The Manifesto argues that major changes to the planning system are needed to maintain and create a liveable Victoria. This document provides Melbourne as a key example of the issues plaguing the current planning system. The many submissions to the Inquiry into the protections within the Victorian Planning Framework from across Victoria demonstrate that these concerns are not restricted to Melbourne and have not been addressed. This Manifesto echoes the common messages and positions put forward in these submissions, which are essential if Victoria is to remain liveable. A responsible planning system is democratic, socially aware and responds to housing demand whilst also providing and protecting amenity for all citizens.
Melbourne is one of the great Victorian era cities, but it is being obliterated. In its place, a new type of city is being developed. Large parts of inner and middle ring suburbs are being transformed into blocks of high rise and medium rise apartments while low density detached housing dominates the new outer urban growth corridors. Much of this development is the world’s worst standard and will lead to many social, environmental, and economic problems. The scale of such development exceeds that of most other Western cities. Many regional and rural areas are also experiencing the detrimental impacts of poorly controlled growth.
Environmental protection is a necessary precondition for sustainable economic and social development. High amenity places were maintained, by protecting valued natual and cultural assets such as historic areas, landscapes, and other natural features. However, the land use planning system has become primarily a tool, plundering amenity values for the short-term benefit of a few.
The paper examines key issues arising from rapid and fundamental change and proposes measures designed to form a template for government and local government action to address these issues.
We the residents of Melbourne and surrounds, call on the State government to be accurate and transparent about the real causes of housing supply shortages, high housing prices, and the loss of amenity and to take action to address these causes.
1.0 Housing Suppy and Demand
Key development groups and some economic institutes are engaged in a propaganda campaign on the issue of housing:
- They claim that a lack of housing supply is the cause of high dwelling prices,
- They blame residents and planning rules, and
- They seek to further deregulate housing approvals and exclude residents and local government from the approvals process.
The relationships between new housing supply and population are much more complex than a simple linear connection. There are many different forms of housing and living arrangements that contradict the concentration on small apartments and large detached housing that dominate Melbourne’s housing market.
Until mid-2022, Melbourne’s planning and building approvals for dwellings were maintained consistently above levels to meet demand. Several factors have limited actual housing construction. Notably, many approvals have not been acted upon. Short stay accommodation has removed many properties from longer term rental supply. Rising interest rates, increased construction material and labour costs, supply chain problems and increased taxes on investors have led to a recent fall in housing construction.
Planning regulations, resident objections and council rejections of applications have not restricted land or dwelling supply or caused housing price rises. Councils routinely approve over 90 per cent of all planning applications, and their role to represent residents is a vital aspect of a functioning liberal democracy. Using unelected officials and consultants or handing over the planning system to the development industry represents a grave threat to democratic decision making.
1.1 Developer Control
Governments zone land for future development but developers control the supply of housing through the timing of construction and land release. The Victorian government has ensured a steady supply of land across Melbourne, with about 20 years of supply existing now in outer urban growth corridors. But developers seek to ensure that land supply does not exceed anticipated demand, to limit choice and competition, and to maintain profits from high housing prices. They hold back land, or land-bank. For example, as of 2022, Master Planned Community, Woodlea, has taken over six years to release just 25.1 per cent, or 1652 of 6584 lots, whilst the Manor Lakes community still has 43 percent of lots that have not been released after 16 years, despite planning approvals being granted.
Developers also dictate housing products. Developers adjust the size of houses or apartments, or the proportion of the house to the lot, to maintain their profits. The lack of housing diversity and the large dwelling sizes often forces new home purchasers to pay high prices for dwellings they do not prefer. For many buyers, the choice is presented between small, poorly designed and constructed one- or two-bedroom apartments in the established city or large detached new outer urban housing with the worst urban services.
This lack of choice forces unnecessarily high home loans onto many new home buyers, placing increased pressure on household budgets. A weak government policy framework allows developers to determine the subdivision layout, housing type, retail centre design and location of services for all new growth corridor development. While new outer suburbs contain 44 percent of Melbourne’s population, high-capacity heavy rail only reaches 4 percent of these suburbs. This illustrates the consequences of developers disregarding the importance of amenity over profit.
1.2 Affordable and Social Housing
Mandatory inclusionary zoning is a regulatory technique used to specify requirements for a broad range of public benefits, including affordable housing, as part of the development approvals process. Mandatory inclusionary zoning has been applied in the US to over 500 cities and counties from the early 1970s. Under this approach, developers are required to provide a proportion of new developments to house low- and moderate- income households, usually between 10 – 25 per cent sometimes with discretionary density bonuses. Other techniques for gaining broader public benefits from development approvals include value capture, such as betterment levies, which require developers to contribute funds to Local Councils for use at their discretion to benefit the general public.
While there has been no lack of dwelling approvals until recently, the State Government has failed to ensure a sufficient supply of affordable and social housing. If inclusionary zoning had been applied in Melbourne to apartment construction since 2005, almost 40,000 affordable housing units at 25 percent of all approvals, could have been made available to lower- and moderate-income households. Social housing provision for the lowest income residents has also been neglected.
The State Government does not require any social or affordable housing in new private sector developments, regardless of whether there are increases in height, density, or land value. The lack of regulation has led to substantial windfall profits to developers by preventing public authorities from being able to gain public benefit from the large increases in building height, density and from land value. Developers have been allowed to reap all the benefits from Melbourne’s extensive high-rise boom since 2005.
1.3 The ‘Missing Middle’
The developer narrative is that ‘NIMBYs’ – selfish residents – and Local Council rejections have prevented new housing, including affordable housing, in the middle ring suburbs. Similarly, zoning rules are blamed for restricting supply in middle-ring suburbs and increased housing prices. But both narratives are false. From 2010-21, middle ring building approvals for high rise and low-rise apartments and townhouses – about 200,000 – were about 80 per cent higher than for inner area high rise approvals, and almost equal to the number of new approvals in outer urban growth corridors. There is no lack of new housing in middle ring suburbs, or ‘missing middle’, in Melbourne’s housing construction boom.
1.4 Excluding Residents and Councils
The State Government has already begun the process of eroding Councils’ ability to manage their own jurisdictions by:
- removing Council strategic and statutory planning powers from all Suburban Rail Loop station precincts,
- introducing a ‘code assessed’ system to replace the need for medium density development permits under ResCode, which excludes residents from being notified, to object or appeal,
- removing the need for a range of permits in Green Wedges by allowing them ‘as-of-right’ which removes the need for permits,
- ‘fast-tracking’ another 100,000 dwelling approvals in growth corridor areas, and
- further deregulating rules as part of the Smart Planning Program.
In each of the above examples, third-party rights are removed, and therefore residents’ views are excluded from the process. This is undemocratic. Moreover, the residents and Councils are being further excluded from all the decisions to dismantle the remaining land use planning controls.
2.0 Regulation and Housing Price
The current planning system is a relatively deregulated one compared to the one which applied to Melbourne from 1954 through to 1999. The more deregulated system was introduced in the 1990s by the Kennett government, explicitly to promote development and reduce local control.
Deregulated planning systems induce developers to bid up the price of land and to constantly raise building heights and densities to recoup their costs. Consequently, housing prices have sometimes risen together with increased housing supply. In Australia, permissive land use controls, including the absence of mandatory height and density controls, lack of sufficient requirement for inclusionary zoning, and failure to implement prohibited uses appropriately in zoning specifications, have been a major factor fuelling developer competition and increasing land price. A result has been higher apartment blocks and tower numbers and higher apartment prices, with the discretionary height controls ignored in two thirds of applications since 1999 in Melbourne CBD. Height and density controls provide certainty in planning and preclude the time consuming and costly adversarial process that almost inevitably result in adverse impacts on communities and the city. The lack of mandatory height controls in the Capital City Zone, the Commercial 1 zone and the Mixed-Use zone, in particular, has handed significant parts of the city over to development interests.
Many economic research firms have recognized that rising interest rates, increased construction material and labour costs, supply chain problems and increased taxes on investors have caused the recent fall in housing construction. Such factors – not planning regulations or resident and local government intervention in approvals – are another major cause of housing price rises.
Location is also a key factor influencing house price. High land prices in the inner and middle ring suburbs are not caused by zoning restrictions on new housing. These are the areas where planning rules are weak. Massive new housing construction there has been influenced by the attractiveness of living close to the CBD and to services in high amenity suburbs. Government fiscal and monetary policy – not land use rules – has been a crucial factor contributing to increased land values. Government housing subsidies, historically low interest rates coupled with the lack of prudential controls by the Reserve Bank, negative gearing, low capital gains tax, high immigration numbers, and dwelling purchase by overseas investors have been major contributors this century to housing being regarded as an investment and not primarily as a place to live.
The fiscal and monetary policy implications are clear on all these issues, but Commonwealth and State Governments refuse to use their powers to reduce the detrimental impacts of such factors on house prices. It is important nevertheless that the real causes of housing price rises are recognised and that planning rules and resident rights are not unfairly blamed.
2.1 Residential Height Controls and Heritage
Previously, the Neighbourhood Residential Zone, coupled with the application of the Heritage Overlay, protected the heritage of pre-World War II housing particularly in the inner and middle ring suburbs. A height control in the General Residential Zone also served to improve the quality of development. The Labor government raised residential height controls introduced by the Coalition government in 2013, and raised the mandatory height limit and removed the prohibition on multi-unit development in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone. This has promoted the widespread demolition of heritage housing.
2.2 Commercial and Mixed-Use Height Controls
Labor has refused to allow the introduction of mandatory height controls in the Commercial 1, Activity Centre and Mixed-Use Zones in Melbourne’s traditional strip shopping centres. Even so, ‘preferred height limits’ are commonly too high and yet are exceeded or ignored. The lack of height limits directly contributes to increased land price as developer competition for land requires ever higher developments to recoup the cost of investment in land. In addition, these zones are highly permissive with few prohibited uses. The result is the progressive redevelopment of Victorian strip centres and the replacement of diverse, interesting built environments with a single use in the form of medium- and high- rise residential apartments.
2.3 Green Wedges and the Urban Growth Boundary
Victoria’s and Melbourne’s green belt and rural zones – which includes Green Wedges – is under renewed threat. Labor’s original 2002 green belt policy, which intended to protect Green Wedges through an urban growth boundary (UGB) and strong non-urban zones, has been subverted three times by large scale expansions of the UGB. The Green Wedge zones are inappropriately allowing a wide range of uses such as schools, churches, accommodation, and commercial uses subject to some controls on minimum land and development size. The urban sprawl and low average densities in urban growth corridors is already threatening the UGB. Protecting Green Wedges preserves land for conservation, agriculture, and our future environmental health. The Port Phillip region is the state’s second most valuable agricultural area. Melbourne cannot afford to lose this economic and environmental asset. Melbourne’s future growth can fit into the designated urban growth corridors in the South-east, West and North, and within the existing metropolitan area; there is no need to develop the Green Wedges.
2.4 Broader Peri-Urban Zone
The broader peri-urban zone extends from the urban growth boundary to about 150 km from the CBD. The Rural Conservation Zone was originally the strongest rural zone applied in the green belt but is now the weakest because it allows a range of urban related uses without the restrictions which apply in the Green Wedge zone. Many other uses are allowed without the need for permits. Major problems arise from permissive controls within the Farming and Rural Conservation zones which allow a broad range of urban related uses; extensive existing land fragmentation from prior subdivision; inappropriate township development and expansion and the widespread misapplication of planning provisions to land. Residential zones in towns allow subdivision and multi-dwelling development. Subdivision is expanding township boundaries with the worst quality suburban type of development.
3.0 Environment and Heritage Protection
Heritage is a great economic and cultural asset. It is an important tourist drawcard. The great cities of Europe benefit enormously from tourists coming to see their heritage buildings and streetscapes. The maintenance and promotion of our heritage assets is an important part of our claims to be a liveable city.
The overriding objective of the 1987 Planning and Environment Act, when first legislated, was to protect the environment of urban, regional, and rural areas. High amenity places were maintained, by protecting valued natural and cultural assets such as historic areas, landscapes, and other natural features. This protection enhanced the liveability of places, protected important natural values, and attracted economic activity.
There is much rhetoric about protecting heritage but the discretionary and ambiguous nature of the planning scheme controls mean that heritage overlays, the main mechanism for protecting these assets, are undermined in three ways: their application is discretionary, the provisions are not quantified or measurable so open to interpretation, and even when a development doesn’t follow the decision guidelines it may be approved, e.g., retention of facades.
This Manifesto supports the State Government’s target to significantly reduce the state’s greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change is an enormous threat to all people and to cultural heritage, and biodiversity. The retention of trees and valuing their cooling effect on the urban heat island effect is vital. There is currently no specific urban heat policy or standards that address the underlying causes of heating, which means environmental assets, in particular, are often disregarded and undervalued despite the increasing risks associated with urban heating and climate change.
For Planning Schemes
The planning system must be redesigned to provide greater certainty, efficiency, and lower costs by: increasing the number of prohibitions for inappropriate uses and developments, providing mandatory and quantified criteria for assessing planning applications, allowing approvals without the need for permits only for minor matters, maintaining third party rights of notification, objection and appeal for all permits, and providing clear and unambiguous policy direction.
State and local policy, overlays and particular provisions must be rewritten to remove vague and contradictory language, provide clear direction, mandatory and quantified controls including the use of mandatory height controls and a policy framework rejecting high rise residential towers as a building model.
Local government must be given greater power to develop planning controls over local matters, including the development of policy, zoning, and other statutory provisions.
One planning system must operate for all users without the use of alternative planning pathways such as special state legislative control over precinct development or ‘fast tracking’ of applications through special standing advisory committees and ministerial decision making.
Ministerial intervention must be limited to matters of legitimate and statewide interest and such matters be clearly defined.
The current local responsibilities over planning scheme amendments defined in the Planning and Environment Act must be maintained.
Statutory measures in planning provisions must implement the emphasis in the Planning and Environment Act on the importance of environmental protection.
Planning provisions must provide special recognition of the importance of tree retention and vegetation regeneration in both urban and non-urban areas.
Development in flood-prone areas including areas likely to be inundated as a result of sea level rise must be prohibited.
Arbitrary government requirements on municipalities for growth must be abolished, and in their place, planning for growth be undertaken as a collaborative process jointly by the State Government, local government, local communities, and development interests based on the objective of matching possible development scale and types to land and neighbourhood characteristics.
For Affordable and Social Housing
Mandatory inclusionary zoning must be adopted for all multi-unit residential developments above three stories requiring at least 20 per cent of the development to be reserved for affordable housing.
For Residential Zones
The former Coalition government’s 2013 residential zones must be restored including lower mandatory height controls and a prohibition on multi-unit development in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone.
For Commercial, Activity Centre and Mixed-Use Zones
Zones or appropriate overlay and particular provision controls must include mandatory and quantified height, density, and design controls.
For all buildings in activity (shopping) centres constructed prior to 1939 (traditional strip shopping centres) in the C1, AC and MU zones, or a designated particular provision, must prohibit development above 11.5 metres and require a setback of 12 m for further developments.
For Urban Growth Zone and other Growth Area Planning Controls
Precinct Structure Plans must include mandatory quantified measures requiring sunlight access to housing; the highest housing energy efficiency rating; higher housing variability; average gross residential density of 25-40 dwellings/ha based on graduated housing types from low rise apartments close to activity centres and public transport to attached and detached housing types; street oriented activity centres; high walkability; accessible services; use of water sensitive design; and frequent public transport.
The Victorian Planning Authority must monitor and enforce compliance of new development to mandated measures and coordinate development with employment provision and other sectoral measures.
For Green Wedge and Rural Zones
The following uses currently permitted must be prohibited in all Green Wedge and Rural Zones: caravan park, exhibition centre, function centre, group accommodation, materials recycling, place of assembly, place of worship, primary school, research and development centre, research centre, residential building, residential hotel, restaurant, restricted place of assembly, secondary school, solid fuel depot.
The Green Wedge A Zone must be applied only to areas, such as the Dandenong Ranges, already subdivided into small rural residential lots not able to be protected by the residential zones.
The Urban Growth Boundary must be fixed, and the non-urban zones declared inviolate in legislation as declared conservation, agricultural and landscape areas.
Dwelling construction must be strictly limited to areas affected by existing land fragmentation through the use of minimum land sizes for dwelling construction, tenement controls and mandated restructure provisions.
The use of planning controls in Green Wedge and Rural Council planning schemes must be better matched to land characteristics.
Legislated urban growth boundaries must be applied to townships, similar to those applied to Yarra Valley townships and the Melbourne metropolitan area.
Areas of special significance must be declared low growth areas, limiting residential development in townships and on non-urban land, and planning controls be regulated to prevent substantial change to such regions.
For Heritage Protection
Provision of new open space and protection of existing open space and vegetated neighbourhoods and other urban areas must be given priority in redevelopment planning; a long-term plan should be implemented for bringing existing urban open space in private ownership into an expanded regional parkland network.
The heritage overlay must be rewritten to provide clear, quantified, and mandatory content, mandatory height controls, and where appropriate, development setbacks, placing primary emphasis on the need to protect both built and landscape heritage.
The use of the Heritage overlay must be better linked to the use of a revised Neighbourhood Residential zone which prohibits multi-unit development.
The Heritage Act must be rewritten to better protect precincts including those with altered streetscapes; recognise the value of remnant heritage in substantially altered streetscapes and landscapes; remove the recognition of financial viability in considering proposed developments; require effective maintenance of heritage value to prevent deterioration; and lessen the distinction between high and low heritage value.
The recognition and protection of built and natural heritage value must not require extensive justification and lengthy delays provided by complex and subjective studies of heritage value.
Protection of industrial heritage and reuse of industrial buildings must be given greater statutory recognition.
Facade development must be prevented through strong statutory protection of built heritage in its entirety and through measures such as heigh controls commensurate with existing building height.
For Transport Precincts and Construction
Modification of existing infrastructure must not drive the destruction of amenity, neighbourhood character and environmental values such as vegetated areas. Integrated land use-transport planning must be based on the efficient provision of public transport to new outer urban growth areas but respect the existing character and amenity of neighbourhoods when intensifying existing transport rich precincts.
Planning for precincts for Suburban Rail Loop stations, activity centres and centres nominated under the Regional Framework program must be undertaken using the normal planning system, including decision making by local government with full third-party rights.
Existing and proposed parkland must not be used for construction purposes or incorporated into the design and development of transport infrastructure.
Proposed new electrified rail services and extensive bus services must be provided to new growth suburbs and work commence on construction of Melbourne Metro 2.
Manifesto inadai kwamba mabadiliko makubwa ya mfumo wa mipango yanahitajika kudumisha na kuunda Victoria inayoweza kuishi. Hati hii hutoa Melbourne kama mfano muhimu wa masuala yanayokumba mfumo wa sasa wa mipango. Mawasilisho mengi kwa uchunguzi juu ya ulinzi ndani ya Mfumo wa Mipango ya Victoria kutoka Victoria yote yanaonyesha kuwa wasiwasi huu haujapunguzwa kwa Melbourne na haujashughulikiwa. "Manifesto hii inaelezea ujumbe wa kawaida na msimamo uliowekwa katika mawasilisho haya, ambayo ni muhimu ikiwa Victoria inabaki kuishi. """ Mfumo wa mipango unaowajibika ni wa kidemokrasia, unafahamu kijamii na unajibu mahitaji ya makazi wakati pia unatoa na kulinda starehe kwa wananchi wote. Melbourne ni mojawapo ya majiji makubwa ya enzi ya Victoria, lakini yanaharibiwa. Badala yake, aina mpya ya jiji inaendelezwa. Sehemu kubwa ya vitongoji vya pete ya ndani na ya kati zinabadilishwa kuwa vitalu vya ghorofa za juu na za kati, wakati makazi ya chini ya wiani yanatawala vijia vipya vya ukuaji wa mijini. Sehemu kubwa ya maendeleo haya ni kiwango kibaya zaidi ulimwenguni na itasababisha matatizo mengi ya kijamii, mazingira, na kiuchumi. Kiwango cha maendeleo hayo kinazidi kile cha majiji mengine mengi ya Magharibi. Maeneo mengi ya kikanda na vijijini pia yanakabiliwa na athari mbaya za ukuaji usioweza kudhibitiwa vizuri. Ulinzi wa mazingira ni hali ya lazima kwa ajili ya maendeleo endelevu ya kiuchumi na kijamii. Maeneo yenye starehe ya juu yalihifadhiwa, kwa kulinda mali zenye thamani za asili na za kitamaduni kama vile maeneo ya kihistoria, mandhari, na sifa nyingine za asili. Hata hivyo, mfumo wa mipango ya matumizi ya ardhi umekuwa hasa chombo, ukinyang'anya maadili ya starehe kwa faida ya muda mfupi ya wachache. Karatasi hiyo inachunguza masuala muhimu yanayotokana na mabadiliko ya haraka na ya msingi na inapendekeza hatua zilizobuniwa kuunda template kwa ajili ya hatua za serikali na serikali za mitaa kushughulikia masuala haya. "Wananchi wa Melbourne na maeneo ya jirani, tunatoa wito kwa serikali ya Jimbo kuwa sahihi na uwazi kuhusu sababu halisi za upungufu wa ugavi wa nyumba, bei ya juu ya nyumba, na upotezaji wa huduma na kuchukua hatua za kushughulikia sababu hizi. """ """Kampuni za ujenzi na taasisi za uchumi zinafanya kampeni ya propaganda kuhusu suala la makazi: wanadai kwamba ukosefu wa makazi ni sababu ya bei ya nyumba ya juu, wanalaumu wakazi na sheria za mipango, na wanatafuta kuondoa zaidi idhini ya makazi na kuondoa wakazi na serikali za mitaa kutoka mchakato wa idhini." Mahusiano kati ya ugavi mpya wa nyumba na idadi ya watu ni tata zaidi kuliko uhusiano rahisi wa mstari. Kuna aina nyingi tofauti za makazi na mipango ya kuishi ambayo inapingana na mkusanyiko wa vyumba vidogo na nyumba kubwa za kujitenga ambazo zinatawala soko la nyumba la Melbourne. Kufikia katikati ya 2022, Melbourne ilipanga na kuidhinisha ujenzi wa makazi ilihifadhiwa kwa kiwango cha juu ili kukidhi mahitaji. Mambo kadhaa yamepunguza ujenzi halisi wa nyumba. Hasa, idhini nyingi hazijafuatwa. Makao ya kukaa kwa muda mfupi yameondoa mali nyingi kutoka kwa usambazaji wa kukodisha kwa muda mrefu. Kuongezeka kwa viwango vya riba, kuongezeka kwa gharama za vifaa vya ujenzi na kazi, matatizo ya mlolongo wa usambazaji na kuongezeka kwa ushuru kwa wawekezaji kumesababisha kupungua kwa ujenzi wa nyumba hivi karibuni. Kanuni za mipango, upinzani wa wakazi na kukataa kwa halmashauri ya maombi haijazuia ugavi wa ardhi au makazi au kusababisha ongezeko la bei ya nyumba. Halmashauri za wilaya zinakubali zaidi ya asilimia 90 ya maombi yote ya mipango, na jukumu lao la kuwakilisha wakazi ni jambo muhimu kwa demokrasia ya uhuru inayofanya kazi. Kutumia maafisa na washauri wasiochaguliwa au kuipa mfumo wa mipango kwa sekta ya maendeleo inawakilisha tishio kubwa kwa maamuzi ya kidemokrasia. Serikali huamua eneo la ardhi kwa ajili ya maendeleo ya baadaye, lakini watengenezaji huamua ugavi wa nyumba kupitia wakati wa ujenzi na kutolewa kwa ardhi. Serikali ya Victoria imehakikisha usambazaji wa ardhi katika Melbourne, na karibu miaka 20 ya usambazaji sasa katika vijia vya nje vya ukuaji wa mijini. Lakini watengenezaji wanatafuta kuhakikisha kwamba ugavi wa ardhi hauwezi kuzidi mahitaji ya kutarajia, kupunguza chaguo na ushindani, na kudumisha faida kutoka kwa bei ya juu ya nyumba. Wao kushikilia nyuma ardhi, au ardhi-banki. Kwa mfano, kufikia mwaka wa 2022, Master Planned Community, Woodlea, imechukua zaidi ya miaka sita kutoa asilimia 25.1 tu, au 1,652 ya sehemu 6584, wakati jamii ya Manor Lakes bado ina asilimia 43 ya sehemu ambazo hazijatolewa baada ya miaka 16, licha ya idhini za mipango kutolewa. Watengenezaji wa nyumba pia huamua bidhaa za nyumba. Watengenezaji wa majengo hubadilisha ukubwa wa nyumba au vyumba, au uwiano wa nyumba na uwanja, ili kudumisha faida zao. Ukosefu wa makazi mbalimbali na ukubwa wa makazi mara nyingi hulazimisha wanunuzi wa nyumba mpya kulipa bei ya juu kwa ajili ya makazi wao si kupendelea. Kwa wanunuzi wengi, uchaguzi ni kuwasilishwa kati ya ndogo, duni iliyoundwa na kujengwa moja au mbili chumba cha kulala vyumba katika mji imara au kubwa kujitenga mpya nje ya mijini makazi na huduma mbaya zaidi ya mijini. Ukosefu huu wa chaguo unalazimisha mikopo ya nyumba ya juu isiyo ya lazima kwa wanunuzi wengi wapya wa nyumba, na kuweka shinikizo kubwa kwenye bajeti za kaya. Mfumo dhaifu wa sera ya serikali inaruhusu watengenezaji kuamua mpangilio wa mgawanyiko, aina ya makazi, muundo wa kituo cha rejareja na eneo la huduma kwa maendeleo yote mapya ya njia ya ukuaji. Ingawa vitongoji vipya vya nje vina asilimia 44 ya idadi ya watu wa Melbourne, reli nzito ya uwezo mkubwa hufikia asilimia 4 tu ya vitongoji hivi. Hii inaonyesha matokeo ya watengenezaji kupuuza umuhimu wa starehe juu ya faida. Ujenzi wa makazi ya bei nafuu na ya kijamii (MPAH) ni mbinu ya udhibiti inayotumiwa kuelezea mahitaji ya huduma mbalimbali za umma, ikiwa ni pamoja na makazi ya bei nafuu, kama sehemu ya mchakato wa idhini ya maendeleo. Mpangilio wa lazima wa eneo la kujumuisha umetumika nchini Marekani kwa miji zaidi ya 500 na kaunti kutoka mwanzoni mwa miaka ya 1970. Kwa mujibu wa mpango huu, watengenezaji wa ujenzi wanatakiwa kutoa sehemu ya maendeleo mapya ya makazi ya nyumba ya mapato ya chini na ya wastani, kwa kawaida kati ya 10 hadi 25%, wakati mwingine na bonasi za ukaribu wa hiari. Mbinu nyingine za kupata faida za umma kutoka kwa idhini za maendeleo ni pamoja na kukamata thamani, kama vile ushuru wa uboreshaji, ambao unahitaji watengenezaji kuchangia fedha kwa Halmashauri za Mitaa kwa matumizi yao kwa hiari yao kwa manufaa ya umma kwa ujumla. Ingawa hakukuwa na upungufu wa idhini za makazi hadi hivi karibuni, Serikali ya Jimbo imeshindwa kuhakikisha usambazaji wa kutosha wa nyumba za bei nafuu na za kijamii. Ikiwa eneo la ujumuishaji lingetumika katika ujenzi wa nyumba za Melbourne tangu 2005, karibu vyumba 40,000 vya makazi ya bei nafuu, kwa asilimia 25 ya idhini zote, vingeweza kupatikana kwa kaya za mapato ya chini na ya wastani. Utoaji wa nyumba za kijamii kwa wakazi wenye mapato ya chini zaidi pia umepuuzwa. Serikali ya Jimbo haitaji nyumba yoyote ya kijamii au ya bei nafuu katika maendeleo mapya ya sekta binafsi, bila kujali kama kuna ongezeko la urefu, wiani, au thamani ya ardhi. Ukosefu wa udhibiti umesababisha faida kubwa kwa watengenezaji wa ujenzi kwa kuzuia mamlaka za umma kupata faida ya umma kutoka kwa ongezeko kubwa la urefu wa ujenzi, wiani na thamani ya ardhi. Miongoni mwa miradi hiyo, kampuni ya Melbourne ya ujenzi imeanza kuendeleza ujenzi wa majengo ya juu ya majengo ya juu ya majengo ya Melbourne tangu mwaka 2005. "Miongoni mwa mambo ya kuvutia zaidi ni ""NIMBYs"" - wakazi wenye ubinafsi - na kukataliwa kwa Halmashauri ya Mitaa kumezuia makazi mapya, ikiwa ni pamoja na makazi ya bei nafuu, katika vitongoji vya pete ya kati." Vivyo hivyo, sheria za ugawaji wa maeneo zinashutumiwa kwa kuzuia ugavi katika vitongoji vya pete ya kati na kuongezeka kwa bei za nyumba. Lakini masimulizi yote mawili ni ya uwongo. Kuanzia mwaka 2010 hadi 2021, idhini za ujenzi wa pete ya kati kwa nyumba za ghorofa za juu na za chini na nyumba za mji - karibu 200,000 - zilikuwa karibu 80% zaidi kuliko idhini za ghorofa za juu za eneo la ndani, na karibu sawa na idadi ya idhini mpya katika njia za ukuaji wa mijini. Hakuna ukosefu wa nyumba mpya katika vitongoji vya pete ya kati, au "kati inayokosekana", katika ukuaji wa ujenzi wa nyumba za Melbourne. Serikali ya Jimbo tayari imeanza mchakato wa kuharibu uwezo wa Halmashauri za kusimamia mamlaka zao kwa: kuondoa mamlaka ya mipango ya kimkakati na ya kisheria ya Halmashauri kutoka kwa vituo vyote vya Suburban Loop, kuanzisha mfumo wa "kuchunguza" kuchukua nafasi ya mahitaji ya vibali vya maendeleo ya wiani wa kati chini ya ResCode, ambayo inazuia wakazi kutoka kuarifiwa, kupinga au kukata rufaa, kuondoa mahitaji ya aina ya vibali katika Green Wedges kwa kuwaruhusu kuwa na haki ya kuondoa kibali, na kufuatilia haraka zaidi ya kibali cha nyumba 100,000 katika maeneo ya ukuaji. Katika kila moja ya mifano ya juu, haki za mtu wa tatu zinaondolewa, na kwa hiyo maoni ya wakazi huondolewa kutoka kwa mchakato. Hii si ya kidemokrasia. Kwa kuongezea, wakazi na Halmashauri zinaondolewa zaidi kutoka kwa maamuzi yote ya kuondoa udhibiti wa mipango ya matumizi ya ardhi iliyobaki. Mfumo wa sasa wa mipango ni moja ya deregulated ikilinganishwa na moja ambayo kutumika kwa Melbourne kutoka 1954 hadi 1999. Mfumo wa deregulated zaidi ulianzishwa katika miaka ya 1990 na serikali ya Kennett, wazi kukuza maendeleo na kupunguza udhibiti wa mitaa. Mifumo ya mipango ya deregulated kuchochea watengenezaji bid juu ya bei ya ardhi na daima kuongeza urefu wa ujenzi na wiani wa kulipia gharama zao. Kwa hiyo, nyakati nyingine bei za nyumba zimepanda pamoja na ongezeko la nyumba. Katika Australia, udhibiti wa matumizi ya ardhi ya kuruhusu, ikiwa ni pamoja na kutokuwepo kwa udhibiti wa urefu na wiani wa lazima, ukosefu wa mahitaji ya kutosha ya zoning ya ujumuishaji, na kushindwa kutekeleza matumizi yaliyokatazwa kwa usahihi katika vipimo vya zoning, imekuwa sababu kuu ya kukuza ushindani wa msanidi ardhi na kuongezeka kwa bei ya ardhi. Kwa sababu ya idadi ya majengo ya ghorofa na mnara wa juu na bei ya ghorofa ya juu, udhibiti wa urefu wa hiari umepuuzwa katika theluthi mbili ya maombi tangu 1999 katika Melbourne CBD. Udhibiti wa urefu na wiani hutoa uhakika katika mipango na kuzuia mchakato wa muda mwingi na wa gharama kubwa wa upinzani ambao karibu bila shaka husababisha athari mbaya kwa jamii na mji. Ukosefu wa udhibiti wa urefu wa lazima katika eneo la mji mkuu, eneo la kibiashara la 1 na eneo la matumizi mchanganyiko, hasa, umetoa sehemu kubwa ya mji kwa maslahi ya maendeleo. Kampuni nyingi za utafiti wa kiuchumi zimetambua kuwa kuongezeka kwa viwango vya riba, kuongezeka kwa gharama za vifaa vya ujenzi na kazi, matatizo ya mlolongo wa usambazaji na kuongezeka kwa ushuru kwa wawekezaji kumesababisha kupungua kwa hivi karibuni kwa ujenzi wa nyumba. Sababu kama hizo - si mipango ya mipango au uingiliaji wa wakazi na serikali za mitaa katika idhini - ni sababu nyingine kuu ya kuongezeka kwa bei ya nyumba. Eneo pia ni jambo muhimu linaloathiri bei ya nyumba. Bei ya juu ya ardhi katika vitongoji vya ndani na kati vya pete haisababishwi na vizuizi vya zoning kwenye nyumba mpya. Hizi ni maeneo ambapo sheria za mipango ni dhaifu. Ujenzi wa nyumba mpya huko umesababishwa na kuvutia kwa kuishi karibu na CBD na huduma katika vitongoji vya hali ya juu. Sera ya serikali ya kifedha na fedha - si sheria za matumizi ya ardhi - imekuwa sababu muhimu ya kuchangia kuongezeka kwa thamani ya ardhi. "Msaada wa serikali kwa makazi, viwango vya chini vya riba vya kihistoria pamoja na ukosefu wa udhibiti wa prudential na Benki ya Hifadhi, gearing hasi, kodi ya chini ya faida ya mtaji, idadi kubwa ya uhamiaji, na ununuzi wa makazi na wawekezaji wa kigeni wamekuwa wachangiaji wakuu katika karne hii kwa makazi kuwa ""kuchukuliwa kama uwekezaji na sio kama mahali pa kuishi.""" """Madhara ya sera za kifedha na fedha ni wazi juu ya masuala haya yote, lakini serikali za Jumuiya ya Madola na Serikali za Jimbo zinakataa kutumia mamlaka yao kupunguza athari mbaya za mambo kama hayo kwenye bei za nyumba." Hata hivyo, ni muhimu kwamba sababu halisi za ongezeko la bei ya nyumba zinatambuliwa na kwamba sheria za mipango na haki za wakazi hazishukiwi bila haki. "Kabla ya hapo, ""Mkoa wa Makazi ya Jirani,"" pamoja na matumizi ya ""Utekelezaji wa Urithi,"" ulilinda urithi wa makazi ya kabla ya Vita vya Pili vya Ulimwengu, haswa katika vitongoji vya ndani na vya kati vya pete." Udhibiti wa urefu katika Eneo la Makazi ya Jumla pia ilitumika kuboresha ubora wa maendeleo. Serikali ya Labour iliongeza udhibiti wa urefu wa makazi ulioletwa na serikali ya muungano mnamo 2013, na kuongeza kikomo cha urefu wa lazima na kuondoa marufuku ya maendeleo ya vitengo vingi katika eneo la makazi ya jirani. Jambo hilo limesababisha uharibifu mkubwa wa nyumba za kale. "Mashirika ya wafanyakazi ya Melbourne yamekataa kuidhinisha ""kuweka udhibiti wa urefu"" katika maeneo ya biashara, kituo cha shughuli na maeneo ya matumizi ya mchanganyiko katika vituo vya biashara vya Melbourne." Hata hivyo, "viwango vya juu vinavyopendekezwa" kwa kawaida ni vya juu sana na bado vinazidiwa au kupuuzwa. Ukosefu wa mipaka ya urefu huchangia moja kwa moja kuongezeka kwa bei ya ardhi, kwani ushindani wa wajenzi wa ardhi unahitaji maendeleo ya juu zaidi ili kulipia gharama ya uwekezaji katika ardhi. Kwa kuongezea, maeneo haya ni ya kuruhusu sana na matumizi machache yaliyokatazwa. Matokeo ni maendeleo ya maendeleo ya vituo vya Victorian na kubadilisha mazingira ya kujengwa ya kuvutia na ya matumizi moja katika fomu ya ghorofa za makazi za kati na za juu. 2.3 Green Wedges na Mipaka ya Ukuaji wa Miji Victoria na Melbourne's green belt na maeneo ya vijijini <unk> ambayo ni pamoja na Green Wedges <unk> ni chini ya tishio upya. Mkataba wa kwanza wa chama cha Labour wa Green Belt ulianzishwa mwaka 2002 na kuimarisha mipaka ya ukuaji wa mijini (UGB) na kuimarisha maeneo yasiyo ya mijini, lakini umepigwa marufuku mara tatu na upanuzi mkubwa wa UGB. "Mashamba ya ""Green Wedge"" yanaruhusu matumizi mbalimbali kama vile shule, makanisa, makazi, na matumizi ya kibiashara chini ya udhibiti fulani juu ya ardhi ya chini na ukubwa wa maendeleo." Kuongezeka kwa miji na wastani wa chini wa watu katika njia za ukuaji wa mijini tayari zinatishia UGB. Kulinda Green Wedges huhifadhi ardhi kwa ajili ya uhifadhi, kilimo, na afya yetu ya mazingira ya baadaye. Mkoa wa Port Phillip ni eneo la pili la kilimo lenye thamani zaidi katika jimbo hilo. Melbourne haiwezi kupoteza mali hii ya kiuchumi na mazingira. Melbourne inaendelea kuendeleza maendeleo yake katika maeneo ya Kusini Mashariki, Magharibi na Kaskazini, na katika eneo la mji mkuu; hakuna haja ya kuendeleza Green Wedges. Eneo la karibu na mijini linaenea kutoka mpaka wa ukuaji wa mijini hadi karibu kilomita 150 kutoka CBD. Eneo la Uhifadhi la Vijijini lilikuwa eneo la kijijini lenye nguvu zaidi katika ukanda wa kijani lakini sasa ni dhaifu zaidi kwa sababu inaruhusu matumizi mbalimbali yanayohusiana na mijini bila vizuizi vinavyotumika katika eneo la Green Wedge. Matumizi mengine mengi huruhusiwa bila uhitaji wa vibali. Matatizo makubwa yanatokana na udhibiti wa kuruhusu ndani ya maeneo ya kilimo na uhifadhi wa vijijini ambayo inaruhusu aina mbalimbali za matumizi ya mijini; kugawanyika kwa ardhi iliyopo kutoka kwa mgawanyiko wa awali; maendeleo na upanuzi usiofaa wa mji na matumizi mabaya ya mipango ya ardhi. Maeneo ya makazi katika miji kuruhusu mgawanyiko na maendeleo ya makazi mengi. Mgawanyiko ni kupanua mipaka ya township na aina mbaya zaidi ya maendeleo ya vitongoji. Ulinzi wa mazingira na urithi ni mali kubwa ya kiuchumi na kitamaduni. Ni mahali muhimu pa kutembelewa na watalii. Majiji makubwa ya Ulaya hufaidika sana kutokana na watalii wanaokuja kuona majengo yao ya urithi na mandhari ya barabara. Uhifadhi na kukuza mali zetu za urithi ni sehemu muhimu ya madai yetu ya kuwa mji mzuri wa kuishi. Sheria ya Mpango na Mazingira ya 1987 ilianzishwa mwaka 1987 ili kuimarisha mazingira ya mijini, vijijini na vijijini. Maeneo yenye starehe ya juu yalihifadhiwa, kwa kulinda mali zenye thamani za asili na za kitamaduni kama vile maeneo ya kihistoria, mandhari, na sifa nyingine za asili. Ulinzi huo uliongeza uwezo wa kuishi katika maeneo hayo, ulilinda maadili muhimu ya asili, na kuvutia shughuli za kiuchumi. Kuna mengi ya hotuba kuhusu kulinda urithi, lakini tabia ya hiari na ambiguous ya udhibiti wa mpango wa mipango ina maana kwamba urithi overlays, utaratibu kuu kwa ajili ya kulinda mali hizi, ni undermined kwa njia tatu: matumizi yao ni hiari, masharti si quantified au kupimwa hivyo wazi kwa tafsiri, na hata wakati maendeleo haifuati miongozo ya uamuzi inaweza kupitishwa, kwa mfano, kuhifadhi facades. Manifesto hii inasaidia lengo la Serikali ya Jimbo la kupunguza kwa kiasi kikubwa uzalishaji wa gesi za chafu za jimbo. Mabadiliko ya hali ya hewa ni tishio kubwa kwa watu wote na kwa urithi wa kitamaduni, na utofauti wa kibiolojia. Kuhifadhi miti na kuthamini athari yao ya baridi juu ya athari ya kisiwa cha joto cha mijini ni muhimu. Kwa sasa hakuna sera maalum ya joto la mijini au viwango vinavyoshughulikia sababu za msingi za joto, ambayo inamaanisha mali za mazingira, haswa, mara nyingi hupuuzwa na kupunguzwa thamani licha ya hatari zinazozidi kuongezeka zinazohusiana na joto la mijini na mabadiliko ya hali ya hewa. Mfumo wa mipango lazima uandaliwe upya ili kutoa uhakika zaidi, ufanisi, na gharama za chini kwa kuongeza idadi ya marufuku kwa matumizi yasiyofaa na maendeleo, kutoa vigezo vya lazima na vya kiasi kwa ajili ya tathmini ya maombi ya mipango, kuruhusu idhini bila haja ya vibali kwa mambo madogo tu, kudumisha haki za tatu za taarifa, upinzani na rufaa kwa vibali vyote, na kutoa mwelekeo wa sera wazi na wazi. """Sera za serikali na za mitaa, overlays na masharti maalum lazima yaandaliwe upya ili kuondoa lugha isiyoeleweka na yenye kupingana, kutoa mwelekeo wazi, udhibiti wa lazima na wa kiasi, pamoja na matumizi ya udhibiti wa urefu wa lazima na mfumo wa sera ya kukataa minara ya makazi ya juu kama mfano wa ujenzi." Serikali za mitaa zinapaswa kupewa mamlaka zaidi ya kuendeleza udhibiti wa mipango juu ya masuala ya mitaa, ikiwa ni pamoja na maendeleo ya sera, zoning, na masharti mengine ya kisheria. Mfumo mmoja wa mipango lazima ufanye kazi kwa watumiaji wote bila kutumia njia mbadala za mipango kama vile udhibiti maalum wa kisheria wa serikali juu ya maendeleo ya wilaya au "kufuatilia haraka" kwa maombi kupitia kamati maalum za ushauri za kudumu na maamuzi ya wizara. Uingiliaji wa wizara lazima uepukike kwa masuala ya maslahi halali na ya serikali nzima na masuala kama hayo yanapaswa kufafanuliwa wazi. Wajibu wa sasa wa mitaa juu ya marekebisho ya mpango wa mipango iliyofafanuliwa katika Sheria ya Mipango na Mazingira lazima ihifadhiwe. Hatua za kisheria katika masharti ya mipango lazima kutekeleza msisitizo katika Sheria ya Mipango na Mazingira juu ya umuhimu wa ulinzi wa mazingira. Sheria za mipango lazima kutoa utambuzi maalum wa umuhimu wa kuhifadhi miti na mimea upya katika maeneo ya mijini na nje ya mijini. Maendeleo katika maeneo ya mafuriko, ikiwa ni pamoja na maeneo ambayo yanaweza kufurika kwa sababu ya kuongezeka kwa kiwango cha bahari, lazima marufuku. """Madai ya serikali ya kukata tamaa juu ya ukuaji lazima yaondolewe, na badala yake, mipango ya ukuaji lazima ifanywe kama mchakato wa ushirikiano pamoja na Serikali ya Jimbo, Serikali za Mitaa, Jumuiya za Mitaa, na maslahi ya maendeleo kulingana na lengo la kulinganisha kiwango cha uwezekano wa maendeleo na aina ya ardhi na sifa za jirani." Kwa ajili ya makazi ya bei nafuu na ya kijamii, zoning ya lazima ya ujumuishaji lazima itumike kwa maendeleo yote ya makazi ya vitengo vingi juu ya ghorofa tatu, ikihitaji angalau asilimia 20 ya maendeleo kuhifadhiwa kwa nyumba za bei nafuu. "Mapendekezo ya serikali ya muungano wa zamani ya 2013 ""maeneo ya makazi"" lazima kurudishwa ikiwa ni pamoja na udhibiti wa urefu wa lazima wa chini na marufuku ya maendeleo ya vitengo vingi katika eneo la makazi ya jirani." Kwa ajili ya kibiashara, kituo cha shughuli na mchanganyiko-matumizi maeneo au overlay sahihi na udhibiti maalum utoaji lazima ni pamoja na lazima na quantified urefu, wiani, na kubuni udhibiti. Kwa majengo yote ya shughuli (maeneo ya ununuzi) yaliyojengwa kabla ya 1939 (maeneo ya ununuzi ya jadi) katika maeneo ya C1, AC na MU, au masharti maalum ya kuagiza, lazima marufuku maendeleo zaidi ya mita 11.5 na kuhitaji kurudi nyuma ya mita 12 kwa maendeleo zaidi. Kwa ajili ya maeneo ya ukuaji wa mijini na maeneo mengine ya ukuaji, mipango ya muundo wa wilaya lazima ijumuishe hatua za lazima za kupima zinazohitaji upatikanaji wa jua kwa makazi; kiwango cha juu cha ufanisi wa nishati ya makazi; tofauti ya makazi ya wastani ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi ya makazi. Mamlaka ya Mpango ya Victoria lazima iangalie na kutekeleza kufuata kwa maendeleo mapya kwa hatua zilizoamriwa na kuratibu maendeleo na utoaji wa ajira na hatua nyingine za sekta. Matumizi yafuatayo yanayoruhusiwa sasa lazima yaepushwe katika maeneo yote ya kijani kibichi na vijijini: Hifadhi ya caravan, kituo cha maonyesho, kituo cha kazi, makazi ya kikundi, vifaa vya kuchakata, mahali pa mkusanyiko, mahali pa ibada, shule ya msingi, kituo cha utafiti na maendeleo, kituo cha utafiti, jengo la makazi, hoteli ya makazi, mkahawa, mahali pa mkusanyiko uliofungwa, shule ya sekondari, ghala la mafuta. "Zoni ya ""Green Wedge A"" inapaswa kutumika tu kwa maeneo kama vile Dandenong Ranges, ambayo tayari imegawanywa katika sehemu ndogo za makazi ya vijijini ambazo haziwezi kulindwa na maeneo ya makazi." Mpaka wa Ukuaji wa Miji lazima uamuliwe, na maeneo yasiyo ya mijini yatangazwa kuwa yasiyoharibiwa katika sheria kama maeneo yaliyotangazwa ya uhifadhi, kilimo na mandhari. Ujenzi wa makazi lazima uelekezwe kwa maeneo yaliyoathiriwa na mgawanyiko wa ardhi uliopo kwa kutumia ukubwa wa chini wa ardhi kwa ujenzi wa makazi, udhibiti wa kukodisha na masharti ya marekebisho ya kuagiza. Matumizi ya udhibiti wa mipango katika Green Wedge na Rural Council mipango ya mipango lazima bora mechi kwa sifa za ardhi. Mipaka ya ukuaji wa mijini ya kisheria lazima itumike kwa miji, sawa na zile zinazotumika kwa miji ya Bonde la Yarra na eneo la mji mkuu wa Melbourne. Maeneo ya umuhimu maalum lazima yatangazwe kuwa maeneo ya ukuaji wa chini, kupunguza maendeleo ya makazi katika miji na kwenye ardhi isiyo ya mijini, na udhibiti wa mipango lazima ufuatwe ili kuzuia mabadiliko makubwa katika mikoa hiyo. Utoaji wa nafasi mpya ya wazi na ulinzi wa nafasi ya wazi iliyopo na vitongoji vya mimea na maeneo mengine ya mijini lazima vipe kipaumbele katika mipango ya ujenzi; mpango wa muda mrefu unapaswa kutekelezwa kwa kuleta nafasi ya wazi ya mijini iliyopo katika umiliki wa kibinafsi katika mtandao wa mbuga za mkoa. "Kupitia ""kuandika upya"" kwa urithi, lazima utoe maudhui ya wazi, ya kiasi, na ya lazima, udhibiti wa urefu wa lazima, na, inapofaa, mapungufu ya maendeleo, na kuweka msisitizo wa msingi juu ya haja ya kulinda urithi wa kujengwa na mazingira." Matumizi ya Urithi overlay lazima kuwa bora kushikamana na matumizi ya marekebisho ya Jirani Residential eneo ambalo inakataza maendeleo ya vitengo vingi. Sheria ya Urithi inapaswa kuandikwa upya ili kulinda vizuri maeneo, ikiwa ni pamoja na wale walio na barabara zilizobadilishwa; kutambua thamani ya urithi wa mabaki katika barabara zilizobadilishwa na mazingira; kuondoa utambuzi wa ufanisi wa kifedha katika kuzingatia maendeleo yaliyopendekezwa; kuhitaji utunzaji wa thamani ya urithi ili kuzuia uharibifu; na kupunguza tofauti kati ya thamani ya urithi ya juu na ya chini. Kutambuliwa na ulinzi wa thamani ya urithi wa ujenzi na asili haipaswi kuhitaji uthibitisho mkubwa na ucheleweshaji mrefu unaotolewa na masomo tata na ya kibinafsi ya thamani ya urithi. Ulinzi wa urithi wa viwanda na matumizi ya majengo ya viwanda lazima yatambuliwe zaidi kisheria. Maendeleo ya facade lazima kuzuiwa kwa njia ya ulinzi wa kisheria wa nguvu wa urithi uliojengwa kwa ukamilifu wake na kwa njia ya hatua kama vile udhibiti wa urefu unaolingana na urefu wa jengo la sasa. """Ubadilishaji wa miundombinu iliyopo haipaswi kuendesha uharibifu wa huduma, tabia ya jirani na maadili ya mazingira kama vile maeneo ya mimea." Mpango wa ushirikiano wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri wa usafiri. Mpango wa maeneo ya vituo vya Suburban Rail Loop, vituo vya shughuli na vituo vilivyochaguliwa chini ya Programu ya Mfumo wa Mkoa lazima ufanye kwa kutumia mfumo wa kawaida wa mipango, ikiwa ni pamoja na maamuzi ya serikali ya mitaa na haki kamili za mtu wa tatu. Hifadhi zilizopo na zilizopendekezwa hazipaswi kutumiwa kwa madhumuni ya ujenzi au kuingizwa katika kubuni na maendeleo ya miundombinu ya usafiri. Mipango ya reli mpya na huduma za basi za umeme zinapaswa kutolewa kwa vitongoji vipya vya ukuaji na kazi ya kuanza ujenzi wa Melbourne Metro 2.