Grange Planning Brain

title: Amendment C106gpla - Growing Places Strategy Implementation council: golden-plains state: vic category: amendment classification: MAJOR status: active last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:

  • Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf
  • Item 7.2 Attachment - Planning Scheme Amendment - Growing Places Strategy - 26.05.2026.pdf
  • C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx
  • Growing Places Strategy - A Plan for Growth - Golden Plains Shire Council
  • Investment Prospectus 24 FINAL V2.pdf
  • GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf
  • Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf
  • GPS Fact Sheet_Growth in Our Region.pdf

Amendment C106gpla - Growing Places Strategy Implementation

Amendment C106gpla is the statutory translation of Golden Plains Shire’s shire-wide Growing Places Strategy into the Golden Plains Planning Scheme, and its planning effect is to move growth management from older township-by-township structure plans toward a municipal growth sequence centred on Bannockburn, then conditional investigation of Meredith, Lethbridge, Teesdale, Cambrian Hill and Stonehaven (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). The amendment matters because it is the mechanism Council is using to show how Golden Plains can plan for the state housing target of 12,500 new houses by 2051 while filtering growth through infrastructure capacity, bushfire risk, flood risk, agricultural land protection, cultural heritage and transport constraints (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.29).

Background

Golden Plains has not had municipal-wide housing growth policy of this scale for roughly three decades: the explanatory report says the Growing Places Strategy is the first time in 30 years that housing growth has been considered at a municipal-wide level following the 1996 Golden Plains Land Use Strategy and later township structure plans (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). The Department of Transport and Planning advised Council in 2021 that a shire-wide settlement strategy should precede further township structure plan reviews, and Council discontinued the word settlement for this project after Eastern Maar advised that the term was culturally inappropriate (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The growth pressure is regional rather than only local. The Housing Needs Assessment found that Golden Plains’ population growth rate increased from 2.3% per year in 2001-2006 to 3.0% per year in 2011-2016, then eased to an estimated 2.4% per year in 2016-2021, with Geelong and Ballarat growth identified as the continuing driver of housing demand in the shire (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.5-7). The 2023 growth fact sheet translated the issue for the community as a choice between planned growth and unmanaged pressure: Victoria in Future implied about 9,950 extra people from 2021 to 2036, while the independent Housing Needs Assessment indicated higher pressure of about 3.1% per year or about 15,000 extra people in the same period (Source: GPS Fact Sheet_Growth in Our Region.pdf, p.1).

Council adopted the Growing Places Strategy at its June 2025 Council Meeting and resolved to seek approval from the Minister for Planning to prepare, authorise and exhibit the amendment (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.11). The Minister authorised exhibition in mid-December 2025 with conditions largely about terminology, consistency with state provisions, and compliance with the Ministerial Direction on Form and Content (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.11).

Analysis

Statutory Mechanism and Planning Scheme Changes

The amendment applies to all land in Golden Plains Shire and implements the Growing Places Strategy by updating the Municipal Planning Strategy, replacing the Clause 02.04 Strategic Framework Plan, relocating township structure plans from Clause 02.04 to Clause 11.03, and changing local policies for settlement, agriculture, heritage and housing (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). In simple terms, the amendment does not itself rezone the next growth front; it changes the rule book so future structure plans, rezonings and permit decisions are assessed against a shire-wide growth sequence (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The main growth-policy change is to amend Clause 11.01-1L so that future investigation of Cambrian Hill, Lethbridge, Meredith, Stonehaven and Teesdale is supported only as identified by the Growing Places Strategy (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). The amendment also removes the former Golden Plains North West policy because the Northern Settlement Strategy is being superseded by the GPS, while retaining and relocating local structure-plan content for places including Bannockburn, Gheringhap, Inverleigh, Smythesdale, Teesdale, Lethbridge, Meredith, Rokewood, Linton, Batesford and several smaller towns and localities (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The agricultural-policy mechanism is defensive. Clause 14.01-1L is split so excision and subdivision in the Farming Zone are separated from a new Clause 14.01-1L-02 for dwellings in the Farming Zone, with the purpose of protecting rural land for agriculture and avoiding dwellings that compromise rural activities (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). After exhibition, officers recommended adding policy language that excised dwelling lots should generally be a maximum of 2 hectares or the minimum needed to provide a 100 metre separation distance to the new boundary, and that Section 173 agreements should warn owners about dust, noise, odour, chemicals, machinery, traffic and operating hours from nearby farming (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-18).

The housing-policy mechanism is selective intensification. Clause 16.01-1L is proposed to reduce the policy reference for small lots from 400 square metres to 300 square metres in suitable areas, aligning with the Small Lot Housing Code and supporting higher density housing close to jobs, services and public transport (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). Officers recommended refining this after exhibition so lots under 300 square metres should be close to commercial, retail and community facilities, or be located consistently with an approved structure plan or development plan (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.18).

The heritage-policy mechanism adds both First Peoples and post-contact heritage signals into local policy. The amendment inserts a new dry stone walls policy at Clause 15.03-1L-02 and a new Aboriginal cultural heritage policy at Clause 15.03-2L, informed by the GPS and Victorian Aboriginal and Local Government Strategy 2021-2026 (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). The GPS says future growth-location planning should include Cultural Values Assessments, place-name audits, design responses that protect and enhance cultural places, and work that supports the visibility of Wadawurrung and Eastern Maar cultural heritage (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.29-30).

Land Supply, Housing Need and Growth Sequence

The amendment is built around a scenario-based housing need model, not a single forecast. Spatial Economics modelled three dwelling-growth paths to 2051: extended VIF2019, idForecast and a policy-intervention scenario (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.7-8). The policy-intervention scenario reaches annual average dwelling demand of 260 dwellings in 2021-2026, 366 in 2026-2031, 494 in 2031-2036, 610 in 2036-2041, 651 in 2041-2046 and 573 in 2046-2051 (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, p.43).

The GPS converts that uncertainty into a sequencing rule. Bannockburn remains the primary urban growth location, Meredith is the next urban growth location subject to reticulated sewerage, Lethbridge and Teesdale are lower-density incremental locations subject to land-supply exhaustion and bushfire resilience, and Cambrian Hill and Stonehaven are longer-term urban growth investigations dependent on regional infrastructure and sequencing with Ballarat and Geelong (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.23-27).

The numerical tension is clear. The state target for Golden Plains is 12,500 new houses by 2051, while the GPS reports that the Housing Needs Assessment identified potential demand for 14,770 new houses by 2051 (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.17). Bannockburn can accommodate over 8,000 new homes in the South East PSP, North West Development Plan and South West Development Plan precinct areas, and 13,000 new homes at full development including future investigation areas (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.29). This means Bannockburn can carry most of the statutory target on paper, but faster take-up would bring forward the need for another growth front before 2040 (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.29).

The Housing Needs Assessment shows why relying only on theoretical supply is risky. As at December 2021, Golden Plains had planned rural residential capacity for roughly 5,000 to 6,000 additional dwellings, but much of the northern capacity was in existing Rural Living lots or fragmented land rather than broadhectare serviced land (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.35-36). For urban housing, the same report estimated zoned capacity for at least 1,341 dwellings and unzoned capacity of about 10,100 lots, with almost all unzoned urban capacity in the southern SA2s and mostly associated with Bannockburn/Gheringhap (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.36-37).

The mechanism is therefore not simply more land. It is a move from dispersed rural residential growth toward serviced, sequenced growth that can support smaller lots, infrastructure contributions and more housing diversity (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.20, 29-30). The amendment supports that by discouraging larger rural living expansion and requiring future growth areas to complete structure planning, infrastructure servicing assessment, land capability assessment, environmental site assessment, transport impact assessment and a development contributions plan before rezoning or development (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.29-30).

Infrastructure and Staging Dependencies

Infrastructure is the main gate in the GPS. The strategy states that developers seeking to rezone land in future growth areas should either fully fund required infrastructure or demonstrate that existing infrastructure has sufficient capacity (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.20). It also states that development contributions require estimates of required infrastructure upgrades, including transport, community and recreation facilities, and drainage infrastructure (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.20).

Reticulated sewerage is the clearest binding constraint. Meredith is identified as the next location where future urban growth will be considered, but only if the town is serviced with reticulated sewerage to address existing wastewater issues and enable greenfield residential growth (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.26, 29). The GPS says Council must advocate with Barwon Water and State and Federal Government for reticulated sewerage at Meredith so groundwork investigations and structure planning can occur before land supply is needed (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.29).

Barwon Water’s position limits certainty. The explanatory report records that Barwon Water generally supported the GPS and would work with Council on the case for Meredith sewerage, but had not committed to reticulated sewerage in any township locations and identified water supply upgrades as essential in some areas (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). For Stonehaven, Barwon Water advised that existing and planned Western Geelong Growth Area infrastructure could not accommodate the growth scenario, meaning a standalone sewerage solution or significant upgrade would likely be required (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.21).

Transport is the second binding constraint. The GPS says the Hamilton and Midland Highways will reach capacity with the planned Western Geelong Growth Area population and Bannockburn growth, and that Stonehaven can only be considered after traffic investigations, modelling and solutions for connections within Geelong (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.21). After exhibition, officers recommended replacing Stonehaven wording about resolving the Hamilton Highway with broader language requiring suitable traffic solutions for movement efficiency and safety between the growth area and the wider transport network (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-17).

The rail corridor is an important but uncertain planning input. The GPS identifies the Geelong-Ballarat rail line as a potential sustainable transport spine and notes the G21 Integrated Transport Strategy’s advocacy for passenger rail between Geelong and Bannockburn, but also says resumption of that service is not a current State Government priority (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.20-21). The explanatory report records that DTP Transport noted there were no current plans to reintroduce passenger rail in the Geelong-Ballarat corridor (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). This reduces confidence in any growth sequence that relies on rail rather than road capacity and bus-network improvements.

Environmental Risk, Bushfire and Flood Filtering

The amendment’s risk logic is to identify broad growth directions first, then require detailed site assessments before structure planning or rezoning. The explanatory report says the Shire-wide Strategic Bushfire Assessment was a central informing document and shaped policy changes about growth locations and bushfire risk (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). The GPS states that growth should be directed to areas of low bushfire risk and that townships where incremental growth is identified will need bushfire mitigation work (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.12-13).

The Batesford and Teesdale submission issues show how bushfire filtering affects settlement decisions. Officers reported that Teesdale and Lethbridge were included for low-density growth because settlement-scale bushfire assessments identified them as preferred locations to improve bushfire resilience in existing townships (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.15). Officers also recommended clarifying Clause 02.03-3 to state that land adjoining existing developed areas in Teesdale is assessed as Landscape Type 1 and within a lower landscape risk area (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.17).

Flooding is treated as a growth-screening issue rather than only a permit-stage issue. The GPS says it avoids growth in flood-prone areas based on existing flood mapping and identifies the Teesdale Flood Study as a template for future flood studies (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.12-13). The GPS also says climate change impacts on flood extent will need to be considered when flood maps are updated (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.13).

The amendment does not include final precinct-scale environmental answers. The GPS requires future growth-location work to include Integrated Water Management Plans, Stormwater Management Plans and Flood Impact Assessments, Flora and Fauna Assessments, Biodiversity Protection Assessments, Environmental Site Assessments, sodic soils assessment, historic mining activity assessment and undocumented landfill investigation (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.29-30). That means C106gpla sets the decision pathway but does not settle exact developable area, infrastructure land take, offset burden or lot yield for each future growth location (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.29-30).

Agricultural Land and Rural Zone Contest

The amendment strengthens the policy line between housing growth areas and farming land. The GPS states that all rural land converted for residential purposes should be used efficiently and to the minimum extent required for sustainable living, and that new residential areas are to be zoned from the residential suite rather than larger rural living purposes (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.18). The explanatory report says the amendment deletes an existing further-strategic-work item for farming land policy because this policy has been drafted and included in the amendment (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

Two submissions raised Rural Zone issues. Submitter 7 objected on the basis that the amendment lacked policy for innovative sustainable land management, carbon and biodiversity offsetting, vegetation restoration and agricultural productivity in rural areas (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.13-14). Officers responded that the GPS is a housing strategy rather than a rural land-use strategy, and that the agricultural background work was used to consider land supply for housing rather than to prepare a comprehensive rural land and activities policy (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.13-14).

Submitter 5 supported the farming-land protection direction but sought changes to ensure Farming Zone dwelling excisions contain their own separation distances, so amenity buffers do not spill across adjoining farms and limit agricultural activity (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.14). Officers accepted this logic through recommended wording on 100 metre separation, dwelling envelopes and Section 173 agreements (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-18). The practical effect is that a rural dwelling becomes a contained sensitive use rather than a trigger for sterilising neighbouring productive land (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-18).

Contested Issues and Submissions

Exhibition ran from 23 February to 13 April 2026, with 9 submissions received during exhibition and 2 received after exhibition closed (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.11). Five submissions were from agencies and six were from or on behalf of landowners (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.11). Three submissions supported the amendment with no changes, one made no comment, two raised no substantive objection but recommended minor changes, three supported with minor changes, and two could not be resolved because officers did not support the requested changes (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.11-12).

The most substantive unresolved land-use issue is Batesford. Submitter 10 supported the broad objectives of the strategy but sought Batesford’s identification as a growth location (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.13). Officers opposed the change because the Batesford Structure Plan introduced by Amendment C9 in January 2002 does not support residential development along Fyansford-Gheringhap Road, because the structure plan still contains undeveloped Future Rural-Residential Stage 4 capacity estimated at 154 additional lots, and because the Gheringhap Structure Plan seeks a rural break between Batesford and the future employment precinct (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.14-15).

The Batesford dispute reveals the amendment’s municipal logic. Officers stated that Clause 11.02 requires sufficient land across the municipality rather than an individual capacity target for each township, and the GPS can meet Golden Plains’ housing target through a municipal-wide approach (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.15). This means a landowner request in a constrained or buffer-sensitive locality can be rejected even if the locality is near Geelong, because the amendment allocates growth to the shire-wide sequence rather than to every pressured town (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.15).

Stonehaven is a conditional, not immediate, growth question. Submitter 11 supported identifying Stonehaven as a future growth investigation area but sought modified wording for the preconditions (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.13). Officers recommended changes so the policy requires other growth locations to have been considered first, suitable traffic solutions for movement efficiency and safety, and analysis of regional land supply and housing demand (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-17). That wording lowers the risk that Stonehaven is read as a committed growth area before transport, sewerage and regional supply questions are resolved (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-17).

Regional Relationships

Golden Plains’ growth strategy is structurally linked to Geelong and Ballarat. The Housing Needs Assessment states that what happens in Geelong affects the south of the shire, what happens in Ballarat affects the north, and Melbourne growth affects both regional cities (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.15-16). It also states that Geelong and Ballarat were forecast to see combined population growth of at least 160,000 between 2016 and 2036, and possibly more than 230,000 under stronger recent-trend scenarios (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.22-23).

Cambrian Hill is the Ballarat-facing growth dependency. The GPS describes Cambrian Hill as an extension of Ballarat’s growth with access to trunk infrastructure including sewerage, and says development must be sequenced with Ballarat’s planned greenfield growth (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.26-27). Central Highlands Water sought early infrastructure planning for Cambrian Hill to integrate with neighbouring areas and avoid expensive reconfiguration later (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

Stonehaven is the Geelong-facing growth dependency. The GPS says Stonehaven would extend planned future growth of Geelong, but must address other growth-location sequencing, transport capacity and regional land supply or housing needs before it can proceed (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.27). The explanatory report records that DTP and the City of Greater Geelong advised Stonehaven is subject to potential upgrades and solutions to connections within Geelong (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The Gheringhap Employment Precinct is the main employment-land relationship in the amendment’s geography. The GPS identifies Gheringhap as an employment precinct and states that diminishing industrial land supply in Geelong is likely to create demand for land there (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.18). The investment prospectus describes agriculture, construction, education and training as major employment sectors, with agriculture employing 19.0% of the workforce, construction 16.5%, and education and training 10.2% (Source: Investment Prospectus 24 FINAL V2.pdf, p.9). The planning implication is that residential growth sequencing and employment-land protection interact most directly around Bannockburn, Batesford, Stonehaven and Gheringhap (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.18; Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.14-15).

Current Status

As at the 26 May 2026 council agenda, officers recommended that Council refer all submissions on Amendment C106gpla to an independent Planning Panel under section 23(1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and authorise officers or suitable representatives to appear at the Panel generally in accordance with the report’s response to submissions (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.11). The exhibited amendment had a directions hearing scheduled for 6 July 2026 and a Panel hearing scheduled for 10 August 2026 under Ministerial Direction No.15 (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The amendment is therefore post-exhibition and pre-Panel, not adopted or approved (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.11, 15). If Council abandons the amendment, officers identify uncertainty for future growth locations and risk that Council cannot meet the Housing Target, with the Minister potentially able to direct Council to continue or take over progression of the amendment (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, p.20).

Dependencies

  • Blocks: Clear statutory support for the GPS growth sequence, including future structure planning for Meredith, Lethbridge, Teesdale, Cambrian Hill and Stonehaven, is weaker until C106gpla is progressed through Panel, adoption and approval (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).
  • Blocked by: Panel consideration, unresolved submissions, Ministerial approval, and infrastructure commitments for reticulated sewerage, water supply, transport capacity and local infrastructure funding (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.11-20; Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.20-30).
  • Informed by: The GPS was informed by technical work on bushfire, natural environment and hazards, cultural heritage, post-contact heritage, industrial land, town character, civil infrastructure, agriculture, biodiversity, community wealth and community services, but most of those full reports are not included in this compile set (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).
  • Implements: Growing Places Strategy 2025, Clause 11.02 development capacity policy, Clause 16.01 housing supply policy, Plan for Victoria housing target work, and the Bannockburn Growth Plan growth framework (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx; Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, p.29).
  • Conflicts with: Requests for additional growth outside the GPS sequence, especially Batesford, and rural-zone submissions seeking broader rural land-management policy rather than housing-focused agricultural protection (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.13-15).

Golden Plains’ growth model depends on the neighbouring regional cities because the shire’s housing demand is shaped by Geelong, Ballarat and Melbourne growth rather than only by internal employment growth (Source: Summary Report_Housing Needs_Final_V1.pdf, pp.15-23). Cambrian Hill requires sequencing with Ballarat’s greenfield program and infrastructure planning with Central Highlands Water (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.26-27; Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). Stonehaven requires coordination with the City of Greater Geelong, DTP, Barwon Water and transport planning for the Western Geelong Growth Area and Hamilton/Midland Highway network (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.20-21, 27; Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The G21 Integrated Transport Strategy is relevant because the GPS relies on the Geelong-Ballarat corridor as a possible sustainable transport spine, but DTP Transport advised that passenger rail reintroduction is not currently planned (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.20-21; Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx). This makes bus planning, road capacity, active transport and development contributions more important as near-term mechanisms than rail-dependent growth sequencing (Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.20-21, 29-30).

Gaps in This Analysis

This page can analyse the amendment mechanism, settlement hierarchy, submission themes and broad infrastructure gates, but it cannot quantify precinct-level net developable area, infrastructure cost, DCP levy rates, biodiversity offsets, bushfire mitigation costs, sewer augmentation costs or transport upgrade costs because the full technical reports are referenced but not included as source documents (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx; Source: GPSC_Growing Places Strategy_FINAL.pdf, pp.29-30). The key missing reports are the Strategic Bushfire Assessment, settlement-scale bushfire assessments, Natural Environment and Hazards Analysis, First Peoples Cultural Heritage report, Post Contact Heritage report, Civil Infrastructure Analysis, Biodiversity Protection Assessment, Industrial Land Supply and Demand Assessment, Town Character Profiles, Agriculture Assessment and Community Services and Infrastructure Plan Update (Source: C106gpla Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted.docx).

The combined suggested ordinance attachment was included in the manifest, but the extracted text contains mostly page headers and does not expose the ordinance wording in a usable text form (Source: Item 7.2 Attachment - Planning Scheme Amendment - Growing Places Strategy - 26.05.2026.pdf). This creates an ordinance-verification gap: the officer report summarises recommended changes, but the precise tracked ordinance text cannot be audited from the extracted text alone (Source: Council Meeting Agenda Final - 26.05.2026.pdf, pp.16-18; Source: Item 7.2 Attachment - Planning Scheme Amendment - Growing Places Strategy - 26.05.2026.pdf).

Graph View