Planning is used to meet the needs and expectations of society such as economic growth, management of resources, protection of the environment and managing land for settlement (The Planning Academy, 2015). In the interest of net community benefit and sustainable development planning and responsible authorities endeavor to incorporate policies to relevant issues for the benefit of present and future generations. Under the Local Government Act 1989 municipal planning authorities are required to co-ordinate with other public bodies in identifying regional impacts in their decision-making and to be consistent with the objectives of local government to achieve sustainable development and efficient use of resources (The Planning Academy, 2015)
According to Maos (2012) planning is expected to work in tandem with politics since planning affects economic profit, quality of residential life, urban renewal or historical preservation, dispersers suburbanization or compact development: effectively, planning is used as a tool to either attract a certain demographic and deter others. According to Auerbach (2012) urban sprawl planning is based on principles set by state institutions, bided by specific direction to control development and prevent irreversible acts of development in the planning area. Furthermore, planning is generally conducted in areas of a scarcity of resources, compounded with a system of political pressure and conflict aimed to boost economic growth, preserve the environment and meet the needs of the community. Mondal (2015) argues that history has proven it is difficult to accommodate the three sectors at once. According to Auerbach (2012) urban planning is the implementation of policy-makers’ decisions and that politicians in planning refer to the politician’s involvement in the planning process, heavily motivated by political reward.
Greater Hobart is nestled between mountain ranges and foothills creating the cities backdrop. Urban skylines and hill-faces are considered to have significant development potential as a result of the appealing views and settings provided. Maintaining visual values, natural habitat, water quality, and biodiversity around the urban area are of growing concern to local communities. To satisfy these needs, The Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (2010-2035) set guidelines to provide a method for identifying visual values and incorporating an assessment of values associated with urban skylines and hill-faces are being enforced. The values, guided by the Sustainable Forest Management Policy endeavor to create growth environmentally, socially and economically. This is of significant importance as Tasmania’s greatest attractions is the natural environment.
Public consultation is required for factors involving a degree of subjectivity. However, others are more easily quantifiable and can be determined through quantitative means. Community attitudes are reflected through the use of surveys in Tasmania regarding landscape and vegetation. These landscapes and vegetation contribute to historical, cultural and heritage values that contribute to giving the community a sense of place, encouraging the existing population to remain and attracting both temporary and permanent stayers. Considering these factors is becoming increasingly topical in the planning process.
To assess visual values and their implication for development Forestry Tasmania (2013) has developed a visual management system that provides theoretical principles within certain settings that provide relatively objective solutions. This system is so effective that it is being used to evaluate other land uses within Tasmania and provides a reliable, repetitive way to assess sensitivity to development. The system allows planners to determine the visual importance of an area and is guided by the Forest Practices Authority Manual for landscape management. The same manual addresses principles and procedures for forest managers to follow to accommodate visual amenity.
Tasmania Planning Provisions
Councils within the Southern Beaches of Tasmania seek community involvement when planning for future decisions and what the community feels is currently wrong with zoning decisions. Questions regarding key issues such as social, environmental, or economic questions are asked to obtain information on what local residents would like to see changed.
The Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (2010-2035) sets out strategic directions for the Southern Tasmania Region, such as creating a network of vibrant activity centres, The centres aim to provide a hub where housing prospect can be planned, facilitates agglomeration of economies for business and industry, and creates a sustainable environment that reduces private motor vehicle traffic. Improving economic infrastructure, as Southern Tasmania is dependent on the northern areas for import and exports, strategies to improve intrastate travel such as rail linkages to and from the sea and airports are of upmost importance. Additionally, the implementation of the national broadband network will allow increased connectivity for rural communities for telecommuting and a ‘new economy’ employment. Supporting strong and healthy communities, and creating livable communities, as there are communities suffering social and locational disadvantage. The strategy seeks to offer affordable housing in locations that will offer education, health facilities and access to community services while promoting a less car-dependent environment. The 25-year horizon should set guidelines to help achieve these goals.
Local Planning Provisions
Sorell council has, as of March 18, 2014 endorsed the Southern Tasmanian Regional Planning Initiative as per the proposed Memorandum of understanding between the Southern Tasmania Councils, Southern Tasmanian Councils Authority and the State Government. The planning initiative seeks to achieve a comprehensive regional land use strategy for the region, infrastructure investment strategy and development to be coordinated, consistent and contemporary planning schemes for all councils involved, based on the regional land use strategy. Within Southern Tasmania, the Southern Regional Model Provisions form the foundation of all planning schemes. The Tasmanian Planning Commission (2016) states each council is responsible for adding its individual local level provisions, however, is prohibited to making additions or alterations with the Regional Provisions. Although the Southern Regional Model Provisions are not mandatory as part of any planning scheme, worth noting is the need to amend inconsistencies between current planning schemes and is high on the political agenda at the state level.
Infrastructure Pressure as a Result of Population Growth
With a resident population of 13,193 as of 2015 ABS census data, the growth rate is steadily rising at 2% per year, making the municipality one of the fastest growing in Tasmania. Infrastructure provisions have become restrictive, particularly in the Southern Beaches area in conjunction with the growth rate outpacing infrastructure growth. Community expectations are not met as on-site wastewater treatments do not meet the public health outcomes, however within the near future it is expected the southern Beaches will have provision to reticulated infrastructure. The 1990s moratorium was a response to a particular waste issue in the Southern Beaches in a few localized areas but has since become a tool of planning restriction with no obvious effort to fix the localized problem. Further development will need to be managed to ensure the road infrastructure capacity is not exceeded to major employment districts outside of the municipality.
Located to the east of the Southern Tasmanian region the Sorell municipal acts as the civic centre for the municipality located 25km northeast of central Hobart. Sorell forms one of the municipalities at the urban / rural interface of Greater Hobart. The Sorell Draft Interim Planning Scheme (2013) outline that the surrounding settlements to the east of the municipality, including the shack settlements, such as Dodges Ferry and Primrose Sands continue to experience urban development and growth pressure, as it continues to remain as affordable housing and is considered to be close enough to be within commuter distance. Economic activity within the municipality is still dominated by primary industries despite the increasing urban and residential growth pressure.
Smaller settlements across the coastal areas in the east and south, agricultural and highland districts to the north and lower-middle Derwent Valley to the west make up the remainder of the region’s population. ABS (2015) data suggests the region historically is subject to low population growth in comparison to mainland centres, experiencing an annual population growth of just 0.9% between 2001-2008. In addition, the regions population is aging quicker than the national average, resulting in the average household size decreasing steadily for decades. Due to these factors interstate migration has been a consistent factor of the states demography.
As a result The Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy 2010-2035 (The Strategy) is a document detailing broad policy to facilitate and manage change, growth and development within Southern Tasmania over a 25-year time horizon. The planning scheme, declared by the Minister for Planning pursuant to Section 30C of the Land Use Planning & Approvals Act 1993 is required to be consistent with the strategic direction for the region. The four major directions aimed at increasing population retention are adopting a more integrated approach to planning and infrastructure, improving economic infrastructure, supporting productive resources and making the region nationally and internationally competitive.
The surrounding suburbs within the Southern Beaches are identified as dormitory suburbs to Greater Hobart. Meaning they are a small town or suburb whose residents travel to key employment districts outside of the municipality. Current limitations associated with road network infrastructure inhibit the Regional Infrastructure Investment Plan to install reticulated water and sewerage infrastructure into the southern beaches. To abide by the general regional direction of the Land Use strategy restrictions to the growth of rural areas are applied to an existing footprint. As a result, any further development and low density subdivision is recommended to one dwelling per hectare, as site conditions allow.
Restrictive Zoning
Map 2, below, shows the Southern Beaches are subject to zoning such as;
– Rural resource (marked light brown),
– Significant agricultural (marked dark brown),
– Environment management (marked blue),
– Rural living (marked pink),
– Low density residential (marked orange),
– General residential (marked red),
– Recreation (marked green),
– Light industrial (marked bright pink)
Evidently there is only a concentrated area located in Sorell that allows for general residential zoning. Locations such as Dodges Ferry and Primrose Sands are granted low density residential, however both have the population of 3,000 and 934 respectively (ABS 2015). Dodges Ferry has a small area zoned for local business, this area comprises a local bakery, news agency and a small supermarket / petrol station, however is still considered a commuter town to the Hobart CBD. Further evident is the small amount of space that is zoned residential, the majority of land available is marked rural resource, preventing the displacement and fettering of agricultural land, not compromising activity by non-agricultural use and development.
To promote residential growth, the Sorell Interim Scheme Planning Scheme (2013) aims to increase density to an average of 25 dwellings per hectare within a distance of 400 to 800 meters of integrated transit corridors and principal and primary activity centers. In addition to increasing housing density, council seeks to increase the supply of affordable housing. While accomplishing these goals, restrictions are placed to ensure land zoned for residential purposes do not exceed a 10 years supply of residential land. Land constraints will be managed by applying low-density residential zones where necessary as well as minimizing rural residential growth outside of identified settlements to existing rural residential areas. The planning scheme is contradictory to itself in saying council wishes to promote residential growth by increasing density per hectare and increasing the supply of affordable housing then placing restrictions to limit growth as roadwork infrastructure could not handle the increased population traffic.
Surf Coast Shire Planning Provisions
Population Affecting Planning
The Surf Coast Shire is located in the southwest of Victoria as seen in Map 3. The Shire has an area of 1,560 square kilometres with 55 kilometres making up the coastline defining the southeastern boundary. According to Plan Melbourne (2014), Melbourne has an estimated population of 7.7 million people by 2051, as a result the economy continues to change and grow therefore appropriate land zoning for commercial and industrial provisions must be implemented for the expected future job growth across Melbourne. The planning system needs to stay current with the ever-changing demand of the economy as it grows in order to support the growth of existing and new industries. Plan Melbourne proposes new geography for employment and spatial framework that will provide concentrated employment areas. Planning commercial and industrial infrastructure and ensuring investment for Melbourne and surrounding areas will warrant providing transport networks to help maximize productivity.
State and local governments will collaboratively work to ensure long-term economic and planning for infrastructure that will promote employment and investment. Each region will have strategies playing to the individual strength of the area pushing economic performance for new industries and capitalizing on city shaping projects such as the East / West Link and the Melbourne Rail Link, that will support linkage between Melbourne’s sub regions.
Infrastructure Pressure
According to the Surf Coast Planning Scheme (2015) the Surf Coast is heavily reliant on tourism being a ‘surf town’. Employment is a mix of retail, tourism and hospitality. Agriculture is a growing sector and contributes to the economy but only employs a small proportion of the Shire’s workforce. Agriculture is increasingly valued due to its contribution to the environment, landscape, amenity and livability of the Shire that adds to its tourism and recreation value.
The Surf Shire is subject to key drivers such as increasing popularity of the coastal town as permanent, holiday and tourist destinations that ultimately promote planning change and development. Although there is positive growth within the area, similar to the Southern Beaches, pressure is put on necessary infrastructure to support the rapid rate of growth as well as accessibility of the Shire to Geelong and Melbourne. As a result of constant growth within the area there is a high cost of urban land and consequent pressure to develop urban uses in rural areas.
A major focus in the planning scheme of the Surf Coast Shire (2015) is to encourage the concentration of major retail, residential, commercial, and entertainment developments to provide a variety of land uses that are easily accessible to the community. Contrary to that of the Southern Beaches, to aid the development of the conglomeration, a mix of housing types at higher densities will be constructed around the activity centre. As a result of having a greater population economic activity is encouraged by locating new education, justice, community, and healthy facilities in an attempt to attract users from large geographical areas that are close or on the edge of the activity district with accessibility to public transport. For example, estimations from the Sustainable Futures Plan of Torquay (2012) estimate the population will be between 25,000-30,000 people, half of which will be new residents requiring an estimate of 6,500 new residential lots.
Consistent with state government policy, the plan aims to achieve a minimum of 15 lots per hectare in new growth areas. In 2006 Council acquired land to construct a precinct containing new council offices, an indoor / outdoors recreation facility and a community and children’s service centre. To date, the council office, recreation pavilion and sporting grounds have been constructed. Additionally, through community studies and workshops the Urban Planning Unit would be best located closest to the two major employment areas functioning as a main street with shops fronting the road to promote pedestrian focused interface. Traditional shopping centre design typically supports pedestrian activity, as supported by the already established town centre in Gilbert Street. Street focused design ensures large car parking areas don’t dominate the public area and keep neighbourhood character as well as being a barrier to shopping and taking up large amounts of land. The development will promote activity and vibrancy day and night by applying a mixture of uses in a live / shop / work environment.
Transportation
Similar to the Southern Beaches, the Surf Coast Shire struggles with insufficient transportation infrastructure to facilitate a growing population. The aim is to reduce motor vehicle dependence and to build on existing transportation systems that will integrate public transport and public open spaces that will assist in managing peak holiday seasons. To achieve these goals the Victorian Transport Plan (2015) outlines strategies that are to be applied to coordinate public transport to meet the needs of the community both locally and regionally. New subdivisions must include provision for open space to identify specific community needs.
Current Zoning
The Surf Coast Shire and surrounding suburbs have zoning that stimulates growth within the area, such as;
– CDZ2; Comprehensive Development Zone (marked blue)
– C1Z; Commercial 1 Zone (marked light purple)
-UGZ1; Urban Growth Zone (marked cream / pink)
– GRZ1; Residential Zone (marked pink)
– LDRZ; Low Density Residential (marked dark pink)
– FZ – Farming zone (marked mint green)
Evident from the zoning map 4 the Surf Coast Shire has greater provision that the Southern Beaches to promote growth within the immediate area. Zoning such as the comprehensive development zone allows for the development or redevelopment of larger sites resulting in a variety of land uses. The commercial zoning allows the town to generate its own income and attract more permanent residents instead of being a commuter town. The residential zone allows for greater housing density and is not restricted to minimum lot sizes of 1000 square metres and encourages a range of building scales and mix, abiding by the height limit of nine metres or where specified in a schedule to the zone. The farming zone is in place to promote employment in existing rural communities and retain the existing population (Victoria State Government 2014)
4.3 Discussion
The research question aimed to discover whether planning discrepancies lie within councils of similar nature seeking to achieve like results in terms of economic, population and infrastructure growth while conserving the environment and moving in the right direction for the site specific suburbs. It was expected that differences would occur as a result of the amount of variables present and site-specific characteristics.
All of the data collected was sourced from publicly open information, mainly through public policy, planning schemes and overlay provisions, statutes, literature, official documents such as ‘Plan Melbourne’ and ‘The Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy’. The data collected confirmed these assumptions showing that the larger council with greater pressure for growth and more resources available showed progression and affirmative planning was more readily available compared to that of an area with an already existing lower population with less immediate pressure to grow. Collecting only secondary data meant that further investigation as to why certain decisions may have been were difficult to ascertain. There is a lack of control over the quality of data meaning the results are only as good as the data that is publicly available. Lastly, the research is guided by what secondary data is available. As primary data was not obtained the research could not be conducted for its absolute intended purpose.
Southern Beaches Demographics
The Southern Beaches of Tasmania are located to the Southeast of Tasmania, approximately 30 kilometers northeast of the Hobart central business district as seen in Map 1. The greater Sorell area commands an area of 583 square kilometres. Hobart has a current population of 210,000 and an expected population of 280,000 by 2021 according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015). The increase in population will require planning changes in the immediate and surrounding areas to accommodate the influx of both temporary and permanent populace.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015) Tasmania’s Southern Region comprises 12 local government areas. It is the largest of the three regions of Tasmania making up 38% of total area and 48% of the population. Greater Hobart is the driver for all economic and social facilities in conjunction with being the capital city and the political centre for Tasmania. Accounting for 90% of the regions employment opportunities it is the most populated urban area in the state. Surrounding settlements and town are significantly influenced by its social and economic interactions.
The suburb of Primrose Sands comparatively has a large population of 934 compared to surrounding suburbs such as Copping, Forcett (635) and Dunalley (500) (ABS, 2015). Primrose will have more residential population growth as a result of shacks being used as permanent residences over time. Nearby suburbs such as Midway Point and Dodges Ferry have commercial areas identified for local business zones, allowing flexibility and opportunity over the next 25-years. Although the population of Primrose is slightly lower than the greater surrounding suburbs there is no commercial land identified, but for one local store that is already utilized without sufficient land area for any future commercial uses.
Inconsistent Land Use Strategy
Twenty years ago community members located areas within Primrose Sands ideal for commercial development and provided a layout for commercial enterprise within that area, demonstrating that mini warehousing / storage buildings and landscape supplies, such as native plant nursery, building sands and gravels and bulk goods would fit in this area, building a more dynamic community and creating local jobs without disrupting residential amenity. However, there is no provision made for any commercial growth or development within the Primrose Sands community over that period by identifying any areas where this kind of community infrastructure could take place. Contrary to the aims and directions of the proposed process from council this land wasn’t zoned commercial then, and the new planning scheme does not zone this nor any other land in Primrose to encourage commercial infrastructure (Iplan 2016).
According to the Sorell Council (2013) Healthy communities objectives are to be achieved “In settlements other than Sorell Township, providing where possible for a small area, joined local business or village within walking distance of the main residential areas”. The aforementioned land complies with the criteria and should be considered to further the states objectives of the proposed scheme. There are no other settlements in Tasmania of similar size so poorly serviced by commercial infrastructure; the proposed planning scheme is inconsistent with the stated planning objectives. As mentioned in the literature review, the Sorell Council, as part of the Council Strategic Plan (2014) states that they seek the opinions of the community and facilitate growth through development, however, as evidence suggests the actions are contradictory to what is stated. This is evident through the lack of commercial zoning, restricting housing lots to one dwelling per hectare and using a lack of road infrastructure as an excuse not to change these and promote growth in the area.
Scarce Infrastructure
Places like the Southern Beaches are attracting residents despite the lack of infrastructure because they are socially mixed communities in attractive locations and are affordable as an entry into the housing market. Those looking to enter the market are generally aware of the lack of other infrastructure when they move in and discount ‘improvements’ like reticulated water and accompanied costs. Community members are content with current services offered, such as a lack of reticulated water, it is argued by local residents that there is an overemphasis on infrastructure improvements prior to any further development. However, this complies with Percy’s (2015) theory from the above literature review that the implementation of a water tank and solar panels may ease the pressure for the need of infrastructure to distance communities.
Council and State authorities have been restricting any development in these areas since before the 1993 planning scheme. For 20 years these communities have suffered spending neglect and planning restriction. For instance, Sorell council was unsupportive of the Primrose Sands RSL when it was proposed and fought it until losing on appeal. Local residents could not comprehend why their local government was against community initiative that had demonstrable strong support and has since become a valuable community resource largely self funded and adding to a township. The planning scheme at the local level becomes unrelentingly restrictive. There is not equity between settlements or regard for the impact on individual owners. This has significant impact on landowners and stagnates what could be a better community. Referring to the literature review, the population growth the pressure for infrastructure continues to build. According to the Sorell Council the major limiting factor is the concern for road infrastructure and ensuring the capacity is not exceeded.
Surf Coast Shire
Infrastructure Approval
Strategies are implemented to support a multi-functional municipality to deliver modern facilities to the temporary and permanent population to achieve a sustainable local community. For example, activity centers synthetic playing fields are designed with diverse uses to support local employment opportunities with the ambition of making a self-contained town resulting in less motor vehicle dependency. The synthetic playing fields are a long-term priority aimed at servicing future demand for access to playing fields. The development is pending a feasibility study should it be required. The Shire currently works in partnership with existing groups and relevant management agencies to facilitate participation opportunities to support the 100+ active sports clubs in the municipality. Where appropriate the provision of horizontal and vertical mix use property will be encouraged, including offices on floor levels and apartments at upper levels. Residential diversity will be met by facilitating the community with medium density housing, affordable housing and housing for the aged, in appropriate locations. Significant differences in supply of residential property exist within the Shire.
New ‘greenfield’ opportunities identified in Torquay will result in rapid population growth in the Shire over the next forecast period. As a result of new residential development coupled with an increase in the number of dwellings permanently occupied, all areas of the Shire are expected to increase in population. Greenfield areas provide a variety of medium to high-density lots to encourage a mix of housing types. As mentioned in the literature review as part of Plan Melbourne (2015) affordable housing development is a top priority of the urban sprawl. The preferred neighbourhood character is yet to be established for residential growth. The aim is to support an overall general density of 15 lots per hectare unless stated otherwise to response to environmental values, while higher residential densities of 20 lots per hectare are to be located around activity centre and active public space.
Local needs are met by implementing provisions to distribute social infrastructure across townships and within community hubs. According to sections 21.02-7 of the Surf Coast Planning Scheme the strategies neighbourhood and streetscape character will be influenced by clause 22.02 of the policy to advance the preferred style of urban areas. Furthermore, there is a requirement for a range of lot sizes for Greenfield subdivision, resulting in housing diversity and discouraging applications for battle-axe subdivisions in the future. Battle-axe subdivisions are a poor result of poor subdivision design whereby property is situated in the front of a deep lot with the driveway going along the side, additionally; the lot will have a deep backyard behind the house. The battle-axe subdivision results in a property situated at the back of the original lot with zero street frontages.
To continue neighbourhood character large format retail premises’ are integrated with smaller retail units such as shops and cafes to be consistent with the scale and regularity of the street and frontages. All coastal localities are encouraged to be consistent with a coastal style of urban form in all developments. To soften urban development council has recognized the pivotal role vegetation plays in defining township character. As such, residential development densities must be compatible to the protection of existing neighbourhood character and indigenous vegetation across the Surf Coast Settlements. As discussed in the literature review, The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (2011) recognises affordable housing and infrastructure is crucial for those located on the urban fringe due to the disadvantages already present such as poor job accessibility, lack of facilities and services, and transport inconvenience.
Transportation
Due to relatively strong population growth as a result of the regions natural environment, development applications and zoning changes are more likely to be approved than that of the Southern Beaches. The area is subject to constraints, for example, the coastal towns between Anglesea and Lorne are limited in growth by the Great Otway National Park and the councils desire to keep the coastal landscape between each settlement. Furthermore, those developing new property are insensitive to neighbourhood character and are building inappropriate buildings that are out of place, generally stemming from inadequate analysis of the context of the location. Similar to the Southern Beaches, settlements have limited public transport services and are too dependent on personal motor vehicle travel. Household structures and demand for services and facilities are shifting as a result of peak population increases during summer season; the increased population is a mixture of tourists and absentee holiday homeowners. However, dissimilar to the Southern Beaches, there is infrastructure pressure to establish large retail premises such as supermarkets and department stores within and outside the designated activity centers. Plan Melbourne (2014), as discussed in the literature review, aims to create a transport plan implemented by 2050 to linking the central city, national employment clusters, and industrial precincts and will help create an efficient use of underutilized land by creating affordable housing with appropriate density as appropriate to the area within the Greenfield locations.
Public Input
The importance of public input has been shown in an ongoing case at Bells Beach. A local landowner of the land immediately surrounding Bells Beach submitted a development proposal for tourist accommodation. The local community and the local Surf Coast Shire both refused the proposal. The landowner has now taken the proposal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). The first precedent will be set provided VCAT approve the tourist development proposal and will create opportunity for future tourist development within the area. The VCAT hearing begins 24 October 2016 and local residents are forming a petition to stop the proposal. Currently 25,300 people have signed the petition to stop the development and start the process of achieving legislated protection for Bells Beach and surrounding areas. There is concern within the community that the petition will bear little weight to VCAT and they are better off funding an expert planner to argue on planning grounds for the community’s behalf. That in combination of the local councils rejections would be hard to ignore given it’s a nature reserve. This is relevant to literature reviewed earlier, Vann (2014) states that town planning is controversial as the desires of the community are often conflicting, while one party looks for economic gain that often comes at the expensive of the environment. The very thing that generates so much attraction to the area, therefore, there are community members that want to protect the environment and stop the development. King-Cullen (2014) suggests the decision must reflect the communities’ best interests.
4.4 Summary
Planning discrepancies were found between the two subject councils. Although expected, the research uncovered to what extent these dissimilarities lie. The results show that the larger council located in Victoria, that had greater pressure to meet community expectations and grow at a quicker rate achieved and continues to achieve goals set out by council and are updating zoning to guide the direction in which the townships need to move. The smaller council located in Tasmania does not come under the same growth pressure or have the same financial freedom to grow. As a result the townships stagnate and struggle to grow due to lack of infrastructure and access. As locations of affordable housing the areas would greatly benefit from commercial zoning and infrastructure such a supermarkets to create economic growth and move in the direction of being self-sustainable townships. Results could be more accurate or further explained if primary data was obtained to further investigate why council is restricting the development of the outer suburbs through restrictive zoning. Although both areas come under pressure to build infrastructure, council within the surf coast shire encourage the development of horizontal and vertical mix use buildings, while evidence shows the Southern Beaches must fight council to get approval for commercial buildings, a stark contrast in the direction each area is heading.
Chapter 5: Conclusions
5.1 Introduction
The process of urban planning has general guidelines to follow but are ultimately steered by site specific factors, ranging from zoning, locational restrictions or freedoms, community involvement, politics and personal gain, available resources and how to best achieve the needs of community development. This report has touched on discrepancies between two councils with similar landscapes and ultimate goal of the direction would be most beneficial to the community.
It has become evident through the analysis of predominantly secondary research that despite the similarities of each council they are moving in different directions. The Surf Coast Shire is making affirmative movement in the direction of the planning scheme that will create economic growth and meet the requirements of the community.
Contrary to this direction is the Southern Beaches of Tasmania that lacks consistency between the stated actions and directions for future growth compared to what is actually happening to reach these goals and objectives. This is a direct result of the necessity for Melbourne to grow outward due to rapid population growth and the funds available for infrastructure and transportation links between the subject location and major cities. Southeast Tasmania at this given time does not have the demand or the financial resources available to correctly develop these outer suburbs.
It is important to note that there are discrepancies within certain objectives of each council, the main one being transportation systems. Given the vast difference in population the Surf Coast Shire has a much greater need for public transportation leading to Melbourne. The Southern Beaches have more dependence on motor vehicles and thus resources should be spent on improving the roads and access leading to and from the outer suburbs.
That lack of road infrastructure is one of the limiting factors and restrictions for zoning changes and council believe existing roadways could not handle the increase in population and resulting use.
5.2 Conclusion
Population Growth
Due to differences in population size, political pressure and resources available it is clear that the council’s are moving in different directions. While the Surf Coast Shire is promoting development in the right areas and stimulating economic growth through zoning infrastructure provisions, the Southern Beaches of Tasmania council’s actions are inconsistent with the planning schemes and objectives. Despite being the fastest growing municipality in Tasmania the communities in the area have suffered for over 20 years of spending neglect and planning restriction resulting in a stagnation of what could be a better, thriving community as population growth continues to outpace infrastructure growth. Ultimately the Surf Coast Shire is at an advantage for future development and funding due to a greater demand for outward growth as Melbourne’s central business district and surrounding suburbs are stressed from intense population growth.
Infrastructure
The Surf Coast Shire already has existing basic infrastructure such as reticulated water that the Southern Beaches don’t, therefore greater works are required to promote that area where there is diminished demand and economic stability. Suburbs within the Southern Beaches are limited by council’s decisions affecting zoning that restrict further development, Primrose Sands is an example of a town that is in need of commercial zoning, that has the current population and expected growth to warrant a supermarket however cannot facilitate the needs of the community as a result of negligent and restrictive town planning. In the near future these planning ideals will have to change as these communities continue to attract people as an entry level to the housing market. A planning initiative between local council and state government aim to achieve infrastructure and development that are consistent with recent planning schemes, however, as history shows these actions are not always applied despite assurances of doing so.
5.3 Recommendations
Throughout the report a majority of the information is secondary sourced, obtained was from publicly available information, gathering further information to conclude issues such as the suburb of Primrose Sands RSL struggling to obtain a permit or why the suburb does not receive any room for commercial zoning despite an increasing population and obvious community output supporting the change.
Greater Hobart’s population is aging quicker than the national average, resulting in a decrease in average household size and threat of population decline; research should investigate council objectives to neutralize the potential population decline.
The biggest issue overcome in the research project was procurement of information. It was difficult to get in contact with interstate industry relevant professionals meaning information was limited to that publicly published. In a future study, it is recommended that primary research be obtained to discover the justification for decisions such as restrictive zoning or choosing not to develop needed infrastructure in areas that need it and are continuing to grow.
5.4 Further Research
As this area of research is forever evolving to suit the needs of the community, supporting economic growth and conserving the environment further research endeavors are always required.
As the research topic involves information regarding planning objectives in different states, obtaining primary data proved difficult. As a result a majority of the statistics and information presented is secondary data resulting in what were sometimes ambiguous conclusions that could have been established properly if spoken to a property or planning professional. Additionally, the research direction was influenced by what information was publicly available and could not be tailored in an absolute direction. A more comprehensive study obtaining primary data from industry relevant people would prove beneficial in achieving a more definite conclusion as to why these planning discrepancies exist within places with similar ideals attempting to achieve the same goal.
A major unexpected finding was the restrictive planning schemes at local level for the Southern Beaches communities and Primrose Sands in particular. The lack of consistency for planning within the immediate surrounding suburbs and lack of funding to an area that would thrive with encouraging planning and financial support to help build infrastructure and roads to grant better access, instead of using it as an excuse to execute restrictive planning and stagnate further development. Due to a lack of primary research and inability to talk to planning professionals within the area it is difficult to say why this has been the case. Further research would uncover this hand help diminish these inconsistencies.
Although it has been proven that discrepancies lie between the two subject councils answering why has proven to be difficult. Areas located within the Surf Coast Shire have been subject to affirmative planning and subsequent funding that boost economic growth and attract a greater population. The Southern Beaches, although on a small scale are not privileged to the same constructive planning to promote the area. There are blatant inconsistencies between the objectives of the council and the actions implemented to reach said objectives. Given more time and access to industry relevant professionals the question as to why this is the case would greater