Make safe separation part of planning law

The change we are seeking

Safe Separations calls on the Victorian Government to establish an explicit statewide planning framework for separating retail petrol stations from sensitive uses. The framework should operate before development is approved, provide clear responsibilities and continue to protect people throughout operation.

Download the policy brief · Download the reform proposal

Both documents are public consultation drafts. The detailed legal mechanism and numerical settings require technical and legal examination.

Protect people in both development directions

Rules should cover new stations near existing or approved homes, schools, childcare, hospitals, aged care and comparable uses. They should also address new sensitive developments near existing or approved stations. Approved but not yet built uses must not be overlooked.

Material expansions and operational changes should trigger proportionate review when they increase emissions or exposure. Relevant changes can include throughput, tank capacity, dispensing infrastructure, delivery arrangements, vent locations and operating hours. Routine maintenance should not be treated as a new development merely because it improves equipment.

Numerical options for consultation

50 metres: a proposed minimum

A non-discretionary minimum for covered new developments would provide a clear starting point. Our consultation draft examines a 50-metre floor. It would not be displaced solely by a favourable discretionary model.

100 metres: a proposed default for 24-hour stations

Longer operating hours can change exposure opportunities and amenity impacts. The draft examines a 100-metre default for 24-hour stations, with any proposed departure requiring independent assessment and EPA agreement, never below the minimum floor.

300 metres: a proposed assessment area

This would trigger assessment of nearby sensitive uses and credible exposure pathways. It is not a proposed 300-metre exclusion zone. Assessment should extend further where sources or local conditions justify it.

WA Health's differentiated advice is one Australian policy reference for the 50/100-metre options. International exposure work informs the wider assessment discussion. None establishes these three settings as universal health thresholds for Victoria. Consultation should also compare a uniform 100-metre floor and throughput-based options. [39] [55] [38]

Make the rule measurable and enforceable

• Define protected uses, covered station activities and the treatment of staged developments.
• Use a clear default measurement, proposed as the shortest horizontal boundary-to-boundary distance. Any activity-area alternative would need tight definition.
• Identify the responsible planning authority and require appropriate EPA and health input.
• Specify the information required before a decision: sources, throughput, operating hours, controls, nearby uses and relevant site conditions.
• Publish reasons for decisions and any permitted departure from a default above the binding minimum.
• Tie operating approvals to commissioning, testing, maintenance, records and fault response.

Air assessments should use actual source and receptor locations as well as the statutory boundary measurement. Building effects, delivery peaks, background sources and contamination pathways can warrant additional protection.

Address the gap without misdescribing existing law

Victoria already has planning requirements and environmental duties. The 30-metre condition in the examined Industrial 1 Zone provision concerns whether a service station can operate without a permit; it is not a universal statewide prohibition on closer development. Our request is for a comprehensive, express separation framework, not a claim that stations are entirely unregulated. [41] [45]

The drafting process must consider operative use, referral and decision provisions together. Adding a line to an assessment table alone would not necessarily deliver the intended protection. [42] [43]

A workable transition

New rules should specify their commencement and treatment of existing approvals. Existing stations require effective operating controls and investigation of problems. The proposal is not an instruction to move households or close all existing facilities.

Implementation should assess regional fuel access, land availability, costs and enforcement capacity. These issues should shape transition and delivery, rather than be left unresolved until applications arrive.

From Victoria to national consistency

A Victorian reform process can establish methods that other jurisdictions can examine: shared sensitive-use definitions, transparent evidence standards and consistent control expectations. National coordination can support those methods; changes must still take effect through the relevant state and territory systems.

Ask your representative to act · Compare Australian approaches