title: Planning Scheme Amendment VC267 - Townhouse and Low-Rise Code council: greater-bendigo state: vic category: amendment classification: MAJOR status: approved last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf
Planning Scheme Amendment VC267 - Townhouse and Low-Rise Code
Planning Scheme Amendment VC267 materially changes how multi-dwelling housing applications are assessed in Greater Bendigo because the council report says it replaced the former ResCode-style Clause 55 assessment with the Townhouse and Low-Rise Code and a deemed-to-comply pathway for townhouses and apartment buildings up to three storeys (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). The practical effect shown in the Elmore application is that once the specified measurable standards are met, the responsible authority cannot refuse those matters and objectors do not have VCAT review rights on those deemed-to-comply standards (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-78).
Background
The agenda report states that VC267 followed the State Government’s Housing Statement and introduced transformative changes to all planning schemes (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-76). The same report states that Clause 55 was previously known as ResCode and, before that, The Good Design Guide for Medium Density Housing (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). The new title for the provision is the Townhouse and Low-Rise Code (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76).
The clearest local evidence in the source is item 8.3, a proposal for five dwellings on a 1,012 square metre vacant Township Zone site at 27 Hervey Street, Elmore (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.68-69). Council officers recommended a permit because the relevant elements of the Townhouse and Low-Rise Code were met, and the report expressly states that this meant objectors did not have review rights (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.68, 80).
Analysis
Assessment Mechanism
VC267 changes the assessment mechanism from a broad judgement model to a metric-led model because the agenda states that all standards in the Code now have an objective metric and, if the metric is met, no further assessment is required or can occur (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). In plain terms, the earlier system gave council more room to ask whether a proposal fitted the surrounding area overall, while the new system works more like a checklist where meeting the specified measurement closes off further debate on that matter (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-78).
The agenda identifies three matters that Clause 55 says cannot be considered unless an applicable decision guideline specifies otherwise: the Municipal Planning Strategy and Planning Policy Framework, the purpose or decision guidelines of the relevant zone, and Clause 65 decision guidelines (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.77). The report also states that if Clause 55 is inconsistent with another planning scheme provision, Clause 55 prevails (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.77). This is a major statutory change because it narrows the assessment pathway for eligible townhouse and low-rise applications and reduces the role of broader local policy discretion in those applications (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-77).
Notice, Objection and Review Rights
The agenda distinguishes between notice and review rights: it says the new provisions do not prevent notice being given, but residents’ objection and appeal rights are significantly curtailed where the deemed-to-comply standards are met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). Council officers said they would still apply normal material detriment tests when deciding whether to give notice, and that they would not envisage a case where notice would not be given for more than one dwelling on a lot (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). The practical consequence is that nearby residents may still learn about and object to an application, but their ability to take a deemed-to-comply matter to VCAT is removed where the relevant standards are met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-78).
For the Elmore proposal, the agenda says five objections were received after notice was given (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.68). The objections raised density, traffic, parking, fencing, privacy, water pressure, sewerage, septic systems, stormwater, pedestrian access, safety, neighbourhood character and amenity issues (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.74-75). The report then concluded that the relevant Code elements were met and that objectors did not have VCAT review rights (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.80). The mechanism therefore shifts some contested local impacts from a merits-review pathway into a compliance-check pathway (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-80).
Local Housing and Settlement Implications
The Elmore case shows how VC267 can affect smaller settlements, not only metropolitan or major urban infill locations, because the subject land was in the Township Zone in Elmore and the proposal was for five dwellings on one 1,012 square metre lot (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.68-69). Strategic Planning advised that the Elmore Structure Plan was being prepared to guide the town’s development over the next 30 years and that the subject property was within the study area (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.73). Strategic Planning also advised that more than 99% of houses in Elmore were detached dwellings on large lots with three to four bedrooms, while average household occupancy was 2.1 people per dwelling (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.73).
This matters because the local housing need identified by Strategic Planning aligns with a more diverse dwelling mix: the report says community engagement found unit housing was supported and needed in Elmore, provided it was well designed and respectful of town character (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.73). The Code did not itself create the local need for smaller dwellings, but it changes the decision pathway through which that type of housing is assessed (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.73, 76-78). In the Elmore example, the proposal included one two-bedroom dwelling of 90 square metres, three one-bedroom dwellings of 57 square metres, and one two-bedroom dwelling of 73 square metres (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.70). That built form directly addresses dwelling-size diversity in a town where the report says detached three-to-four-bedroom dwellings dominate the housing stock (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.70, 73).
Built Form Controls and Measured Outcomes
The Elmore assessment demonstrates the metric-led operation of the Code through a sequence of measurable standards (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.78, 82-87). The street setback standard was met because the two adjoining setbacks were 9.14 metres and 5.994 metres, the minimum required setback was 5.994 metres, and the proposed front setback was 6.582 metres (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.82). The building height standard was met because no maximum height was specified in the Township Zone schedule, the default maximum height was 9 metres, and the proposed dwellings had a maximum height of 4.3 metres (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.82).
The side and rear setback standard was met with northern, southern and rear setbacks of 1.569 metres, 4.36 metres and 1.158 metres respectively (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.83). The site coverage standard was met because the maximum site coverage was 60% and the proposal had 39% site coverage (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.85). The access standard was met because the proposed 3.5 metre crossover represented 17% of the 20.12 metre frontage (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.85). The tree canopy standard was met because the 1,012 square metre site required 202.4 square metres of canopy cover and the landscape plan provided 215.9 square metres (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.86).
These measurements show how the post-VC267 pathway converts neighbourhood character, height, setbacks, site coverage, access and canopy into quantifiable compliance questions (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.82-87). The consequence is greater consistency in assessment, but also less scope for broader local character arguments where the specified metrics are met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-78, 82-87).
Standards Not Automatically Met
The Elmore report identifies two areas where the relevant metric was not fully met but officers considered the objective satisfied: functional layout and solar protection to new north-facing windows (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.78-80). Four of the five units did not contain a bedroom meeting the minimum main-bedroom size, but each bedroom met the minimum size for other bedrooms and officers considered the functional layout objective met in light of the restrained dwelling sizes (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.79). Unit 1 did not meet the defined solar-protection standard for its north-facing window, but officers considered the objective generally met because the window was partially shaded by gable-end eaves and the other dwellings had shading to north-facing windows (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.79-80).
This is important because VC267 does not remove all discretion; it narrows where discretion is available and ties that discretion to specified decision guidelines once a metric is not met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76, 78-80). The agenda says failure to automatically meet a metric in other deemed-to-comply standards would be unlikely to warrant refusal if discretion remains to determine whether the objective is still met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.78). The practical effect is that non-compliance does not automatically mean refusal; it reopens a narrower merits assessment focused on the relevant objective and decision guidelines (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.78-80).
Infrastructure and Servicing Friction
Objectors raised infrastructure concerns about low water pressure, aged water infrastructure, fire safety, partial sewerage, septic systems, stormwater detention and surface-water flooding (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-76). The agenda records that Engineering Drainage had no objection subject to standard conditions for underground drainage, stormwater quality, stormwater detention, and a section 173 agreement for maintenance of the stormwater detention system (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.73). The report does not include a water authority servicing assessment, a sewer capacity assessment, or quantified fire-flow evidence for Elmore (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.73-76).
The planning implication is that VC267 can resolve built-form assessment questions without resolving every community concern about infrastructure capacity (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.73-80). Where infrastructure concerns are dealt with by referral responses and permit conditions rather than a quantified servicing report, the public record may not fully show whether local water, sewer and drainage systems have enough spare capacity for cumulative townhouse and unit development (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.73-76). That is an analytical gap in the available source, not a finding that capacity is inadequate (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.73-76).
Interaction With Tree Canopy Controls
The agenda records that a large gum tree had been removed from the Elmore site before the development application assessment (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.80). The report states that no tree controls applied at the time of removal and that planning permission was not required for that removal (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.80-81). The report also states that Amendment VC289 introduced Clause 52.37 for canopy trees on 15 September 2025, which would have triggered a permit requirement had the removal occurred after that date (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.80-81).
This means VC267’s tree canopy standard operates alongside later canopy-tree controls rather than replacing them (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.80-86). In the Elmore case, the Code assessment required 202.4 square metres of canopy cover and the proposal provided 215.9 square metres, but the agenda also shows that timing of tree removal can affect whether existing vegetation is protected before an application is assessed (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.80-86).
Transitional Evidence From Pre-VC267 Clause 55
The same agenda contains a separate application where Clause 55 as it existed before VC267 applied because the application was submitted in February, before VC267’s approval date (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.29). That earlier assessment described the old structure as objectives that must be met and standards that should be met, with broader discretion where a standard was not met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.29-30). The report used neighbourhood character, residential policy, infrastructure, integration with the street, site coverage, open space, landscaping, storage, design detail, common property and site services in the pre-VC267 assessment (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.29-43).
This provides a direct comparison within one council agenda: the pre-VC267 pathway allowed broader discussion of policy and qualitative design matters, while the post-VC267 pathway in the Elmore item says the substantive assessment is focused on the Code only (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.29-43, 76-78). The transition is therefore not merely a change in clause name; it changes which issues can determine the outcome of eligible applications and which issues can be pursued by third parties at review (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-78).
Current Status
By the 15 December 2025 council agenda, VC267 had already been introduced and was being applied in statutory planning assessments in Greater Bendigo (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-80). The agenda states that VC267 introduced Clause 55 changes in March 2025, but the compile source does not include the VC267 amendment documentation, approval notice or gazettal material (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). The most concrete local status evidence is that officers used the Code to recommend approval of five dwellings at 27 Hervey Street, Elmore, with the conclusion that the relevant Code elements were met and objectors had no VCAT review rights (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.68, 80).
Dependencies
- Blocks: The Code blocks refusal or further assessment on deemed-to-comply matters where the specified standards and objectives are met (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.76-78).
- Blocked by: The source does not identify a remaining approval blocker for VC267 because it describes the amendment as already introduced and in operation by March 2025 (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76).
- Informed by: The agenda links the changes to the State Government’s Housing Statement, but it does not include the Housing Statement, explanatory report or amendment instruction (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-76).
- Implements: The agenda frames the Code as supporting faster decisions and greater certainty for townhouses and apartment buildings up to three storeys (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76).
- Conflicts with: The Elmore application shows tension between the Code’s constrained assessment pathway and local concerns about density, neighbourhood character, water pressure, sewerage, septic systems, drainage, parking and pedestrian access (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.74-80).
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
The source gives one cross-boundary spatial link: the Campaspe River is approximately 250 metres east of the Elmore subject site and forms the border between Greater Bendigo and Campaspe municipalities (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.69). The source does not provide evidence that VC267 has been coordinated with Campaspe Shire, a water authority or a regional infrastructure program (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.68-90). The broader cross-jurisdictional relevance is that VC267 applies through Victorian planning schemes generally, but the provided source only demonstrates its operation in a Greater Bendigo council agenda (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-80).
Gaps in This Analysis
The corpus contains a council agenda applying VC267, not the primary VC267 amendment instrument, explanatory report, instruction sheet, gazettal notice or consolidated Clause 55 text (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, p.76). That means this page can analyse the local assessment mechanism and immediate implications, but it cannot independently verify the full statewide amendment package, commencement date, all affected clauses, transitional provisions or official policy rationale beyond what the council agenda states (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-80).
The source also does not include a quantified municipal pipeline analysis showing how many Greater Bendigo townhouse or low-rise applications are likely to move through the deemed-to-comply pathway (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.68-90). It does not include water, sewer, transport or drainage capacity modelling for cumulative low-rise housing in Elmore or other townships (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.73-76). It does not include VCAT outcomes after VC267 or any monitoring data on decision timeframes, refusal rates, objector participation or design outcomes (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-80). These gaps should be recorded in _gaps as a critical corpus gap for the official VC267 amendment material and an important evidence gap for local implementation monitoring (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-agenda-december-15-2025.pdf, pp.75-80).