Insights Library
Planning Amendment (Make Better Decisions Faster) Bill 2025: Major reforms on the horizon
The Planning Amendment (Make Better Decisions Faster) Bill 2025 (Bill) was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on 29 October 2025 and is now being debated in both Houses of Parliament.
The Bill proposes fundamental changes to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic).
While the government is seeking to espouse the virtues of the Bill as creating a more efficient and certain planning system, the devil will be in the detail.
We provide the below insights on some of the key changes.
Planning scheme amendments
Categorisation: It is proposed that planning scheme amendments will be categorised by planning authorities into one of three categories, being low, medium and high impact. The criteria for each category will be in the Regulations (not yet tabled) and proportionate to the type of amendment being sought (e.g. complexity, risk).
Abandonment: The proposed changes will also make it more difficult for planning authorities to abandon amendments, providing greater certainty for Proponents. The abandonment of high-impact amendments can only occur with the consent of the Proponent or compliance with the circumstances set out in the legislation. The Minister can also choose to continue an amendment the planning authority has sought to abandon.
These changes are welcomed, particularly making it more difficult to abandon an amendment and allowing the Minister to continue an amendment so the process does not have to start again. The categorisation of amendments is also welcomed in principle, but we would like to see more detail on the criteria for each category.
Planning application pathways and third party appeal rights
The Bill seeks to implement three separate pathways for a permit application. It appears that either the Regulations or Planning Scheme will provide the specific criteria for what type of use or development fits into each pathway. We describe each below:
Type 1 Applications: These are proposed to be low risk applications that are envisaged by the zone and overlay. The Minister’s Second Reading Speech states that Type 1 Applications will replace existing VicSmart applications, with stand-alone homes and duplexes as examples mentioned in the Government press release on 28 October 2025. It is proposed planning authorities will have 10 days to decide on these applications. However, the timeframes will be prescribed by the Regulations- again, the changes to Regulations has not been made public.
Type 1 applications will not require public notice and will include ‘deemed approval’ mechanisms if a decision is not made by the responsible authority within the prescribed time.
There will be no third party appeal rights to VCAT for Type 1 Applications, however, applicants can still apply for a review of a notice of refusal or failure to make a decision within the prescribed timeframe.
Type 2 Applications: According to the Second Reading Speech these will be applications which comply with specified codes or significantly comply with specified codes (that will be prepared in collaboration with local Government, the development industry and the community during the proposed implementation period for reforms). It remains unclear what applications will be captured by a Type 2 Application. In the Government’s press release, Type 2 Applications would include low-rise and multiple townhouse developments.
No public notice will be required to be given, unless the code or the planning scheme specifies otherwise- again, there is little detail about what this entails. Any person/s receiving notice, can only comment on the application, as opposed to filing what we currently know as a formal objection, which otherwise carries existing appeal rights to VCAT.
It is stated that the statutory timeframe for a Type 2 application is to be prescribed by the Regulations but is to be less than the current 60 days (30 days was suggested in the initial press release).
Like with Type 1 Applications, there will be no third party appeal rights to VCAT.
Type 3 Applications: These applications are for more complex applications and will, in effect, mirror how the current planning system operates. Public notice and referrals will still occur for these applications and the current 60-day timeframe will still apply. It is likely notice requirements will be more restrictive and limited to only directly abutting properties.
The current information available in relation to the categorisation of the 3 application types and how these will operate is limited. We will need to see greater detail (through either the Regulations or the Planning Scheme changes proposed) on the criteria for each category, as this will have significant knock-on effects for when notice is required and third party appeal rights enlivened.
It also remains to be seen the ambit of discretion afforded to responsible authorities to classify applications as Type 3.
For applicants, particularly those who have developments which may fall into either Type 2 or Type 3, the key will be how Type 2 and Type 3 are categorised (e.g. will it be based on the type of use or development, which overlays apply, quantum of units, number of storeys, cost of development, or a combination of these).
Finally, we question what, if any, legislative changes are required in order to reclassify/define the type of applications as Type 1, Type 2 and Type 3 applications- will this discretion solely lay with the Planning Minister without any overview from the Houses of Parliament?
Restrictive covenants
Consideration of planning policy: Planning policy can now be considered in the decision to remove or vary a restrictive covenant. This includes consideration to loss of amenity, loss arising from a change of character to the neighbourhood and the reference to the objectives or purposes of the Planning Scheme. This is a fundamental change to the existing relevant decision criteria for restrictive covenants.
Council allowed to grant a permit: A permit can be granted by the responsible authority or Minister which breaches a restrictive covenant, however, the covenant still remains enforceable by beneficiaries until it is removed or varied.
These changes provide broad discretion for decision-makers in relation to varying or removing a covenant and could mean greater weight is given to planning policies such as neighbourhood character when a decision-maker is considering a covenant variation or removal application.
Deemed Approval for endorsement of plans and documents post-permit
A conditional process is proposed which applies to the approval of plans and other documents under a permit whereby if a decision is not made within the prescribed timeframe the Applicant, it is a Deemed Approval. This is a welcome inclusion to increase accountability on the part of the Responsible Authority and should result in more expeditious secondary consent and endorsement processes.
Where to from here?
Our office will continue to monitor the progress of the Bill in Parliament and will provide further updates in due course. If you have any questions about any of the changes we have highlighted in this article or any of the other changes proposed, please do not hesitate to reach out.
Get in Touch
Fill in the details to help us answer your query and booking enquiries promptly.