It seems that the mere mention of the words ‘bushfire risk’ strikes fear into most planners, whilst ‘planning processes’ does the same for many fire agencies. Why is this so?

Planners barely raise an eyebrow when someone mentions the words ‘native vegetation’, ‘significant landscape’ or even ‘topography’. They confidently identify these constraints in an area, identify any likely ‘show stopers’, talk to proponents and incorporate these considerations into the decision making process (including avoidance and mitigation measures).

So why is it when these physical constraints combine to create a bushfire hazard, that planners seem unable to incorporate them into their day job?

It really is a simple equation: vegetation plus topography equals bushfire hazard. If you then add bushfire hazard and people, the result is bushfire risk. In many proposed new or expanding settlements there is often an intersection between pressure for development and identifiable bushfire hazard.

Historically, fire agencies have tended to work with planners, builders and the community once a development proposal is fairly well advanced.  At this stage in the process, it is often too late to consider broader settlement planning issues, including whether the risk from bushfire makes the development unacceptable and should be avoided.

The outcome of the apparent ‘fear’ of bushfire risk is that consideration of bushfire is delayed (or even bypassed) in the strategic planning process for many proposed new or expanding settlements.  This is a quite a perverse outcome, given that following the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission, the state policy was updated and now prioritises the protection of human life over other planning policy considerations in areas at risk from bushfire. Given planners are used to balance competing objectives, perhaps bushfire as the ‘trump’ card seems too scary.

The purpose of this presentation is to explain the process currently being implemented in Victoria, which marries strategic land use planning and bushfire considerations with the aim of directing development to areas of lower bushfire risk, avoiding the current legacy risk that has resulted in the tragic events of February 7 2009, as well as other bushfire events.

The presentation will identify practical ways that bushfire risk can be considered in the strategic planning process.