of non-statutory processes
to ensure people were advised of the amendment and understood the proposed changes.





A notice in the Port Phillip Leader newspaper
Four information sessions held over 2 weeks in March (in the afternoon and in the evening)
An interactive map explaining the changes
Staff availability at St Kilda Town Hall to give advice in person, over the phone and via email
Melbourne Water contact details (phone, email) to assist with enquiries
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 23


Information about the amendment on Melbourne Water’s website (including a link to the
interactive map)
Setting up a flood information email address to give out flood level information for SBO2 areas
6.4 Exhibition Process
Timeframe


The Amendment was exhibited for 34 days, from 5 March to 8 April 2015.
The minimum statutory requirement is one month, however, additional days were provided
because Labour Day and Easter fell within the exhibition period.
Notification given






A total of 20,997 letters were sent notifying property owners of the Amendment.
Letters were customised to inform people how the Amendment affects their property. Owners
of a large number of properties within Port Phillip (e.g. Office of Housing) were sent a single
letter with a table explaining how each of their properties is affected.
The letters included a formal notice on the reverse side and a double-sided colour flyer giving
basic information about the Amendment. A copy of the letter templates and the flyer is in
APPENDIX 4.
A notice appeared in the Port Phillip Leader on 3 March and the Government Gazette on 5
March 2015.
Article in the March / April edition of ‘Divercity’ highlighted the Amendment for affected nonowner occupiers.
Letters were sent to prescribed Ministers, local members of parliament, neighbouring councils,
government agencies and infrastructure providers, informing them of the Amendment.
Information made available





An interactive map was provided on Council’s website, allowing people to search for their
address and find out how their property is affected. The map proved effective and enabled
people to visualise the floodshape in relation to their property and surrounding neighbourhood.
Council’s website made available – the Amendment documentation, Fact Sheets, a set of
FAQs, background material and a submission form.
Melbourne Water’s website was linked to Council’s website and the interactive map.
Two Fact Sheets were prepared. Fact Sheet 1 – ‘Overview of Flooding in Port Phillip’ gave a
general overview of flooding in Port Phillip, including what else Council and Melbourne Water
are doing about flood mitigation. Fact Sheet 2 – ‘Amendment C111 – SBO Review’ provided
more information about Amendment C111, including an explanation of the flood modelling, the
differences between the schedules to the SBO that are proposed and the impact of the
Amendment on development. A copy of these documents is in APPENDIX 4.
Information folders were displayed at all Council ASSIST centres and libraries, including
copies of the SES Home Emergency Plans.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 24
Information sessions and meetings


Information Sessions – Four information sessions were held during the weeks beginning 16
and 23 March, with two sessions during office hours (2-5pm) and two evening sessions (5-8pm)
at the St Kilda and South Melbourne town halls. People were encouraged to pre-book for these
sessions so that specific information about their property, such as the exact flood level, could be
provided. 37 people attended these sessions.
Meeting with EFLAG – Council and Melbourne Water staff attended and gave a short
presentation about the Amendment at a meeting of the Elwood Flood Action Group (EFLAG)
on 11 March 2015.
Response to enquiries



Council and Melbourne Water staff were available to answer phone calls, attend to enquiries at
the counter at the St Kilda Town Hall and respond to emails. People were encouraged to
contact Melbourne Water for technical enquiries and Council for general enquiries about the
Amendment, although technical matters (for SBO2 areas) were also handled by staff in the Asset
Management unit.
Telephone, email enquiries and submissions that mentioned specific maintenance or design
issues relating to local drainage were logged and referred to the relevant area of Council for
resolution.
A separate email address (floodinfo@portphillip.vic.gov.au) was set up to allow people to find
out the flood level of their property if it is proposed to be included in SBO2 (i.e. areas affected
by flooding from the local drainage network). This information was provided free of charge and
was administered by the Asset Management unit. Melbourne Water provides flood level
information for SBO1 and SBO3 areas (i.e. areas subject to flooding from the main drainage
network).
How people responded to notification






The dedicated webpage received a total of 1,946 hits between when the webpage went live (25
February) and the closing date for submissions (8 April 2015). This includes 1,353 unique page
views.
The interactive map (which was linked to via the webpage and directly from the Melbourne
Water website) received 1,612 hits during the same period.
Council received a total of 245 phone calls and Melbourne Water received 14 phone calls
relating to the Amendment during the exhibition period.
Council staff attended to 58 counter enquiries, responding to questions people had about the
Amendment.
Council staff responded to queries about the Amendment via 118 emails. This is on top of the
formal submissions that were received by email.
Fifty-seven (57) submissions were received during the exhibition period. An additional six (6)
submissions were received after the exhibition period had concluded, and four (4) have been
withdrawn. All 59 submissions are summarised in this report.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 25
Exhibition Statistics
Submissions:
No. of Letters
20,997
Webpage hits
1,946
No. of Late Submissions
6
Interactive map hits
1,612
No. of withdrawn Submissions
4
Emails
118
Phone calls
259
Counter enquiries
58
Attendees at Info Sessions
37
No. of Submissions received
during exhibition
Net total of Submissions
57
59
6.5 Council consideration of submissions
Council provided an opportunity at its meeting on 9 June 2015 for submitters to speak to their
submissions and eight submitters took that opportunity. A summary of these verbal submissions is
available on pages 13 and 14 of the Minutes for this meeting (available in APPENDIX 5).
At its meeting on 14 July 2015, Council formally considered submissions and provided the following
resolution:






Receives and considers all written submissions made to Amendment C111 to the Port Phillip Planning
Scheme.
Requests the Minister for Planning appoint an independent Planning Panel to review the submissions
received to Amendment C111, in accordance with Part 8 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Refers all submissions, including any late submissions received, to the Panel to be appointed by the
Minister for Planning.
Endorses the recommended response to issues raised in submissions outlined in Attachment 3
[Consultation Report], as the basis for Council’s submission to the Panel.
Authorises the Chief Executive Officer (or delegate) to complete the further technical review of 17
individual properties (as outlined in paragraphs 3.28 – 3.30) and to incorporate the outcomes of this
review into Council’s submission to the Panel. [Refer to Section 8.1 on page 34]
Writes to all submitters, informing them of Council’s decision to proceed to the Panel stage.
Submitters were provided with another opportunity to present to Council at this meeting. The Minutes
for this meeting are also available in APPENDIX 5.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 26
7.
SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED
7.1 Location of submissions
There are (at the time of writing) a net total of 59 submissions (taking into account late submissions and
submissions that have been subsequently withdrawn):




22 regarding properties in Melbourne Water’s drainage areas (proposed SBO1 and SBO3).
34 regarding properties in Council’s drainage areas (proposed SBO2).
1 regarding the Amendment in general.
1each from South East Water and Melbourne Water.
As shown in Figure 2 below, the submissions were spread across the municipality, with the exception of
a cluster of 7 submissions around Byron Street, Brighton Road and Moore Street in Elwood, and 3
submissions from the same apartment building in Balaclava.
Figure 2 – Location of Submissions
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 27
7.2 Effect of the Amendment
Individual properties are affected in one of the following ways by the Amendment:




Retained within the existing SBO with no change to the floodshape
Retained within the existing SBO but with a change to the floodshape (i.e. reducing or increasing
the amount of the property covered by the SBO)
Added to the SBO for the first time
Fully removed from the SBO
35
30
No. of Submissions
25
20
SBO1
15
SBO2
SBO3
10
5
0
Added to the SBO for the first
time
Existing - changed
Existing - unchanged
Figure 3 – Number of submissions by change to the SBO proposed
In relation to submissions, Figure 3 above demonstrates that 82% of submissions received were from
persons whose property is proposed to be added to the SBO for the first time. No submissions were
received from any person whose property is completely removed from the SBO.
7.3 Submitter positions on the Amendment
The positions on the Amendment can be summarised as follows:
Category
Description
1.
Submissions in support
2.
Submissions requesting removal of properties from the proposed SBO
3.
No. of Submissions
(% of submissions)
6
(10%)
43
(73%)
Submission requesting other changes to the Amendment
3
(5%)
4.
Submission requesting that the Amendment be abandoned
2
(3.5%)
5.
Submission did not indicate a position on the Amendment (and raised
issues not directly related to the Amendment)
5
(8.5%)
The following is a summary of the submissions as categorised. The issues raised in the submissions are
discussed more generally here and in further detail in the next section.
Category 1 – Submissions in support
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 28

A total of 6 submissions were received in support of the Amendment. Four of these were from
property owners and one each was received from South East Water and Melbourne Water.
Two of the submissions received from property owners raised issues about blocked drains in
their local area.
Category 2 – Submissions requesting removal of properties from the proposed SBO





This is the largest group of submissions. Forty three (43) submissions were received that
requested their property in particular (and sometimes nearby properties) be removed from the
proposed SBO.
Four of these submissions relate to sites already covered by the SBO, one where there is a
substantial increase in coverage, two where there is no change and another where there is a
substantial decrease.
The other 40 submissions relate to properties proposed to be included in the SBO for the first
time, 13 in SBO1 and 27 in SBO2.
The coverage of the properties by the proposed SBO varies between minor (20 submissions),
moderate (10 submissions), significant (8 submissions) and all of the property (6 submissions).
The basis for requesting properties be removed included:
o The property has never flooded in the time that the submitter (or their family or
previous occupiers) has lived in the property and thus question the modelling.
o There are existing buildings or structures on the part of the land affected by the
proposed SBO that would obstruct the flowpath.
o The inclusion of the property in the SBO would decrease property values and/or
increase insurance premiums.
o The inclusion of the property in the SBO would be an unnecessary administrative
burden that would restrict or increase the costs associated with new development.
o Council and/or Melbourne Water should undertake other flood mitigation measures
such as large engineering solutions, increasing the capacity of the drainage and more
regular maintenance of the drainage system.
Category 3 – Submissions requesting other changes to the Amendment



One submitter wanted their property to remain fully covered by the SBO as the Amendment
seeks to remove most of the property with the exception of <1m across the frontage.
Fundamentally, the submission is questioning the revised modelling undertaken by Melbourne
Water that shows a reduction to the flood risk for properties in that area. The increased
frequency of storm events associated with climate change was a key reason for this position.
Another submission was generally supportive of the Amendment, but recommended that design
standards be changed to require buildings to be constructed on stilts to allow flood water to
pass underneath and reduce the flood risk by constructing more solid foundations.
Finally, one submission has questioned the approach of not considering the impact of climate
change in the revised extent of the SBO.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 29
Category 4 – Submissions requesting the Amendment be abandoned

Two submissions requested that Council abandon the amendment because they considered
o the modelling was flawed in some way (because their property hasn’t flooded); or
o other solutions should be found to fix flooding problems (such as upgrading the drainage
system and decreasing the amount of non-permeable development permitted).
Category 5 – Submissions that did not indicate a position on the Amendment (and raised
issues not directly related to the Amendment)


These submissions did not state a position on the amendment itself, and raised issues not
directly related to the amendment.
The issues included nearby blocked drains, poor design or poor maintenance regimes (including
street cleaning) for the drains. Please note: if specific drains were referred to in the submission
then customer requests were logged so that they could be investigated.
7.4 Issues raised in submissions
In addition to the 6 submissions in support of the amendment, the key issues raised by others in the
submissions can be broadly categorised as follows:










Individual properties have not flooded in the past and should not be subject to the Special
Building Overlay (20 submissions)
Questioned the accuracy of the modelling or stated that modelling doesn’t account for real life
flood events (is only computer modelling) (14 submissions)
Negative impact on property values (14 submissions)
Financial or administrative burden for future development or redevelopment of the site –
including additional costs associated with raising floor levels (11 submissions)
Buildings or structures on a property are unaffected (10 submissions)
Negative impact on insurance premiums (9 submissions)
Problems with specific blocked or poorly designed drains near their property (5 submissions)
Council and Melbourne Water should maintain and upgrade the drainage system to cope with
overland flow from the 1 in 100 year flood event (6 submissions)
Amendment does not address the impacts associated with climate change, including sea level
rise and an increase in storm events (2 submissions)
Further design requirements are required in policy to encourage built form that would allow
flood waters to flow under buildings (1 submission)
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 30
Questioning the
accuracy of the
modelling
13%
Supportive of
Amendment
6%
Building or structures
are unaffected
Climate change
10%
2%
Financial or
administrative burden
11%
Impact on insurance
premiums
9%
Property has never
flooded in the past
19%
Impact on property
values
13%
Problems with specific
drains
5%
Maintain / upgrade
drainage system
12%
Figure 4 – Quantum of issues raised in submissions
Issue
Individual properties have not
flooded in the past and should
not be subject to the Special
Building Overlay
Questioned the accuracy of the
modelling or modelling that
doesn’t account for real life
flood events (only computer
modelling)
Discussion

Twenty (20) of the submissions objecting to the
Amendment referred to previous flood events (or the lack
thereof) in their local area that didn’t affect their property
to explain their position that the modelling must be
incorrect.

Fourteen (14) submissions stated that the modelling should
be based on real life flood events, rather than computer
modelling, which may not account for structures that may
impede the flowpath.

Fourteen (14) submissions stated that the imposition of
their property in the SBO would negatively impact on the
value of their property.

Where a property is only marginally affected by the
proposed SBO, ten (10) objecting submissions pointed to
existing walls, buildings, garages or other structures (on
the site or adjoining sites) that has blocked the flowpath
for previous floods or would potentially block the flowpath
of flood water from entering their property in the future.

Eleven (11) submissions stated that the imposition of their
property in the SBO would be an administrative burden
that could result in increased costs associated with future
redevelopment or extensions to existing buildings.
Impact on property values
Buildings or structures on a
property are unaffected
Financial or administrative
burden for future development
or redevelopment of the site –
including additional costs
associated with raising floor
levels
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 31
Issue
Discussion

Nine (9) submissions stated that the imposition of their
property in the SBO would result in higher insurance
premiums.

Five (5) submissions used the opportunity afforded by the
Amendment to provide feedback to Council about particular
drains that they observed were blocked by leaves and other
material and causing problems for the runoff of water (during
light and heavy rainfall events), the design of particular storm
drains or the inadequacy of the existing drainage to cope with
normal runoff. If specific drains were referred to in the
submission, then customer requests were logged so that they
could be investigated.

Three (3) submissions stated that the entirety of the drainage
system should be upgraded to accommodate overland flows
from the 1 in 100 year flood events, again in lieu of pursuing
expanding the SBO to cover more properties.

A further three (3) submissions stated that lack of
maintenance of the drainage network by Council and/or
Melbourne Water was causing the flooding issues and that
these issues should be investigated, in lieu of pursing an
expansion of the SBO to cover more properties.

Two (2) submissions were received that discussed the lack of
consideration of the impacts of climate change in the revised
modelling of the Special Building Overlay.

One of these submissions raised the issue of increased rainfall
intensity associated with climate change as justification to
retain their property completely within the SBO.

The second submission was critical of the approach taken
with the Amendment to not include consideration of the
impacts of climate change. Specifically, this submission stated
that there is no justification for not incorporating the impacts
of climate change because climate change increases rainfall
intensity, higher sea levels reduces the capacity of the drainage
system and future impacts of coastal climate change have
already informed planning decisions. Furthermore, the
submission stated that the SBO should be based on flood
levels derived from modelling for the assumed impacts of
climate change because the design life of these buildings will
be 50-100 years.

One (1) submission recommended that design standards be
changed to require buildings to be constructed on more
permeable foundations (e.g. stilts or other openings) to allow
flood water to pass underneath and reduce the flood risk
compared to constructing more solid foundations.
Impact on insurance premiums
Problems with specific blocked
or poorly designed drains near
their property
Council and Melbourne Water
should maintain and/or upgrade
the drainage system to cope
with overland flow from the 1 in
100 year flood event
Climate change impacts
Further design requirements are
needed
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 32
7.5 Response to submissions
Further commentary on these issues is provided in Attachment 3 (Consultation Report) to the Council
Report dated 14 July 2015 (provided in APPENDIX 5). This includes some discussion and a broad
response to each issue. Council’s Part B Submission will provide a more detailed response to each of
these 10 issues.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 33
8. CHANGES TO THE AMENDMENT
8.1 Further Technical Review
Council decision
Council resolved at its meeting on 14 July 2015 that it:
Authorises the Chief Executive Officer (or delegate) to complete the further technical review of 17
individual properties (as outlined in paragraphs 3.28 – 3.30) and to incorporate the outcomes of this
review into Council’s submission to the Panel.
Paragraphs 3.28 to 3.30 in the Council Report (referred to in the resolution) stated:



Officers are undertaking a further technical review of 17 (sic) properties, where submitters have
questioned the inclusion of their property in the SBO and the extent of coverage over the subject land is
minimal (this relates only to properties covered by SBO2- Council drains).
The further technical review will mirror the more detailed analysis typically undertaken at the planning
permit stage to ascertain the exact flood risk to the property. The objective of this review is to check for
anomalies.
This technical review may indicate that some very minor refinements to the SBO2 floodshape could be
made. This advice would be presented to the independent Planning Panel for consideration and made
available to relevant submitters prior to any hearing. Council will have the opportunity to formally
consider any recommended changes of the floodshape at the adoption stage of Amendment C111.
The number of properties to be reviewed was mistakenly stated as 17, when in fact only 16 properties
were reviewed.
Council wrote to all affected submitters on 20 July 2015 and advised them of the outcome of the further
technical review.
Overview


As resolved by Council and for the benefit of individual submitters and to inform the Planning
Panel, Council officers undertook a further individual technical assessment of properties in
SBO2 where the proposed coverage of the property by the SBO is minor, and where a
submitter has expressed a view that the property should be removed (16 properties in total).
A property is considered to have minor coverage if the proposed SBO covers less than 15m²
and less than 6% of the total area of the site.
Factors considered
The following five factors were considered as part of the assessment of potential flood risk to a
property (and mirrors the process that will be used at the planning permit stage):




Overland flow path – how much of the water flows onto the property from the main flow path?
Surface flow character – what is the direction and velocity of the flow onto the property?
Thin ground LIDAR level in property – are the LIDAR points on the property higher or lower
than the main flow path?
Flood shape in property – how much of the property is covered by the flood shape?
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 34

Maximum flood depth – what is the maximum flood depth on the property?
The detailed outcomes from this further technical review will be reported to the Planning Panel in Part
B of this report. A summary of the suggested changes are referred to in Section 8.2 below.
8.2 Changes to the Amendment
In considering all written submissions at its meeting on 14 July 2015, no changes to the exhibited
amendment were proposed by Council. As noted in Section 8.1 above, the further technical review of
16 properties subject of submissions has been completed and full detail of the recommended changes to
the flood shape will be presented at the Panel Hearing.
In summary, of the 16 properties subject of the technical review, it is recommended that the proposed
SBO2 could be removed from the following 11 properties:











141 Station Street, Port Melbourne
233 Dow Street, Port Melbourne
235 Dow Street, Port Melbourne
279 Richardson Street, Middle Park
147 Raglan Street, Port Melbourne
11 Lambeth Place, St Kilda
14 Docker Street, Elwood
40 Dundas Place, Albert Park
69 Spray Street, Elwood
50B Milton Street, Elwood
97-101 Cruikshank Street, Port Melbourne
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 35
APPENDICES
Floodplain Management Strategies & Guidelines
Appendix 1
A.
B.
C.
D.
Port Phillip Flood Management Plan (2012)
Draft Flood Management Strategy – Port Phillip and Westernport (2015)
Revised Draft Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy (2015)
Principles for Provision of Waterway and Drainage Services for Urban
Growth (2007)
Amendment Documents
Appendix 2
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Explanatory Report TAB 1
Notice of Amendment TAB 1
Instruction Sheet TAB 1
Planning Scheme Maps TAB 1
Proposed Schedules 1, 2 and 3 to the SBO TAB 1
Authorisation correspondence TAB 2
Planning Scheme Documents
Appendix 3
A. Existing schedule and SBO parent control
B. State and Local Planning Policies
C. VicSmart clauses
Consultation Materials
Appendix 4
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Fact Sheets
Flyer circulated with direct notices to affected property owners
‘Divercity’ article
Letter templates TAB 1
Website text
Notices in Government Gazette and Port Phillip Leader
Council Reports and Minutes
Appendix 5
A. Ordinary Council Meeting (9 December 2014) Amendment C111 Review
of the Special Building Overlay (request for authorisation & exhibit
amendment) TAB 3
B. Ordinary Council Meeting (9 June 2015) Amendment C111 – hearing of
submissions TAB 3
C. Ordinary Council Meeting (14 July 2015) Amendment C111 – consider
submissions and request for appointment of Panel TAB 3
Practice Notes
Appendix 6
A. PN12 – Applying the flood provisions in Planning Schemes
B. PN46 – Strategic Assessment Guidelines
All appendices to this report are available online at:
http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/amendment-c111.htm
Advice for Panel Members (only): Hard and soft copies of documents in some of these appendices have
previously been provided to the Panel. Text in orange (e.g. TAB 1) indicates the location of the document
in the folders that have been provided.
PANEL SUBMISSION – AMENDMENT C111 – REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY
PAGE 36
APPENDIX 1
Floodplain Management Strategies & Guidelines
A.
B.
C.
D.
Port Phillip Flood Management Plan (2012)
Draft Flood Management Strategy – Port Phillip and Westernport (2015)
Revised Draft Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy (2015)
Principles for Provision of Waterway and Drainage Services for Urban Growth (2007)
APPENDIX 2
Amendment Documentation
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Explanatory Report
Notice of Amendment
Instruction Sheet
Planning Scheme Maps
Proposed Schedules 1, 2 and 3 to the SBO
Authorisation correspondence
APPENDIX 3
Planning Scheme Documents
A. Existing schedule and SBO parent control
B. State and Local Planning Policies
C. VicSmart clauses
APPENDIX 4
Consultation Materials
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Fact Sheet 1 – ‘Overview of Flooding in Port Phillip’
Fact Sheet 2 – ‘Amendment C111 – SBO Review’
Flyer circulated with direct notices to affected property owners
‘Divercity’ article
Letter templates
Website text
Notices in Government Gazette and Port Phillip Leader
APPENDIX 5
Council Reports and Minutes
A. Ordinary Council Meeting (9 December 2014) Amendment C111 Review of the Special
Building Overlay (request for authorisation & exhibit amendment)
B. Ordinary Council Meeting (9 June 2015) Amendment C111 – hearing of submissions
C. Ordinary Council Meeting (14 July 2015) Amendment C111 – consider submissions and
request for appointment of Panel
APPENDIX 6
Practice Notes
A. PN12 – Applying the flood provisions in Planning Schemes
B. PN46 – Strategic Assessment Guidelines