Archive:   Amendment C64 - Gaming Policy

Last Updated  7/10/11

 

 

Amendment C64 Puts New Requirements In Place For Pokies In Macedon Ranges

(11/7/11 - P)  But more work to be done as Council didn't get all it asked for

In Amendment C64, Macedon Ranges Council attempted to back up its earlier gaming policy by making it clear where gaming machines are prohibited, and where they are 'discouraged', in the Shire.  To do this, Council prepared maps of both prohibited and 'discouraged' areas in towns, and asked for them to be incorporated in the planning scheme.  However, at the panel hearing for the amendment it was argued by those opposing Council's changes (predominantly those with interests in gaming machines) that this was unfair, and that 'discouraged' areas were de facto prohibited areas.  Panel members Lester Townsend, Chair and Trevor McCullough, Member, recommended the maps be removed, and references to them be replaced by a generic statement that gaming machines are prohibited in "strip shopping areas" throughout the Shire. 

 

This means the Shire has to rely on the State definition of 'Strip Shopping Centre' to decide whether or not gaming machines are prohibited.

 

While the Panel did not support including Council's maps, it did indicate that a "buffer" of 'discouraged' areas (areas where gaming machines are discouraged) "is perhaps an easier concept to support in terms of its strategic justification" but said that it could not be entertained as part of Amendment C64 (i.e. it would need to be run as a new amendment). 

 

The Panel's report went to Council on 9 May 2011, and the Panel Report's recommendations have now been adopted by Council.  The amendment now needs to be finalized for Ministerial approval and gazettal.

 

You can access the exhibited documentation and panel report for Amendment C64 by going to 'Macedon Ranges' at Planning Scheme Amendments Online:

http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/Shared/ats.nsf/WebViewDisplay?OpenForm&M&Macedon%20Ranges;Manningham;Mansfield;Maribyrnong;Maroondah;Melbourne;Melton;Mildura;Mitchell;Moira;Monash;Moonee%20Valley;Moorabool;Moreland;Mornington%20Peninsula;Mount%20Alexander;Moyne;Murrindindi;   Go to M for Macedon Ranges and then click on the amendment number (e.g. C64). 

 

MRRA Says:

 

It seems that Council has attempted to provide the Macedon Ranges' community with a high level of protection from the scourge of gaming machines, but its actions were seen as a step too far within the current Victorian planning system.  Nevertheless, the changes that will go into the planning scheme will still work towards achieving higher standard outcomes than have occurred in the past.

 

The worry MRRA has is the Shire's dependency on the State definition of "strip shopping centre", which we believe has a metropolitan bias that disadvantages rural communities.  The sticking point in the definition is the third dot point:

"it [strip shopping centre] is an area in which a significant proportion of the buildings are shops;"

This requirement was interpreted by then President of VCAT, Justice Stuart Morris, in his November 2009 decision to approve poker machines in Romsey, as meaning only buildings which are built as shops count in determining whether an area is a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited.  That is, whether or not pokies are prohibited (because the area is a strip shopping centre) hinges on the type of structure or building, not whether a business is being conducted.  For example, under the present definition a retail business using a former bank or post office wouldn't be counted as being a 'shop', and buildings used as offices also don't seem to count. In his 2009 decision, Justice Morris stated he would not regard a restaurant as a shop, and described a part of Romsey as follows: 

34 Immediately to the north of the subject land is a municipal complex, consisting of offices, other community services and a car park; and these are (in large part) in a Public Use Zone, not a business zone.

 To the north of the council complex, there is a shop building which has two uses: a fast food outlet and a real estate agency.

 Further to the north there is an office style building which is used by an agricultural business.

 Yet further to the north is a dwelling, used as an accountant’s office.

 And then, a building which is used as a saddlery.

 And to its north, there is a vacant lot; and then a brick commercial building, used as an estate agent’s office, which also fronts the side road Stawell Street.

I cannot find that the area on the east side of the main road, between Stawell Street and Woodend Wallan Road, is, or is part of, an area that is a strip shopping centre.  In this area there is not a significant proportion of buildings that are shops. 

Justice Morris only identified one of 6 buildings as being a shop.

 

The whole point of the State definition is to identify areas likely to be frequented by pedestrians (who may be enticed into gaming machine venues if located nearby), and prohibit gaming machines in those areas. But the current definition, and Justice Morris' interpretation, specifically recognise and count only shop buildings (not buildings that are used for shops or other business/commercial purposes) as having the ability to attract pedestrians.  In MRRA's view, this unfairly fails to recognize the complexity and diversity that typically characterize a rural town, and how small towns function. Vacant land, Shire offices and commercial and retail businesses in buildings other than purpose-built shops are commonplace.  And they are all fundamental elements of the place people go to for their every day needs: their town centre.

 

Alarm bells rang when we noted that an argument was put at the Amendment C64 panel hearing that although the Supreme Court and VCAT subsequently overturned Justice Morris' 2009 decision, his interpretation of strip shopping centre remained valid. 

 

When MRRA met the Minister for Planning on June 22, we raised this and the inherent bias against rural areas in the current definition with him, and asked for the State definition of strip shopping centre to be changed to recognise the differences between strip shopping centres in Melbourne and town centres in rural areas.