Author: clause1

Congratulations to Ashley Thompson Director of Clause 1 Planning who was honoured at the Design Matters Annual Awards Ceremony in Melbourne with a Life Time Membership for services to Town Planning

Planning Scheme Amendment VC289 came into force on 15 September 2025. The amendment creates a new Clause 52.37 (Canopy Trees) provision.

Restrictive covenants have long been registered on land titles as a means of controlling land use and development. Some of the most common covenants, applicants seek to remove (or vary), are ‘single dwelling’ restrictions that prohibit development of land with more than one dwelling.

In late 2018, under Amendment VC149, the State Government changed Clauses 54 and 55 and included new Decision Guidelines requiring consideration of the impact of overshadowing from new development, on existing rooftop solar energy systems, on neighbouring lots in residential zones.

he State Government has recently released two new Planning Practice notes that provide practitioners with interesting insight in how Council planners are encouraged to apply neighbourhood character considerations and assess application for change.

In July 2019 The Age newspaper published an article concerning the decline of trees in Metropolitan Melbourne, using research findings from a study by RMIT University. The article reported that in the 5 years between 2014 and 2018, a total of approximately 2000 hectares of tree cover was lost from the city.

Can a large development site, made up of multiple small lots, utilise the ‘small lot exemptions’ contained in the Aboriginal Heritage regulations? This question was put to VCAT in Hartland Group Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC [2018] VCAT 1722 VCAT. The following provides a summary of the Tribunal’s findings:

Once again, at this time of year Councils across the state will implement ‘blackout periods’, restricting the advertising of planning applications over the holiday season. The dates and restrictions of the ‘blackouts’ vary significantly from Council to Council.

Clause 1 recently provided readers with the findings of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) in relation to what constituted “a lot”, when calculating the total Garden area. The decision in Clayton Gardens Pty Ltd v Monash CC [2019] VCAT 1138 found that:

In Makhmalbaf v Monash CC [2018] VCAT 1641 the Tribunal considered a proposal for two dwellings on one lot. The Monash Planning Scheme designated the site within the boundaries of the Glen Waverley Activity Centre, whereas the zone and local planning policies sought to treat the site in the same manner as other residential neighbourhoods, far removed from an activity centre.