Reference
On this page:
This page includes a summary of results and feedback on the planning scheme amendments and compensation regulations consultation.
For a more detailed report on the consultation results, including how we have responded to feedback, you can read the Summary of consultation responses to proposed changes (full).
You can access the new regulations at the bottom of this page.
Background
Between 22 July 2026 and 19 August 2026, the Department of Transport and Planning (DTP) consulted on proposed changes to the Planning and Environment Interim Regulations 2026 (the PE Regulations). The changes support reforms to planning scheme amendment (PSA) process, public engagement requirements and planning compensation.
More than 100 submissions were received during consultation, including 34 survey responses through Engage Victoria and 67 written submissions from state and local government organisations, peak and industry bodies, representatives of the planning, development and legal sectors, and interested individuals.
Alongside consultation opportunities available through Engage Victoria, targeted emails were sent to peak and industry bodies, external advisory authorities, departments and agencies, and local governments, inviting them to participate in the consultation process and attend stakeholder information sessions hosted by the department. The DTP website was also updated, and a LinkedIn post and article in Planning Matters promoted the consultation and encouraged participation.
To support ongoing engagement with the broader Better Decisions Made Faster reform implementation, two Engage Victoria hubs have also been established.
Further insights were provided the Planning Regulations Advisory Committee established to support the program.
What we heard
General support for a more proportionate PSA process
There was general support for establishing three assessment pathways for PSAs and for an approach that better matches the assessment process to the scale, complexity and impacts of an amendment.
Stakeholders generally supported the proposed impact category criteria, while seeking greater clarity about how they will be interpreted and applied in practice.
Feedback particularly focused on:
- which PSAs should be prescribed as low-, medium- or high-impact
- how non-prescribed PSAs will be assessed against the general considerations
- how complex or multi-component PSAs will be categorised
- what happens if a PSA changes impact category during the process
- the need for guidance, worked examples and implementation support.
In response to the feedback received, a number of changes have been made to improve the operation and clarity of the impact category framework.
Support for public engagement reforms
There was strong support for guidance on preparing public engagement plans (PEPs). Feedback focused on making the requirements proportionate to different types of PSAs, reducing duplication with existing processes, and providing clearer guidance on exemptions from notice and exhibition.
Stakeholders also generally supported the proposed changes to other operational and compensation regulations.
What has changed
DTP has retained the overall structure of the impact category framework, but made a number of changes in response to consultation and further review.
Key changes include:
- Refining the prescribed impact categories, comprising changes to low-, medium- and high impact PSA classes to better reflect the likely impacts of different amendments and whether independent planning panel review is warranted.
- Introducing medium-impact classes for certain PSAs that incorporate and give effect to precinct structure plans, where they are consistent with explicit directions in the relevant planning scheme.
- Refining the general considerations used to distinguish between medium- and high-impact PSAs, including greater clarity around policy, environmental, social and economic impacts, regulatory burden, and changes to planning permit notice, decision and review requirements.
- Making minor changes to PEP requirements to clarify how prior engagement is addressed and how people that have been, or will be, notified are identified.
- Updating other operational regulations, including timeframes for providing information, the circumstances in which an impact category may change, and a proponent-initiated PSA may be abandoned.
- Refining the compensation regulations and considering opportunities to make compensation forms and supporting information more accessible.
Not all suggested changes were adopted. Changes were not made where they could create unintended categorisation outcomes, reduce flexibility, or could not appropriately account for different types of PSAs and planning contexts.
There are several areas (specified below) where changes have been made in response to the detailed comments and feedback that was provided in submissions.
Impact category criteria
Low-impact PSAs
Changes have been made to:
- expand and clarify classes relating to bushfire and flood risk, heritage, public land and other planning controls
- remove the proposed time limit for certain rezonings from a public land zone
- limit the changes that can be made to incorporated documents under the Specific Controls Overlay.
Medium-impact PSAs
Changes have been made to:
- introduce classes for PSAs that incorporate and give effect to a precinct structure plan
- remove the proposed class for rezonings consistent with an explicit land use direction and addressing this instead through the general considerations.
High-impact PSAs
Changes have been made to:
- prescribe PSAs requiring Parliamentary ratification as high-impact, unless a prescribed low-impact class applies
- remove the extensions to Development Contributions Plan and Infrastructure Contributions Plan implementation periods from the high impact category.
Public engagement and other regulations
Minor changes have been made to clarify PEP requirements, including how prior engagement is addressed and how people that have been, or will be, notified are identified.
Other changes include updated timeframes, additional circumstances in which an impact category may be changed, and clearer provisions for abandoning a proponent-initiated PSA.
Proposed compensation regulations have also been refined, with DTP to consider practical guidance and more accessible digital forms.
General considerations
The general considerations used to categorise non-prescribed PSAs as either medium- or high-impact have been refined to improve clarity and better recognise:
- environmental, social and economic impacts
- conflicts between competing policy objectives
- changes to explicit land use directions
- regulatory burden
- changes to planning permit notice, decision and review requirements.
The considerations are not intended to operate as a checklist or scoring system. Their relevance will depend on the circumstances of each PSA.
What happens next?
A consistent theme throughout consultation was the need for guidance and implementation support. DTP will develop guidance to help planning authorities, proponents and other users of the planning system apply the impact category criteria consistently, including examples and information on common PSA types.
DTP will also update the guidance and templates for preparing PEPs, informed by the detailed feedback received through consultation. This material is expected to be available to support implementation of the reforms when they commence in early 2027.
Further detail on the issues raised through consultation, DTP's response and changes made is provided in the below Summary of consultation responses to proposed changes (full).
Further information
For further information on the PE Regulations and broader reforms to the Planning and Environment Act 1987, please contact: planning.reform@transport.vic.gov.au
Finalised regulations
Planning and Environment Interim Amendment (Better Decisions Made Faster) Regulations 2026
Return to the Updating the Planning and Environment Act page.
Page last updated: 27/10/26