Minutes of Ordinary Meeting - Bass Coast Shire Council

15 December 2010 - Minutes for Ordinary Meeting 

Bass Coast Shire Council 

Cowes Cultural Centre, Thompson Avenue, Cowes 

5.00pm 

1. These minutes are due to be 

confirmed on 2 February 2011. 

2. Any decision included in these minutes 

is subject to change resulting from a 

rescission motion passed by Council.

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting - 15 December 2010 Bass Coast 

Shire Council 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

A Present and Apologies ................................................................................................. 4 

B Community Question Time........................................................................................ 5 

B.1 Sue Saliba, Cowes - Development: Justice Road farm and WhyteSands ............5 

B.2 Kim Gaunt, Pakenham - Cancellation of New Years Eve festivities and 

fireworks..................................................................................................................5 

B.3 Peter Kukola, Cowes - permit application 991524A by Phillip Island 

Adventure Resort ....................................................................................................6 

B.4 Peter Kukola, Cowes - Planning Committee meeting - permit 991524A ............7 

B.5 Maurice Schinkel, Cowes - Fireworks display at Adventure Resort, 

Phillip Island Tourist Road .....................................................................................8 

B.6 Pauline Taylor, Cowes - Phillip Island Adventure Resort fireworks 

display......................................................................................................................8 

B.7 Valda Scrase, Cape Paterson - Planning issue C93; Cape Paterson....................9 

B.8 Ian Hendry, Cape Paterson - Planning issue C93; Cape Paterson ......................9 

B.9 Patricia Hunt, Cowes - Friends of the koalas' letters to Council.........................9 

B.10 Maurice Schinkel, Cowes - Short tailed Shearwater mortality at 

Williamson's Beach...............................................................................................10 

B.11 Pauline Taylor, Cowes - Traffic and parking issues in Cowes............................10 

B.12 Richard Schmeiszl - Oprah's visit.........................................................................10 

C Presentations.............................................................................................................. 10 

C.1 Gwen Wiggins........................................................................................................10 

C.2 Nikki van Dijk........................................................................................................10 

D Confirmation of Minutes............................................................................................ 11 

D.1 Ordinary Meeting held on 17 November 2010 ...................................................11 

D.3 Statutory Meeting held on 8 December 2010.....................................................11 

E Petitions and Deputations......................................................................................... 12 

E.1 Compulsory muzzling of dangerous dogs ............................................................12 

F Notices of Motion....................................................................................................... 13 

G Committees and Delegates Reports ........................................................................ 14 

G.1 Combined Bass Coast Road Safety and Bass Coast Event Advisory 

Committees ...........................................................................................................14 

G.2 Phillip Island Nature Parks Community Advisory Committee ...........................15 

G.3 Bass Coast Shire Council Municipal Fire Prevention Committee......................16 

H Performance Monitoring Reports............................................................................. 18 

H.1 Building Statistics - November 2010....................................................................18 

H.2 Planning Permit Approval Statistics ....................................................................19 

H.3 Planning Permits issued under Delegation - November 2010 ............................20 

I Watching Bass Coast ................................................................................................. 24 

I.1 Tribunal Determination: Section 39 Appeal in Relation to Amendment 

C93 - The Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework ..........................24 

I.2 Improvement Opportunity - Change in Booking System for Visitor 

Information Centre Network ...............................................................................28 

I.3 Vundu - 2006 Commonwealth Games Aquatic Sculpture ..................................30 

I.4 Councillor Expenditure Report August 2010 - October 2010............................33 

I.5 Assembly of Councillors Report ...........................................................................35 

J Reports Requiring Council Decision......................................................................... 39 

Page 2



J.1 Amendment C93 - Implementation of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal 

Planning Framework - Post Panel Report ...........................................................39 

J.2 Amendment to fix up minor errors in the Bass Coast Planning Scheme...........62 

J.3 C117 Removal of Dalyston Restructure Overlay Request - Post 

exhibition...............................................................................................................66 

J.4 Proposed Development Plan - Schedule 19: Justice Road Cowes .....................80 

J.5 Proposed discontinuance and sale of unused Road Reserve (lane) off 

John Street, Wonthaggi ........................................................................................91 

J.6 Section 86 Committee of Management - Surf Beach/Sunderland Bay 

Reserve ..................................................................................................................96 

J.7 Petition - Reduction Wildlife Roadkill...............................................................100 

J.8 Petition - Use of Recreational Vehicles and Trail Bikes at Baker Road, 

Krowera ...............................................................................................................104 

J.9 Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park Memorandum 

of Understanding ................................................................................................107 

J.10 Fraud Policy.........................................................................................................110 

J.11 Councillor Ward Based Discretionary Funds.....................................................112 

K Urgent Business........................................................................................................ 116 

K.1 Jet ski free zone - Cr Phil Wright .......................................................................116 

J.12 Community Grant Allocations 2010/11 .............................................................117 

Page 3



A Present and Apologies 

Councillors: Cr Veronica Dowman (Chair), Leadbeater Ward 

Cr John Duscher, Hovell Ward 

Cr Gareth Barlow, Anderson Ward 

Cr Peter Paul, Thompson Ward 

Cr Jane Dore Daly, McHaffie Ward 

Cr Phil Wright, Churchill Ward 

Cr Ross Smith, Townsend Ward 

Officers: Mr Danny Luna, Corporate Services Director and Acting Chief 

Executive Officer 

Ms Felicity Sist, Acting Infrastructure Director 

Mr Steve Piasente, Community and Economic Development 

Director 

Ms Hannah Duncan-Jones, Planning and Environment Director 

Ms Sarah Male, Governance Administration Officer 

Apologies: Mr Allan Bawden, Chief Executive Officer 

Prayer: Cr Barlow read the prayer. 

Acknowledgement: Cr Daly read the acknowledgement. 

Statement: Cr Paul read the Councillor statement. 

Suspension of Standing Orders 

Moved: Cr. Peter Paul / Seconded: Cr. John Duscher 

That standing orders be suspended to allow Anne Davie to address 

Council. 

CARRIED 

Anne Davie ‘sung’ a song of praise for the tidings of great joy that have been bestowed 

upon the community of Cowes by this Council. 

Resumption of Standing Orders 

Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. Peter Paul 

That standing order be resumed. 

CARRIED 

Page 4



B Community Question Time 

B.1 Sue Saliba, Cowes - Development: Justice Road farm and WhyteSands 

Recently built developments in Cowes (such as North Shore, Seagrove and 

Shearwater Estates) have over sized houses with very small (mostly manicured or 

designer) gardens. 

These developments look like they would be more suited to outer suburban areas 

such as Pakenham, Caroline Springs, Taylors Lakes etc. 

Phillip Island is precious for its natural beauty. 

The development of two new large estates in Cowes looms in ‘Justice Road Farm’ and 

‘WhyteSands’. 

Regarding these two new estates, does Council intend to encourage people to build 

smaller houses with reasonably sized gardens that have indigenous plants to provide 

habitat for native wildlife, including birds? 

Ms Duncan-Jones advised that both developments have been through the 

planning and rezoning processes. Following this Council has very little 

control over the design of each property; only through issuing building 

permits. We also lose most of this control as the majority of building 

permits are issued by private building surveyors. Development needs to 

comply with ResCode and the five star rating program. 

Is there nothing we can do to encourage people to preserve nature? 

Ms Duncan Jones advised that Council certainly do try to encourage people 

to plant indigenous plants and include a range of environmentally 

sustainably design features in developments that require permits. Our 

Municipal Strategic Statement supports environmentally sustainably 

design and our planners are constantly discussing these elements with 

developers. Our building officers are encouraged to undertake 

professional development in green building and to incorporate that 

knowledge into their processes. However, we have to do a cost balance of 

our resources and ensure that the cost of undertaking promotion is 

balanced against the outcomes achieved. 

B.2 Kim Gaunt, Pakenham - Cancellation of New Years Eve festivities and 

fireworks 

Due to not enough public notification taking place outside of Cowes advising families, 

youth and visitors to the area that the festivities and spectacular fireworks have now 

been cancelled, how do Council intend to reduce the crowd that will still gather 

expecting both to take place along the foreshore? As the festivities and fireworks 

themselves don’t cause problems, how do you intend to keep safety issues to a 

minimum low as the numbers continue to grow along the foreshore now that the 

police numbers have to be split between Inverloch fireworks, Coronet Bay fireworks 

and Cowes on this night? 

Mr Piasente advised that in relation to public notification Council has 

undertaken the following communications with local, regional and 

metropolitan areas; 

Page 5



• Media stories in the Herald Sun, major radio stations and local 

newspapers 

• Advertising in local, regional, Melbourne and Mornington Peninsula 

newspapers 

• Signage at key entry points to townships and in Cowes 

• Posters and fliers placed in local shops 

• Information on the Bass Coast Shire website 

• Information in the Coastell magazine which is distributed to all 

residents & ratepayers 

• Information provided to real estate agents for distribution to holiday 

house tenants 

In relation to safety issues emergency services have planned their 

approach to safety on New Years Eve and have consulted with Council 

during this process. It is not appropriate to discuss the specific plans that 

Victoria Police will have on the night however we have been advised that 

Victoria police will be able to effectively deal with safety issues. 

B.3 Peter Kukola, Cowes - permit application 991524A by Phillip Island 

Adventure Resort 

Will our matter for objection be heard by the full Council or only the delegates of 

planning committee of the Council? 

I believe this matter is of high importance and deserves the attention of the full 

Council, not just delegates. 

Ms Duncan-Jones advised that the application has received three 

objections and under the delegation by Council the matter will be 

considered by the Delegated Planning Committee. The matter has been 

tabled for decision on 17 December 2010. 

The purpose of the application is to extend the range of accommodation 

offered at the resort by providing space for 20 caravans and 20 tents. The 

application states that the purpose of extending the accommodation range 

is to provide a broader range of choices to existing customers. It is not the 

intent to seek off the road clients. 

The camping sites currently exist and used to provide children with a safe, 

secure environment to learn the skills involved with camping. The camp 

sites are currently an activity used by school groups on one or two nights 

of their stay at the Adventure resort. It is proposed that the camping use 

become a stand alone activity that school groups can use for one or two 

nights, they would not be staying at permanent accommodation on site. 

The use is low impact, and has very little adverse off-site impacts and is 

considered appropriate in terms of the sites zoning. Permit conditions will 

be used to ensure that the camping sites are not rented to individuals. 

Page 6



The recommendation that has been put before the Delegated Planning 

Committee is to approve the application on the basis that the extension of 

the accommodation offer is consistent with the Rural Activity Zone. 

Conditions to restrict the use to the existing patronage have been 

recommended by the officer, as follows: 

• The camping sites cannot be hired to individuals. The camp site 

cannot be used to accommodate members of groups attending the 

facility who cannot be accommodated within the existing 

permanent accommodation. The camp sites can only be used for a 

camping experience by groups attending the Adventure Resort. 

• The caravan sites cannot be rented to individuals. Caravan sites can 

only be used by members of groups attending the facility who 

cannot be accommodated within the existing permanent 

accommodation. 

• The caravan sites can only be used to accommodate members of 

groups attending the facility who cannot be accommodated within 

the existing permanent accommodation for a maximum of 25 days 

per year, with 5 days being the maximum number of consecutive 

days that the use can operate at any one time, unless otherwise 

approved in writing by the responsible authority. 

The caravan sites can only be used to accommodate members of groups 

attending the facility who cannot be accommodated within the existing 

permanent accommodation for a maximum of 25 days per year, with 5 

days being the maximum number of consecutive days that the use can 

operate at any one time, unless otherwise approved in writing by the 

responsible authority. 

B.4 Peter Kukola, Cowes - Planning Committee meeting - permit 991524A 

Issues to be addressed: 

Are they going to be forced and monitored to follow caravan park regulations in 

relation to- 

1. 24 hour access to amenities including disabled facilities to both proposed areas 

2. Sullage points installed for caravans so that vans etc do not just allow to dump 

onto ground or in a normal toilet for environmental reasons and health safety 

3. Power to van – not just leads from other buildings 

4. How are you going to solicit 60 guests 

5. Noise – we already have noise issues with the Adventure Resort starting early in 

the morning and late at night. Clause 15.05 of the planning scheme 

6. No off road to public sites for casual tourists, is this going to be written on the 

permit 

7. Are these points going to be raised on Wednesday 15/12/10 at the council 

meeting 

Page 7



Ms Duncan-Jones advised that as the caravan sites are to be temporary, 

this can easily be regulated by planning permit conditions that will limit 

the amount of times per year that the caravan sites can be used and who 

can use the sites. As the sites are to be used occasionally, the off-site 

impacts are not considered unreasonable. 

The on-site guest amenities are regulated by Councils Environmental 

Health Team. If the Delegated Planning Committee resolves to issue a 

planning permit then it is recommended that a planning permit condition 

be used that requires the permit holder register the camping and caravan 

facility with Council’s Environmental Health team under the Residential 

Tenancies (Caravan Parks and Movable Dwellings Registration and 

Standards) Regulations 2010. The matters raised by Mr Kukola will be 

addressed by the proposed permit conditions and the Residential 

Tenancies regulations. 

The amended plans supplied by the Adventure Resort illustrate that part 

of the site will be renovated to include toilet, shower and laundry facilities 

for the temporary caravan sites. The amended plans did not require 

notice because they did not increase material detriment to surrounding 

landowners 

B.5 Maurice Schinkel, Cowes - Fireworks display at Adventure Resort, Phillip 

Island Tourist Road 

Will Council make representations to WorkSafe and the Country Fire Authority with 

the intention of preventing a fireworks display at the above location, because the 

adjacent and abutting land (5 ways and the Koala Conservation Centre) have a 

Wildfire Management Overlay applying, and because of the potential fire risk to these 

areas from stray pyrotechnics? 

Mr Piasente advised that the use of fireworks is regulated by the 

Dangerous Goods Act 1985. Worksafe Victoria is the responsible 

authority for this Act. 

It is Council’s understanding that all the appropriate permits have been 

obtained for the fireworks display proposed for the Adventure Resort on 

New Years Eve. As the fireworks are on private property Council does not 

have the ability to prevent the fireworks from proceeding. 

We have however advised the CFA, Victoria Police and adjoining 

landowners of the proposed fireworks. 

B.6 Pauline Taylor, Cowes - Phillip Island Adventure Resort fireworks display 

Can Council intervene to stop the fireworks display at the Adventure Resort on New 

Years Eve? 

Was Council given a chance to have any input into the granting of the permit? 

Cr Dowman advised that as the permit has already been approved, 

Council is unable to have any input into it this year, however will 

endeavour to work with the permit authority for any future years. 

Page 8



B.7 Valda Scrase, Cape Paterson - Planning issue C93; Cape Paterson 

Has Council recognised that the Panel, when recommending the C93 for Cape 

Paterson did not address the issue of the impact of the 1400 lot development would 

have on the beaches and foreshore at Cape Paterson? Will the Council be requiring 

the developer/s to contribute to the much needed upgrade or new toilet/shower 

facilities at both 1st Surf and Bay beaches which currently are not connected to 

sewerage and are a health hazard or will the Council be funding this necessary 

infrastructure from municipal funds in the coming budget? 

Ms Duncan-Jones advised that the recommendation of the Panel is that the 

land to the north be included in the Township boundary, this does not in 

itself allow for the land to be developed. 

If Council resolves to adopt the recommendations of the panel then any 

development of the land to the north could not proceed until a rezoning 

process had been undertaken. The rezoning process would need to 

consider what off site infrastructure contributions are required as a result 

of the increased utilisation of infrastructure. These contributions would be 

determined at the time a rezoning request is considered and the 

contributions would be determined on the basis of what is required at that 

point in time. 

B.8 Ian Hendry, Cape Paterson - Planning issue C93; Cape Paterson 

Is Council aware the C93 at Cape Paterson clearly comes under the guidelines of the 

Victorian Coastal Strategy hierarchy of principles and this has been verified by the 

planning department staff? 

Ms Duncan-Jones advised that as a coastal settlement all matters relating 

to proposed changes to the current township need to be assessed in 

accordance with the Victorian Coastal Strategy. This was undertaken by 

Council officers, the consultants who prepared the Bass Coast Strategic 

Coastal Planning Framework and consultants representing the interests of 

various landowners. The information provided by these sources was then 

reviewed by the independent Planning Panel who found that linear 

development such as that proposed at Cape Paterson, Pioneer Bay and 

Coronet Bay was not supported by the Victorian Coastal Strategy. The 

recommendation before Council this evening reflects the findings of the 

independent Planning Panel. 

B.9 Patricia Hunt, Cowes - Friends of the koalas' letters to Council 

When will replies, or at least acknowledgements, of two letters sent to Council be 

received and also when will the amended plans for WhyteSands be put on public 

notice for comment? 

Mr Luna advised that he would look into the status of the two letters and 

respond to the questioner. 

Ms Duncan-Jones advised that she would take the question about the 

amended plans on notice and respond to the questioner. 

Page 9



B.10 Maurice Schinkel, Cowes - Short tailed Shearwater mortality at 

Williamson's Beach 

As no replies have been forthcoming from the desalination consortium to my 

questions to Council on 20 October 2010 and 17 November 2010 and forwarded to 

the Community Liaison Committee, will Council now pursue the matter with the 

Chief Executive of Aquasure with the intention of obtaining a response. 

Mr Luna advised that he would follow up with Aquasure, and provide a 

response to the questioner. 

B.11 Pauline Taylor, Cowes - Traffic and parking issues in Cowes 

When is the Bass Coast Shire Council going to take the Cowes traffic/parking issues 

seriously? 

Mr Luna responded that there were many areas covered, for example 

planning, infrastructure and enforcement. He advised that her question 

would be taken on notice to allow us to review her submission to the Town 

Planning Subdivision Application Number 100324 85-87 Thompson 

Avenue, Cowes, Lots 9 and 10 LP10386 & Lot 4 LP24184 and a response 

sent. 

B.12 Richard Schmeiszl - Oprah's visit 

Council did nothing to try and attract Oprah Winfrey to Bass Coast. Why didn’t we 

work at trying to get her, not just some of her guests, to visit Phillip Island. 

Mr Piasente advised that he has discussions with his staff about Oprah’s 

tour, which was arranged and scheduled by Tourism Victoria. The advice 

given was that we would not successful. 

Cr Barlow added that Phillip Island being featured on her program, which 

is aired in numerous countries, is more effective at promoting our local 

area than a visit by her would be. 

C Presentations 

C.1 Gwen Wiggins 

Cr Dowman presented Mrs Gwen Wiggins with a certificate to acknowledge her 

dedication to the community through her 30 years service as secretary and treasurer 

of the Bass Recreation Reserve Committee of Management. 

C.2 Nikki van Dijk 

Cr Wright presented Miss Nikki van Dijk with a certificate to acknowledge her recent 

success at the Australian Junior Surfing Titles, where she obtained the highest heat 

score of 18.7. Nikki also won the event, making her only the second Victorian, and 

first Phillip Islander, to take out the title. 

Page 10



D Confirmation of Minutes 

D.1 Ordinary Meeting held on 17 November 2010 

Council Decision 

Moved: Cr. Jane Dore Daly / Seconded: Cr. Gareth Barlow 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 17 November 2010 be 

confirmed. 

D.3 Statutory Meeting held on 8 December 2010 


Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. Jane Dore Daly 

CARRIED 

That the minutes of the Statutory Meeting held on 8 December 2010 be 

confirmed. 

CARRIED 

Page 11



E Petitions and Deputations 

E.1 Compulsory muzzling of dangerous dogs 

File No: CM10/769 

Department: Community and Economic 

Development 

Council Plan Strategic Objective: Environmental Sustainability 

We will ensure the natural assets at 

Bass Coast are promoted and managed 

in a sustainable manner so they can be 

enjoyed now and by future 

generations. 

A petition was received by Council on 17 November 2010 containing 215 signatures. 

A covering letter was also submitted with the petition. 

The petition states the following: 

Staffordshire Bull Terriers and Bull Terrier breeds must wear a muzzle and be on lead at all 

times. 

The petitioner requests Council introduce a local law requiring all bull terrier dog 

breeds be muzzled when outside their yards, after experiencing a personal attack on 

herself and her dog. 

Local Law No. 12 states that: 

“A petition or joint letter presented to the Council must lie on the table until the 

next Ordinary meeting of the Council and no motion, other than to receive the 

petition or joint letter may be accepted by the Chairperson, unless the Council agrees 

to deal with it earlier.” 

Recommendation 

That the petition be received and lie on the table until the next meeting 

ordinary meeting of Council. 

Attachments 

AT-1 CONFIDENTIAL - Petition - muzzling of dangerous dogs 17 Pages 


Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. John Duscher 

That the recommendation be adopted. 

CARRIED 

Bass Coast Shire Council Page 12



F Notices of Motion 

Nil 




G Committees and Delegates Reports 

G.1 Combined Bass Coast Road Safety and Bass Coast Event Advisory 

Committees 


Department: Chief Executive Officer 

Council Plan Strategic Objective: Good Governance 

Declaration 

We will manage our resources 

effectively, keep the community 

engaged, listen to our communities' 

concerns to create positive outcomes. 

The reporting officer does not have any direct or indirect interests in this matter. 

Summary 

Attached are the minutes of the combined Bass Coast Road Safety and Bass Coast 

Event Advisory Committees meeting held on Monday 8 November 2010. Items on 

the agenda included the following; 

1. Holiday houses and the Health and Wellbeing Act 

2. Safety at taxi ranks 

3. Schoolies 

4. Grand Prix debrief 

5. Planning for New Years Eve 

6. Community Event update 

7. Carols by the Bay 

8. Pyramid Rock Festival 


That the minutes of the combined Bass Coast Road Safety and Bass Coast 

Event Advisory Committees meeting held on Monday 8 November 2010 

be received. 

Attachments 

AT- 

1 

Minutes of combined Bass Coast Road Safety and Bass Coast Event 

Advisory Committees 

4 

Pages 




G.2 Phillip Island Nature Parks Community Advisory Committee 



Council Plan Strategic Objective: Environmental Sustainability 

Declaration 

We will ensure the natural assets at 

Bass Coast are promoted and managed 

in a sustainable manner so they can be 

enjoyed now and by future 

generations. 

The author has no direct or indirect interests in relation to this report. 

Summary 

Attached are the minutes of the Phillip Island Nature Parks Community Advisory 

Committee meeting held on Friday 29 October 2010. Items on the agenda included 

the following; 

1. Combined meeting – Phillip Island Nature Parks Environment and General 

Nature Park update 

2. General business, including 

• Shearwaters 

• WhyteSands development 

• Koala Count at Koala Conservation Centre 

• Ventnor Road Koala Reserve 

• Koala protection 

• Phillip Island Nature Parks food and beverage prices 

• Staffing numbers at Churchill Island 

• Phillip Island Nature Parks food 

• Rhyll tip 


That the minutes of the Phillip Island Nature Parks Community Advisory 

Committee meeting held on Friday 29 October 2010 be received. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Minutes of Phillip Island Nature Parks Community Advisory 

Committee 

5 Pages 

AT-2 Know your Nature Park newsletter Nov/Dec 2010 3 Pages 




G.3 Bass Coast Shire Council Municipal Fire Prevention Committee 




Declaration 






Summary 

Attached are the minutes of the Bass Coast Shire Council Municipal Fire Prevention 

Committee meeting held on Thursday 18 November 2010. Items on the agenda 

include the following; 

• Review of outstanding items: 

o Committees of Management 

o Burning off Guidelines 

• Fire Prevention Works Plans 

• FARRS 

• Roadsides 

• Wonthaggi Fire Management Plan 

• IFMP update 


That the minutes of the Municipal Fire Prevention Committee’s meeting 

held on Thursday 18 November 2010 be received. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Municipal Fire Prevention Committee Minutes 9 Pages 



That agenda items G.1, G.2 and G.3 be received. 

CARRIED 




Performance 

Monitoring 

Reports 




H Performance Monitoring Reports 

H.1 Building Statistics - November 2010 


Department: Planning and Environment 

Council Plan Strategic Objective: Cohesive Communities 

Summary 

We will improve lifestyle opportunities 

and options by managing the built 

environment and encouraging cohesive 

communities. 

Attached is the report detailing the Building Statistics - November 2010. 


That the report be received. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Building Stats - November 2010 2 Pages 




H.2 Planning Permit Approval Statistics 




Summary 




communities. 

Attached is the report detailing the Planning Permit Approval Statistics for the month 

of November 2010. 



Attachments 

AT-1 Planning Permit Statistics - November 2010 2 Pages 

AT-2 Planning Town Statistics - November 2010 1 Page 




H.3 Planning Permits issued under Delegation - November 2010 




Summary 

Anderson Ward 




communities. 

090623: Develop the land for two sheds and additions to existing dwelling at 303 Bass 

Highway, Anderson. 

100301: Subdivision of the land into three lots at 49-53 Powlett Street, Dalyston. 

100316: Development of six storage sheds at 6/24-26 Boys Home Road, Newhaven. 

100363: Subdivision of the land into two lots at 7 Gordon Street, North Wonthaggi. 

100450: Development of a domestic shed at 64 Churchill Road, Newhaven. 

100525: Development of the land for a dwelling at 7 Church Close, Dalyston. 

Churchill Ward 

050381: Development of the land with two attached dwellings and associated 

vegetation removal, subdivision of the land into two lots and creation of 

access to Road Zone Category 1 at 143 Back Beach Road, Smiths Beach. 

100230: Construct a new single level retail shop with associated civil and site works 

and outdoor paved area at 11 Vista Place, Cape Woolamai. 

Hovell Ward 

100084: Subdivision of the land into twenty-two lots at 2 Fahey Street, Wonthaggi. 

100128: Development of two dwellings at 28 Blue Water Circle, Cape Paterson. 

100305: Subdivision of the land into three lots at 118 Merrin Crescent, Wonthaggi. 

100321: Use and development of a caretaker’s dwelling and removal of two (2) native 

trees at 220 West Area Road, Wonthaggi. 

100349: Development of a dwelling at 35A Hunter Street, Wonthaggi. 

100359: Subdivision of the land into two lots at 72 Hagelthorn Street, Wonthaggi. 

100367: Subdivision of the land into two lots at 3 Easton Street, Wonthaggi. 

100368: Development of land with a second dwelling and demolish a shed and 

construct a carport at 41 Dickson Street, Wonthaggi. 

100391: Subdivision of the land into two lots at 105 Reed Crescent, Wonthaggi. 

100436: Development of a dwelling in a Wildfire Management Overlay area at 11 

Pinnacle Close, Cape Paterson. 




Leadbeater Ward 

100327: Installation of a boom gate and removal of boat shed number 4 at Foreshore 

Road, Jam Jerrup. 

100357: Resubdivision of the land into three lots at 120 Pinkerton Road and Lot 3 & 4 

Heslop Road, West Creek. 

100418: Subdivision of the land into twenty-nine lots at 20 Doherty Road and 1531 

Bass Highway, Grantville. 

100434: Use and development of the land for a dwelling at Lot 1 PS540489 Sheepway 

Road, Krowera. 

100520: Development of the land for three sheds and two decks associated with an 

existing dwelling at 730 Grantville-Glen Alvie Road, Almurta. 

100548: Replacement of an existing shed with a three bay garage in barn style at 280 

Mill Road, Ryanston. 

McHaffie Ward 

100150: Subdivision of the land into four lots at 49-57 Lyall Street, Ventnor. 

Thompson Ward 

100056: Use and development of four dwellings with basement car parking at 9 

Walpole Street, Cowes. 

100298: Subdivision of the land into six lots at 230 Settlement Road, Cowes. 

100423: Subdivision of the land into two lots at 26 McKenzie Road, Cowes. 

100464: Removal of three (3) native trees and lopping of four (4) native trees for 

safety reasons at 65-67 Silverleaves Avenue, Silverleaves. 

100485: Removal of one (1) native tree for safety reasons at 18 Sanders Road, 

Silverleaves. 

Townsend Ward 

100053: Subdivision of the land into two lots at 12 Park Street, Inverloch. 

100351: Use and development of the land for a second dwelling and relocation of the 

existing dwelling at 80 Ullathornes Road, Inverloch. 

100386: Subdivision of the land into three lots in two stages at 35 A’Beckett Street, 

Inverloch. 

100389: Use and development of a replacement dwelling at 180 Cape Paterson- 

Inverloch Road, Inverloch. 

100392: Development of the land for a second dwelling at 26 Sandymount Avenue, 

Inverloch. 

100457: Removal of two (2) native (coast tea tree) trees for the construction of a 

fence at 65 Lohr Avenue, Inverloch. 

100479: Construction of a carport at 5755 Bass Highway, Inverloch. 






Attachments 

There are no attachments for this report. 



That agenda items H.1, H.2 and H.3 be received. 

CARRIED 




Watching 

Bass 

Coast 




I Watching Bass Coast 

I.1 Tribunal Determination: Section 39 Appeal in Relation to Amendment C93 

- The Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework 







communities. 

Previous Items: SR3/08 - Implementation of Bass Coast Strategic Coastal 

Planning Framework 2006 - Council - 15 October 2008 

Declaration 

The author has no direct or indirect interests in relation to the issue. 

Summary 

The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the recent Victorian Civil and 

Administrative Tribunal ruling in relation to a Section 39 appeal lodged in regard to 

the panel process for Amendment C93 – the implementation of the Bass Coast 

Strategic Coastal Planning Framework. 

A report is in the Reports Requiring Decision section of the agenda. 

Introduction 

Amendment C93 implements the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework by 

introducing relevant policy considerations into the Local Planning Policy Framework, 

referencing the Framework in the Planning Scheme, and the application of new 

overlays and zones. The townships that are affected by the Framework are: 

• Jam Jerrup; 

• Pioneer Bay and the Gurdies; 

• Grantville; 

• Tenby Point; 

• Corinella; 

• Coronet Bay; 

• Bass; 

• Kilcunda; 

• Harmers Haven; and 

• Cape Paterson. 




The Panel considering the amendment recommended changes to the Council adopted 

position. A land owner (Coastal Estates Pty Ltd) who was impacted by these changes 

lodged a Section 39 appeal at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal on the 

basis that it was substantially or materially affected by a failure of the panel to comply 

with the Planning and Environment Act 1987. 

As an appeal had been lodged Council was prevented from making a decision to adopt 

the amendment until after the matter was resolved. As the Tribunal has now 

determined that there was no breach and the Applicant has not lodged an appeal to 

the Supreme Court Council can formerly consider Amendment C93. 

The Tribunal member found that there was no breach of the Act and made 

observations on the principles of natural justice applicable to panel hearings. 

Strategic Basis 

The Bass Coast Planning Scheme provides the strategic framework for land use and 

development and the continual review and improvement of the scheme ensures that 

Council is meeting its legislative and community obligations. 

Finances 

Section 39 appeals are not common and it was considered prudent to engage legal 

representation. The cost to Council for representation was $10,614 and other costs 

incurred related to officer time. 

Stakeholders 

Stakeholders in this appeal included: 

• Bass Coast residents and ratepayers; 

• The Applicant; 

• The Minister for Planning; 

• The Panel; and 

• Other landowners. 

Statutory Requirements/Codes/Standards/Policies 

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 provided the legislative basis for the appeal and 

the decision of the Tribunal member. 

Officer’s Comments/Conclusion 

The case had two parts consideration of what jurisdiction the Tribunal had under 

section 39 and whether the Applicant had been afforded natural justice by the Panel. 

In the first matter the Tribunal concluded that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under 

section 39 of the Act does not enable a review of substantive errors by the Panel, but 

is limited to procedural defects. 

In the second part the case of the Applicant rested on alleged failures in relation to 

the findings by the Panel on six matters: 

• the absence of a rezoning request by the Applicant; 

• the Victorian Coastal Strategy; 

• ‘special circumstances’ that may justify a rezoning; 

• development contributions; 

• likely visitation rates; and 




• the impact on views from Agar Road across the Applicant’s land. 

While much of the Tribunal’s determination relates to the relevant legislative and 

common law considerations, the Tribunal does provide discussion of each of the 

alleged failures. 

Rezoning Request 

In relation to whether or not there was a rezoning request on foot, the Tribunal 

found that whilst the Panel’s choice of words may have been inexact it was clear that 

the Applicant had been able to present evidence to the Panel regarding their proposal. 

On this basis the Tribunal concluded that the Applicant had not been denied a fair 

hearing. 

Victorian Coastal Strategy 

The Applicant originally posed the argument about whether the Victorian Coastal 

Strategy could or should be interpreted to mean that “the preferred direction for new 

development is inland rather than on the coast’. However at the hearing this 

argument was not pursued and the Applicant contended that the Panel’s finding was 

not legally correct as it relied on evidence presented by laypersons (Coronet Bay 

Residents and Ratepayers Association). The Tribunal found that this did not 

constitute a procedural defect or denial of natural justice. 

Special Circumstance 

The Applicant argued that as the Panel found that “special circumstances would need 

to apply to any substantial expansion of Coronet Bay’ and they were not given the 

opportunity by the Panel to demonstrate these circumstances that they were denied a 

fair hearing. The Tribunal found that while on first blush there may be some merit in 

this argument, a further review of the Panel report clearly articulates that the use of 

the terminology was not to apply a special test, but to be clear that there were 

strategic policy considerations that would need to be balanced. 

Development Contributions 

The Applicant contended that the Panel had erred by referring to developer 

contributions and suggesting that the opening of the boat ramp should be part of such 

contributions should a proposal proceed. The Applicant considered this an error in 

that Council had no power to impose development contributions. The Tribunal 

considered that there was a difference of intent between the Panel’s use of developer 

contributions and the Applicant’s use of development contributions and that the 

Applicant had discussed infrastructure contributions in their submissions to the Panel. 

Visitation Rates 

This argument rests on the conclusion of the Panel that it was ‘difficult to accept the 

estimates for potential visitation levels and associated expenditure’ that were 

tendered as evidence on behalf of the Applicant. The Applicant argued that as no 

issue was raised at the Panel they were not provided with the opportunity to be 

heard on this matter. The Tribunal found that the Panel provided opportunity for the 

Applicant to present evidence on this matter, and so whilst the Panel did not accept 

that evidence, the Applicant was still heard. 




Views from Agar Road 

The Applicant contended that the Panel did not provide the opportunity to be heard 

in relation to their finding that the draft concept plan and the proposed site layout did 

not take into account views from Agar Road across the land to the coast. The 

Tribunal found that these comments were simply an observation of the Panel and that 

the Applicant was represented by a Planning Consultant who was aware of the 

importance of views and on this basis was denied the opportunity to be heard. 

Conclusion 

The findings of the Tribunal enable Council to move forward and make a decision 

with regard to Amendment C93 and bring to a close what has been a lengthy strategic 

planning project for Council. 



Attachments 

AT-1 VCAT Order - C93 Panel 26 Pages 




I.2 Improvement Opportunity - Change in Booking System for Visitor 

Information Centre Network 



Development 


Declaration 





The Reporting Officer has no direct or indirect interests in relation to the issue. 

Summary 

Council has an ongoing improvement process for identifying and implementing cost 

savings and operational efficiencies. This report identifies savings to Council by 

reducing expenditure on commission’s payable for Phillip Island Nature Park (PINP) 

ticket sales processed through our Visitor Information Centre (VIC) network. 

Details 

In November 2009, the VIC network, in conjunction with PINP, launched the new 

PINP Ticketing System. 

Council invested $10,000 in the development of the new system and will benefit by 

saving approximately $25,000 per annum on commissions. These commissions were 

previously paid to BookEasy, who provided the previous system for the sale of PINP 

tickets. 

The implementation of the PINP Ticketing System has achieved far more than just the 

purchase of a new booking system. It has enabled the VIC network to work with a 

much higher degree of collaboration with PINP. This in turn has raised the level of 

customer service provided with real time bookings for PINP tickets as opposed to an 

allocated supply allowing us to provide premium products. 

Training for this system was extensive and all staff and volunteers have acquired 

additional skills. As well as providing a vehicle for more effective bookings and sales, 

the system has strengthened the network bond with all staff working on the same 

system. 

In the first year of usage of the system (November 2009-2010) the Bass Coast VIC 

network sold 49,834 PINP tickets valued at $1,324,492.85, which would have 

formerly resulted in commission totalling $26,510 being paid to BookEasy. Ongoing 

annual savings will be based on the value of PINP tickets processed by the VIC 

network. 






Attachments 





I.3 Vundu - 2006 Commonwealth Games Aquatic Sculpture 



Development 


Declaration 




communities. 

The reporting officer does not have any direct or indirect interests in relation to the 

issue. 

Summary 

One of the 72 aquatic sculptures from the 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games 

was gifted to Council in late 2006. The sculpture is named Vundu and it is named 

after the native cat fish of Tanzania. Tanzania was Bass Coast’s adopted nation, as 

part of the Commonwealth games. 

Council has been working with the community for a number of years to find the 

sculpture an appropriate home. This included seeking expressions of interest on 

more than one occasion to provide a home for Vundu. 

It is pleasing to report that the most recent process has resulted in finding Vundu a 

new home at the Bass Coast Specialist School. 

Introduction 

Vundu was one of the 72 sculptures that graced the Yarra River during the Melbourne 

2006 Commonwealth Games created by Mothers Art. Vundu (Cat Fish) is the native 

fish of Tanzania, Bass Coast’s adopted nation during the Commonwealth Games. The 

Melbourne City Council gifted Vundu to the Bass Coast Shire Council in late 2006. 

At a Council Briefing in December 2006 the Councillors suggested that we ask 

community arts groups for their recommendations for the requirements for housing 

the sculpture and the most cost effective way of maintaining it. 

Invitations went out to 25 groups to view Vundu and discuss its future. 

Representatives from eight groups and one community artist responded and the 

Vundu Installation Project (VIP) reference group was formed. VIP met on a monthly 

basis from February 2007 until February 2009, whereupon the project was assigned to 

the Public Art Reference Committee. 

VIP unsuccessfully applied for a grant in December 2007. The Group also had a 

display at the Artists’ Society of Phillip Island Art Show in Easter 2008 where artists 

produced works in the theme of a fishy tale to encourage expressions of interest for 

the adoption of the sculpture. 

There have been a number of attempts to find a home for Vundu. Groups who 

expressed interest included: 




• Phillip Island Aquatic Centre Committee 

• San Remo Fishermans Co operative 

• San Remo Foreshore Committee 

• Wonthaggi Angling Club 

Council investigated the possibility of mounting the sculpture at the Newhaven Visitor 

Information Centre however the cost involved in renovation and mounting have been 

prohibitive for all options. 

At its Ordinary Meeting on 21 April 2010, Council endorsed the Public Art Reference 

Committee recommendation to invite Expressions of Interest from the community to 

take ownership of Vundu. The due date for the Expressions of Interest was 11 June 

2010. 

The Bass Coast Specialist School was the only Expression of Interest submitted. The 

Public Art Reference Committee recommended that Council’s Arts Officer further 

explore the School’s plans for Vundu. A class and teachers from the School visited 

the sculpture and subsequently discussions were held with staff and parents in relation 

to funding and housing of the sculpture. 

On the 12 November 2010, Council received a letter from Sue Campbell, Principal of 

the Bass Coast Specialist School, confirming their commitment to take ownership of 

the sculpture. In the letter they advised Council that they plan to paint and 

weatherproof Vundu and, once completed, they will arrange to position the sculpture 

on top of their carport near the front entrance to the school in McKenzie Street, 

Wonthaggi. One of the student’s parents, Peter Innes, has agreed to undertake these 

works shortly. 

The School assures us, on behalf of the Bass Coast Specialist School community, that 

they will undertake to maintain Vundu in good condition and they are confident that 

the proposed positioning will ensure the safety of the sculpture as well as providing 

the general public with constant visual access to Vundu. 

The Bass Coast Specialist School would like to pass on their appreciation to the Bass 

Coast Shire Council for entrusting them with the display and care of Vundu. They are 

looking forward to an official unveiling in the near future with Council in attendance. 


Bass Coast Strategy for Art in Public Places 

Finances 

In June 2007 Council funded to have the sculpture sandblasted and undercoated to 

ensure that it would not deteriorate. The cost of this was $2,900. 

Stakeholders 

Key stakeholders in this project have included the Bass Coast Specialist School, 

Council’s Public Art Reference Committee and the general community. 


Not Applicable 

Other Options 

No other options are considered applicable. 





Finding Vundu a new home has taken a number of years however Council Officers 

believe that locating Vundu at the Specialist school is an excellent result for the 2006 

Melbourne Commonwealth Games Aquatic Sculpture. The students of the School 

will have the opportunity to decorate Vundu and provide ongoing care for the 

sculpture. 



Attachments 





I.4 Councillor Expenditure Report August 2010 - October 2010 




Declaration 






Summary 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 6 February 2008, Council resolved that a 

report (open to the public) be tabled quarterly detailing Councillors’ Travel Claims 

and the Mayor’s expenditure for the previous 3 month period. 

This report is now presented for Council’s consideration. 

Introduction 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 6 February 2008, Council resolved that a 

quarterly report (open to the public) be tabled at the respective Council Meetings 

detailing the following: 


• Travel Claims submitted by Councillors (excluding the Mayor) for each 

quarter; 

• The Mayor’s expenditure for each quarter; and 

• All internal and external Committee appointments attended by 

Councillors, and all representations of Council at community and other 

events for each quarter. 

The Provision of Resources to Councillors Policy prescribes the range of resources 

that must be provided to elected Councillors to enable them to effectively carry out 

their role. These resources include a Councillor allowance, payment of certain 

expenses, and the provision of communication and computer equipment. 

Finances 

Funds have been allocated to cover the provision of resources to Councillors and 

reimbursement of Councillors’ expenses as part of Council’s annual budget process. 

Stakeholders 

Stakeholders include the ratepayers of the municipality and Council. 





The particular statutory requirements and standards relevant to the provision of 

resources to Councillors include; 

Other Options 

• The Local Government Act (in particular Section 74 – Councillor and 

Mayoral Allowances). 

• The Provision of Resources to Councillors Policy. 

The Council can accept that this report meets the requirements of Part 2 of the 

resolution carried at the 6 February 2008 Council meeting or the Council can direct 

Council officers to source further information. 


Part 1 of the recommendation dealt specifically with 2007/08 expenditure. This part 

of the recommendation was completed in March 2008. 

At the Ordinary meeting held on Wednesday 16 July 2008, an amendment to Part 2 

of this recommendation was made, deleting 2. d), 2. e) & 2. f) on the basis that 

comparative data from other municipalities was not available. 

This report deals with the remaining requirements of the resolution. 

Unfortunately the data for the Councillor appointments for May - July 2010 was not 

available for this report. 



Attachments 

AT-1 Minutes February 2008 3 Pages 

AT-2 Minutes July 2008 3 Pages 

AT-3 August - October Expense Register 1 Page 

AT-4 Total Councillor Expenditure 1 Page 




I.5 Assembly of Councillors Report 




Declaration 





The reporting officer has no direct or indirect interest in this matter 

Summary 

An amendment to section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 now requires all 

assembly of Councillors records to be reported on at the next practicable ordinary 

meeting of Council and to be recorded in the minutes of that meeting. This report 

intends to fulfil the requirements of the legislation 

Introduction 

The Local Government and Planning Legislation Act 2010 was proclaimed on Friday 24 

September 2010, making amendments to the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act). 

The amendments included changes to the definition of ‘assembly of Councillors’ as 

well as to the requirements of such an assembly. 

Section 76AA of the Act now defines an assembly of Councillors as 

‘a meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is 

present, or a planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one 

member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be- 

a) the subject of a decision of the Council; or 

b) subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that 

has been delegated to a person or committee- 

but does not include a meeting of the Council, a special committee of the Council, an 

audit committee established under section139, a club, association, peak body, political 

party or other organisation. 

Section 80A requires a written record to be kept of all such assemblies, stating the 

names of all Councillors and Council staff attending, the matters considered and any 

conflict of interest disclosures made by a Councillor. These records must be 

reported, as soon as practicable, at an ordinary meeting of the Council and recorded 

in the minutes. 

Below is a summary of all assembly of Councillors records since the legislation came 

into effect on 24 September 2010. 




Date Assembly of Councillors Councillors in attendance 

29 September 

2010 

6 October 

2010 

13 October 

2010 

20 October 

2010 

20 October 

2010 

27 October 

2010 

10 November 

2010 

17 November 

2010 

1 December 

2010 

1 December 

2010 


Councillors policy workshop Cr Paul, Cr Dowman, Cr Smith, Cr 

Daly, Cr Duscher 

Council briefings Cr Paul, Cr Dowman, Cr Daly, Cr 

Barlow, Cr Smith, Cr Duscher 

Councillors policy workshop All Councillors 

Ordinary Council meeting All Councillors 

Closed Council meeting All Councillors 

Internal meeting Cr Paul, Cr Barlow, Cr Smith, Cr 

Duscher, Cr Dowman, Cr Wright 


Councillors policy workshop Cr Paul, Cr Barlow, Cr Wright, Cr 

Dowman, Cr Duscher, Cr Smith 


Council briefings All Councillors 

That the attached assembly of Councillors forms be received. 

Attachments 

AT-1 29 September 2010 1 Page 

AT-2 6 October 2010 1 Page 





AT-7 10 November 2010 1 Page 

AT-8 17 November 2010 1 Page 

AT-9 1 December 2010 1 Page 

AT-10 1 December 2010 1 Page 






That agenda items I.1, I.2, I.3, I.4 and I.5 be received. 

CARRIED 




Reports 

Requiring 

Council 

Decision 




J Reports Requiring Council Decision 

J.1 Amendment C93 - Implementation of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal 

Planning Framework - Post Panel Report 







communities. 

Previous Items: SR3/08 - Implementation of Bass Coast Strategic Coastal 

Planning Framework 2006 - Council - 15 October 2008 

SR6/09 - Cape Paterson West Rezoning - Amendment C53 - 

Post Exhibition Report - Council - 22 April 2009 

Declaration 

The author has no direct or indirect interests in relation to the issue. 

Summary 

Amendment C93 proposes to implement the recommendations of the Bass Coast 

Strategic Coastal Planning Framework 2008. The Amendment applies to the land in and 

around the following coastal settlements: 

• Bass; 

• Cape Paterson; 

• Corinella; 

• Coronet Bay; 

• Grantville; 

• Harmers Haven; 

• Jam Jerrup; 

• Kilcunda; 

• Pioneer Bay/ The Gurdies; and 

• Tenby Point. 

Strategic Framework Plans for the townships, setting out long term settlement 

boundaries, and supporting planning objectives and strategies will be incorporated 

into the Municipal Strategic Statement. A number of rezonings and overlay changes 

designed to assist in implementing the strategic framework plans are also proposed. 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 15 October 2008, Council considered the 

proposed amendment to incorporate the strategic planning objectives of the Coastal 

Planning Framework 2008 into the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 




Council made the following resolution: 

1. That Council seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to 

prepare an amendment to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. That 

Council advise the Minister that the proposed amendment is consistent 

with the State and Local Planning Policy. 

2. Subject to authorisation from the Minister for Planning, that Council 

prepare and exhibit an amendment to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme 

that seeks to make the changes as per the attached plans, and includes 

a Development Plan Overlay for all land were a 200 metre buffer from 

the foreshore is required; 

3. That if there are submissions received in response to the exhibition of 

the amendment that Council consents to the submissions being 

forwarded directly to Planning Panels Victoria for consideration. 

Council received authorisation to prepare the amendment from the Minister for 

Planning on 13 February 2009 (authorisation number A01288). 

The notice of the preparation of the amendment appeared in the Government 

Gazette on 30 July 2009. 

Notice was sent to individuals and authorities affected on 27 July 2009. 

Notice also appeared in South Gippsland Sentinel Times on 28 July 2009. 

The exhibition period concluded on Thursday 3 September 2009. 

At the completion of the exhibition period Council had received 93 submissions from 

landowners, and seven submissions from Relevant Agencies. (It should be noted that 

the majority of submissions to Amendment C53, Cape Paterson EcoVillage, could be 

considered as submissions to Amendment C93. There were approximately 400 

submissions to Amendment C53). 

At the Ordinary Council meeting on 22 April 2009, as part of the consideration of 

Amendment C53, Council made the following resolution: 

That Council request the Minister for Planning to combine the Panel 

hearing for this amendment with the Panel hearing for Amendment C93 

(Implementation of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning 

Framework). 

Council considered that there were three amendments dealing with the coastal areas 

currently on foot and that there would be merit from both a content and efficacy 

perspective in have one planning panel report of these amendments. Council 

requested that the Minister for Planning appoint a Panel to consider Amendment C53, 

Amendment C93, and Amendment C98 (implementation of the Coastal Spaces 

Landscape Assessment Study) jointly. 

The nine day Panel hearing for the three Amendments concluded just before 

Christmas 2009 and various written submissions were allowed after the hearing. This 

period for written submissions did not conclude until 26 February 2010. 

Council received the Panel Report for Amendment C93 on 7 April 2010. 




The Independent Panel recommended that Amendment C93 be adopted with a 

number of changes that responded to: 

• Climate Change impacts; 

• Coastal Planning Policy; and 

• Distribution of projected growth that was linked to access of services. 

Upon receipt of the Panel Report, Coastal Estates Pty Ltd, a submitter to the Panel 

Hearing lodged an application for review by Victorian Civil and Administrative 

Tribunal under Section 39 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. 

Section 39 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, pertains to defects in procedure. 

In this case, Coastal Estates sought review of procedure of the Panel Hearing. 

Coastal Estates Pty Ltd initially claimed that the Panel had: 

• Made findings not ‘adverted’ to during the hearing; 

• Had not allowed parties a reasonable opportunity to respond to findings 

made in the Panel Report; and 

• Had not given the parties a fair hearing and that natural justice had not been 

afforded. 

Section 39 also requires that a Planning Scheme Amendment is not adopted by 

Council until the Tribunal has made its decision. 

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal handed down its decision in 

November 2010. The Tribunal did not uphold the claims of Coastal Estates Pty Ltd. 

Council is now in a position to consider Amendment C93. 

This Council report has been prepared to provide: 

Introduction 

• An overview of the Independent Planning Panel recommendations; and 

• A recommendation that Council adopt Amendment C93 in accordance with 

the recommendations of the Independent Planning Panel. 

Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework 

The development of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework had its 

beginnings in the objectives and actions of the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2002 

(Victorian Coastal Council). Section 5 of the strategy provides a series of objectives 

to facilitate the sustainable development of the built environment and coastal 

infrastructure in coastal areas. 

Objective 5.2 states that direction should be provided for the location and scale of 

use and development on the coast. This would be achieved in part by undertaking the 

following action: 

‘The planned growth of coastal towns will be managed through the establishment of 

township boundaries in planning schemes. This will ensure that growth in coastal areas is 

planned, coastal values protected (e.g. environmental, scenic, and cultural) and the needs of 

future generations respected’. 

The initial development of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework began in 

2003. It was a community driven project that established a vision, strategies, and 

guidelines that would help shape the structure, function, and appearance of the 

Coastal Areas of the Shire. 




The Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework was originally adopted by Council 

in June 2005, and amended in 2006. (The adopted Grantville Structure Plan was 

replaced with a version that included a revised settlement boundary). 

It was reviewed in its entirety in 2008. The adopted Bass Coast Strategic Coastal 

Planning Framework was reviewed to ensure that the key planning objectives of the 

document remained relevant and reflected any changes to planning policy that had 

occurred since its adoption by Council. The review considered: 

• Any relevant State or Local planning policy changes that had occurred since 

the adoption of the Coastal Planning Framework in 2006; 

• Demographic and population data from the 2006 ABS Census; 

• Recommendations of the ‘Implementing the Coastal Spaces Landscape 

Assessment Study and the Coastal Planning Framework, December 2007’, 

prepared by John Keaney and Michael Kirsch; and 

• On the ground experience through re-engagement with the community and 

revisiting the intended outcomes of the Coastal Planning Framework. 

The outcome of the review resulted in minor, but specific changes to the Bass Coast 

Strategic Coastal Planning Framework. In particular, the structure plan for each of the 

Coastal Settlements included in the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework was 

revised. The Structure Plans were amended in order to: 

• Provide clear settlements boundaries for long term growth; 

• Provide recommended zoning controls for future growth areas; and 

• Provide appropriate timeframes and planning triggers for supporting future 

development within settlement boundaries. 

Council adopted the revised Coastal Planning Framework on 15 October 2008. 

Amendment C93 

The amendment to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme was prepared to implement the 

Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework 2008. 

The amendment was required to give statutory effect to the recommendations of this 

strategic study to assist Council in its decision making in relation to future land use 

and development in the Shire’s coastal settlements and non-urban coastal landscapes. 

The amendment proposed to make changes to the content of the Municipal Strategic 

Statement in order to include objectives, strategies, and structure plans for the 

individual coastal settlements identified in the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning 

Framework. 

The amendment proposed to amend the Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 

1, introduce a new schedule to the Development Plan Overlay, and amend the 

Development Plan Overlay - Schedule 3. These changes would provide the 

appropriate planning controls and decision making guidelines to support the 

implementation of the objectives and strategies set out in the Municipal Strategic 

Statement. 




Council Submission to Panel 

At the Panel Hearing Council submitted that the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning 

Framework had been developed because: 

Sustained population and growth pressure on the Bass Coast Shire is placing increasing 

pressure for development on the coastal precincts of the Shire, leading to fragmented 

coastal planning, subdivision and development decisions. 

The Council submission also stated that Amendment C93 provided an important 

component to the ongoing strategic planning for land use and growth management in 

Bass Coast. 

The Council submission concluded by arguing that Amendment C93: 

Will establish defined settlement boundaries and protect the coastal areas between 

settlements from inappropriate development. It will also manage the expectations of the 

development industry, and provide certainty for the local community. 

Council submits that Amendment C93, subject to minor changes, should be supported for 

the following reasons: 

• It is consistent with the relevant strategies and objectives of the Bass Coast Planning 

Scheme; 

• It furthers the objectives of the State Planning Policy Framework; 

• It furthers the objectives of the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2008; and 

• It provides a strategic planning foundation for managing growth in a growth 

environment. 


State Planning Policy Framework 

The State Planning Policy Framework informs planning authorities of the State policy 

to be taken into account when making decisions. The following clauses should be 

considered in the assessment of the proposal: 

Clause 11.02-1 – Supply of urban land 

This clause seeks to ensure there is a sufficient supply of land available for residential, 

commercial, industrial, recreational, institutional, and other public uses. 

The clause states that planning authorities should plan to accommodate projected 

population growth over at least a 15 year period and provide clear direction on 

locations where growth should occur. 

Clause 11.02-3 – Structure planning 

This clause aims to facilitate the orderly development of developing urban areas and 

ensure effective planning and management of the land use and development of an area 

through the preparation of strategic plans, statutory plans, development and 

conservation plans, development contribution plans and other relevant plans. 

Clause 11.03-1 - Open space planning 

Clause 11.03-1 of the Scheme relates to the provision of open space and creation of a 

diverse and integrated network of public open space commensurate with the needs of 

the community. 




Open space networks should be linked through the provision of walking and cycle 

trails and should incorporate links between major parks and activity areas, along 

waterways and natural drainage corridors and connect places of natural and cultural 

interest. 

Clause 11.05-5 – Coastal settlement 

The objective of this clause is to plan for sustainable coastal development and 

encourages residential and other urban development and infrastructure to be located 

within defined boundaries of existing settlements that are capable of accommodating 

growth. 

Clause 12.01-1 – Protection of habitat 

Clause 12.01-1 of the State Planning Policy Framework outlines the State policy in 

relation to the protection and conservation of biodiversity, including native vegetation 

retention and provision of habitats for native plants and animals and control of pest 

plants and animals. 

This clause states that responsible authorities should ensure that the siting of new 

buildings and works minimises the removal or fragmentation of native vegetation. 

Clause 12.02 - Coastal Areas 

Clause 12.02 sets out the State policy in relation to Coastal areas. The objective of 

this clause is to recognise and enhance the value of the coastal areas to the 

community and ensure sustainable use of natural coastal resources. Strategies for this 

clause are provided in four main principles: 

• Provide for the protection of significant environmental and cultural values; 

• Undertake integrated planning and provide clear direction for the future; 

• Ensure the sustainable use of natural coastal resources; and 

• Ensure development on the coast is located within existing modified and 

resilient environments where the demand for development is evident and the 

impact can be managed. 

Clause 14.01-1 – Protection of agricultural land 

The objective of this clause is to ensure that the State’s agricultural base is protected 

from the unplanned loss of productive agricultural land due to permanent changes of 

land use, and to enable protection of productive farmland which is of strategic 

significance in the local or regional context. 

Clause 14.02-1 – Catchment planning and management 

The objective of Clause 14.02-1 is to assist in the protection and, where possible, 

restoration of catchments, waterways, water bodies, groundwater and the marine 

environment. This clause states that planning and responsible authorities should 

consider the impacts of catchment management on downstream water quality and 

freshwater, coastal and marine environments. 

Clause 15 – Built environment and heritage 

Clause 15 seeks to protect places and sites with significant heritage, architectural, 

aesthetic, scientific and cultural value and creating quality built environments supports 

the social, cultural, economic and environmental wellbeing of our communities, cities 

and towns. 




Clause 16.01-2 – Location of residential development 

Clause 16.01-2 encourages the location of new housing in or close to activity centres 

and employment corridors and at other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good 

access to services and transport. This clause also supports the identification 

opportunities for increased residential densities to help consolidate urban areas. 

Clause 18.01-1 – Land use and transport planning 

This clause seeks to integrate land use and transport planning by planning urban 

development to support the concentration of higher density residential development 

in and around Central Activities Districts, Principal, Major and Specialised Activity 

Centres on the Principal Public Transport Network; and by providing safe, convenient 

and direct pedestrian and cycling access to activity centres, public transport 

interchanges and other strategic redevelopment sites. 

Clause 19.03-2 - Water supply, sewerage and drainage 

Clause 19.03-2 states that planning and responsible authorities should ensure that 

water quality in water supply catchments is protected from possible contamination by 

urban, industrial and agricultural land uses. 

Municipal Strategic Statement 

The amendment seeks to implement the Municipal Strategic Statement and is 

consistent with Councils strategic direction and objectives to confine urban 

development within the existing township boundaries, make full use of existing 

infrastructure, and provide services for the needs of the community. 

The proposed amendment is consistent with the strategic direction within the 

Municipal Strategic Statement. The relevant provisions of the Municipal Strategic 

outlined below. 

Clause 21.03 Key issues 

Settlement 

• Maintaining separation between townships and avoiding extending residential 

development in a linear form along the coast; 

• Protecting areas of environmental, landscape, agricultural or recreational 

significance; and 

• Avoiding development in inappropriate locations. 

Land uses 

• Increasing the supply of commercial land in the main business centres of the 

municipality; and 

• Managing the implications of being a premier tourist destination. 

Environment 

• Protecting areas subject to future impacts as a result of climate change; and 

• Seeking a balance between urban growth of coastal communities and planning 

for the effects of climate change. 

Landscape and built form 

• Maintaining individual settlement identity. 




Clause 21.04 Vision 

Settlement 

• Residential development and related urban land uses contained to existing 

activity nodes; 

• A quality urban environment and well functioning towns that benefit both 

residents and visitors. 

Environment 

• Development responsive to the effects of climate change; 

• The coastal and hinterland areas between activity nodes remaining as areas 

with views, landscape, environmental or rural values. 

Clause 21.05 Settlement 

Clause 21.05 sets out the Council’s vision with respect to settlement. This includes 

fully serviced residential and low density residential development within defined town 

boundaries. Council’s settlement hierarchy for growth and the role of individual 

townships is set out under Clause 21.05. This Clause also lists those strategies 

required to meet these objectives and the ways to support and implement these 

strategies. 

Issues of relevance to this amendment include the need for the Shire to set aside 

adequate residential land to accommodate the expected increase in population and to 

provide fully serviced urban areas. 

The amendment generally supports the implementation of the objectives set out in 

21.05 (Settlement), including: 

21.05.1 (Growth of towns) 

Objective 1 To identify towns that are suitable for urban growth and to provide for 

sufficient land in these towns for growth until 2030. 

Strategy 1.1 Ensure that the growth and consolidation of settlements is consistent 

the Settlement Hierarchy included in this Clause. 

Strategy 1.2 Apply Structure Plans for Wonthaggi, District Towns and Towns 

identified in the Settlement Hierarchy included in this Clause to guide 

growth and urban development in the municipality. The Structure 

Plans must designate settlement boundaries for all towns. 

Strategy 1.3 Restrict urban development to existing urban areas except: 

• Where the land is identified in an adopted Structure Plan as being 

within a future settlement boundary, or as part of a comprehensive 

review of the relevant Structure Plan for a town; 

• Where the future settlement boundary from the adopted Structure 

Plan has been incorporated into the Bass Coast Planning Scheme; and 

• Where staging of the development is in accordance with a 

development plan approved by Council. 

Objective 3 To encourage sustainable development, minimise impacts on the 

natural systems, increase natural reserves and vegetation in urban areas 

and improve the quality of life for the community. 




Strategy 3.1 Minimise the impact on significant environmental features within 

identified settlement boundaries, and address these impacts through 

the rezoning or development planning process. 

Objective 4 To discourage urban development that encroaches or impacts on 

significant environmental features and in areas affected by future 

climate change impacts. 

Strategy 4.1 Ensure that urban growth and development enhances significant 

environmental features by identifying and protecting these areas during 

the preparation of Structure Plans. 

Strategy 4.2 Manage climate change impacts by: 

• Identifying areas subject to future impacts of climate change. 

• Preparing a strategy to deal with the possible impacts of climate 

change for developments located within existing urban boundaries. 

• Avoiding development in areas outside of town boundaries where 

there are possible impacts as a result of climate change. 

Strategy 4.3 Ensure that development is set back from the coast to accommodate 

coastal features, vegetation and climate change impacts. 

Clause 21.07 Environment 

21.07-3 Environmental Hazards 

Acid Sulphate Soils 

Objective 5 To minimise the disturbance of Acid Sulphate Soils as a result of 

development. 

Strategy 5.1 Support development of land in degraded areas only if land 

management practices will result in improved land quality. 

Strategy 5.2 Ensure that development does not activate Acid Sulphate Soils. 

Strategy 5.3 Investigate and map the potential locations for Acid Sulphate Soils in 

the municipality. 

21.07-4 Climate Change 

Objective 1 To protect and conserve existing water reserves and prevent 

degradation of water catchment areas. 

Strategy 1.1 Maintain and improve indigenous vegetation and land management 

practices within Proclaimed Water Catchment Areas. 

Objective 3 To discourage development in areas that may be affected by climate 

change. 

Strategy 3.1 Determine the effects of sea level rise and storm surges and prepare 

and implement strategies to address any potential issues. 

Strategy 3.2 Increase the Council and the community’s knowledge and 

understanding of the effects of climate change in the municipality. 

Strategy 3.3 Discourage individual landowners adjacent to the coast from 

constructing their own sea wall barriers in an attempt to minimise 

impacts from erosion and coastal processes. 

Clause 21.08 Landscape and Built Form 




Clause 21.08 describes the Council’s vision with respect to the landscape and built 

form. The amendment supports the implementation of a number the objectives set 

out in 21.08 (Landscape and Built Form) including: 

Objective 1 To ensure that development is subordinate to the natural, visual, and 

environmental landscape character and significance. 

Strategy 1.1 Ensure that coastal related development responds appropriately to the 

landscape setting, character and desired future character directions. 

Strategy 1.2 Strongly discourage development that is unsympathetic to significant 

landscape areas. 

Strategy 1.3 Avoid linear coastal development beyond urban boundaries. 

Clause 21.10 Local Areas 

The purpose of Clause 21.10 is to provide direction for the future physical form and 

planning objectives for individual townships within the municipality. The amendment 

will introduce specific sub clauses for each of the settlements included in the Coastal 

Planning Framework. 

Finances 

Funding for the project was provided by the Department of Planning and Community 

Development and Council. 

Any further costs principally involve officer time. 

Stakeholders 

The provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 require that when an 

amendment is prepared, it be formally exhibited. This involves the sending of letters 

to adjoining and nearby property affected landowners, and placing an advertisement in 

the local newspapers. 

In this case, notice of the amendment was given to all landowners that are directly 

affected by the proposed changes. In addition, notice was given to community and 

environment groups, and the development industry. Other stakeholders include 

ratepayers and visitors to Bass Coast Shire. As required, notice was also given to 

relevant government agencies. 


Section 25of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 states that the report by Panel: 

(1) The panel must report its findings to the planning authority. 

(2) In its report, the panel may make any recommendation it thinks fit. 

Council has a number of options once it receives the report. It can adopt the Panel’s 

Recommendations, it can make changes to the Panel’s recommendations, or it can 

ignore the Panel’s recommendations. However, Council must tell the Minister why it 

disagreed with the Panel - and why changes were made. 

Other Options 

Option 1 – Adopt Amendment C93, generally as recommended by the Panel. 

Implications – There are no negative implications with proceeding to adopt the 

amendment in the form recommended by the Panel. 




Option 2 – Adopt Amendment C93 with some additional changes. 

Implications - Depending on the changes there are a number of implications, minor 

changes could reasonably be made to reflect updated policy objectives in the State 

Planning Policy Framework, and these would generally be supported by the Minister 

for Planning. If Council deviated significantly from the Panel recommendations, it is 

likely that Council would be asked to re-exhibit the amendment and therefore there 

would be another Panel process. This would represent a significant cost to Council 

and the community, and will mean that Council will continue to use the outdated 

policies to inform decision making. 

Option 3 – Council has an option to abandon Amendment C93. 

Implications – Council would be abandoning seven years of significant work. There 

is a risk that Council would create an environment of great uncertainty and confusion 

for the community and the development industry. There would be no policy 

foundation for making a number of decisions relating to Coastal Settlements and 

Coastal areas. 


Panel Report & Recommendations 

The Panel Report provides a significant review of contemporary Coastal Planning 

Policy in the context of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework and 

Amendment C93. In doing this, the Independent Planning Panel has scrutinised the 

currency of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework and in particular the 

policy objectives and planning strategies that would be incorporated into the 

Municipal Strategic Statement. 

The Independent Planning Panel commended Council for: 

…initiating and resourcing the preparation of its Coastal Framework. It is a very 

comprehensive document. Although the Panel has criticised some aspects of the work, 

the shortfalls are often due to the time lag between the first draft of the Framework and 

the exhibited documents - some 5 years in all. In particular, an understanding of climate 

change induced coastal hazards and the supporting science has developed in parallel 

with the preparation of the strategy. 

Broadly, the Independent Planning Panel concluded that Amendment C93 provides a 

well-considered response to the challenge of emerging pressure for growth in coastal 

settlements. 

Specifically, the Independent Planning Panel recommended that: 

Amendment C93 should be adopted subject to a number of changes. 

These changes fall into two broad categories: 

• A Response to Coastal Planning Policy: 

A number of changes to the proposed Strategic Framework Plans and 

Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 1 are proposed which respond 

to climate change-induced coastal hazards and the implementation of 

Coastal Hazard Vulnerability Assessments. These matters have assumed 

greater importance in planning thinking since the amendment was prepared. 




• The appropriate distribution of projected growth: 

Panel recommends that new growth is concentrated in Cape Paterson and 

Grantville, the two settlements with the best access to urban services. 

Proposed Changes 

In order to implement the broader changes the Panel has recommended that specific 

modifications be made to Amendment C93 and the supporting amendment 

documentation, including: 

• Revising the Proposed Design an Development Overlays; 

• Updating Clause 21.10 and the proposed Strategic Framework Plans for each 

settlement; and 

• Updating other clauses in the Municipal Strategic Statement. 

Design and Development Overlays 

During the Panel Hearing, Council officers worked with the Independent Planning 

Panel to review and rework the existing Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 

1 (Residential areas near the coast). The intention of this review was to update the 

Schedule to reflect changes in Coastal Planning Policy in particular the Victorian 

Coastal Strategy 2008, Ministerial Direction 13, and changes to State Planning Policy 

Framework at Clause 12.02 Coastal areas of the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 

The review was also to address the clumsiness of the proposed requirement that 

there be a 200 metre buffer zone controlling development adjacent to the coast. This 

objective was developed, and included in the in the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal 

Planning Framework before the majority of the Coastal Planning Policy work had been 

completed and incorporated in the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. It was evident that 

the proposed buffer zone was inherently complicated to implement, and potentially 

subject to a number of reasonable compensation claims. 

The proposed changes to the Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 1, 

incorporates the ‘precautionary principle’ into the purpose of the Schedule and 

includes additional requirements for assessing potential climate change impacts on 

development on land adjacent to the coast. 

The Independent Planning Panel made the following specific recommendations: 

• DDO (Design and Development Overlay)Schedule 1 (Residential areas near the 

coast) should be amended to include a new objective ‘To protect 

development against the impact of climate change’; 

• DDO1 (Design and Development Overlay Schedule 1) Clause 2 Buildings and 

works should be amended to: 

o Delete the requirement for all development in residential areas to be 

set back at least 200 metres from the coast in Pioneer Bay, Grantville, 

Coronet Bay and Corinella. 

o Add a new requirement that a permit is required for all buildings and 

works (subject to exemptions) on sites below 5m AHD (Australian 

Height Datum) in Pioneer Bay, Grantville and Coronet Bay. 

o Add a new application requirement that any application for land below 

5m AHD (Australian Height Datum) in Pioneer Bay, Grantville and 

Coronet Bay must be accompanied by a Coastal Hazard Vulnerability 

Assessment (subject to exemptions). 




Comment 

These changes will effectively update the Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 

1. Council will need to consider extending the application of these proposed changes 

to include other Settlements in the Shire that have areas that sit below five metres 

on the Australian Height Datum. This will need to be done through a separate 

planning scheme amendment. 

The proposed updated Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 1 is included 

here at Attachment 2. 

Clause 21.10 and the proposed Strategic Framework Plans for each settlement 

During the Panel Hearing, the Independent Planning panel reviewed the methodology 

used in the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework to determine the 

distribution of areas to cater for projected growth across the settlements. 

At the Panel directions hearing Council had been requested to provide and overview 

of the key services and community infrastructure available to each settlement. 

The Independent Planning Panel was considering two issues: 

• What was the real level of anticipated growth, and demand for land, across 

the settlements; and 

• How should growth be distributed to ensure growth was planned in areas 

where the existing services provided for sustainable communities? 

These issues affect the underlying strategic justification for the amount of projected 

growth, and establishing the long term settlement boundaries for each of the 

settlements. 

The Independent Planning Panel was of a view that some of the proposed boundaries 

and the extent of the growth areas included in the settlements, did not adequately 

reflect the role and function of specific settlements. 

The Independent Planning Panel made the following observations: 

New growth (should be) concentrated in the two settlements with the best access to 

urban services. Modest growth is catered for in settlements with modest services. 

Isolated settlements with no services are confined to infill development. The total growth 

allocated to these settlements is more than adequate to meet short term and 

intermediate term anticipated growth, and some long term growth. 

The Independent Planning Panel would develop these observations into specific 

recommendations for each settlement. 

In addition to the concerns about service provision and projected demand for 

residential land, the Independent Planning Panel was also concerned that a number of 

the proposed settlement boundaries did not reflect the intention and objectives of 

Coastal Planning Policy. 

There was particular concern about Strategic Framework Plans that proposed linear 

urban growth along the coast. The Independent Planning Panel was concerned that a 

number of the proposed growth areas did not meet the objectives of the relevant 

Coastal Planning Policy. 

The following section of the report identifies the specific recommendations the 

Independent Planning Panel makes for each settlement. 




Jam Jerrup 

The Independent Planning Panel could see no clear reason for the extension of the 

settlement boundary at Jam Jerrup. 

The Independent Planning Panel stated: 

Jam Jerrup, a settlement of 100 houses with no services apart from water and electricity, 

is not appropriate for further development due to its isolation, poor services and its 

vulnerability to erosion as a result of climate change. 

The Independent Planning Panel recommended that: 

• The Strategic Framework Plan for Jam Jerrup be adopted subject to the 

deletion of the extension area to the east of the settlement. 

• The exhibited rezoning to R1Z (Residential 1 Zone) and the exhibited DDO1 

(Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 1) at Jam Jerrup be abandoned. 

The Gurdies/Pioneer Bay 

The Independent Planning Panel notes that that both of these settlements might be 

said to come under the definition of ‘old and inappropriate’ subdivisions. 

In addition the Independent Planning Panel notes that Pioneer Bay sits at a very low 

elevation adjacent to the coast. Any proposed expansion of Pioneer Bay would need 

to be assessed in the context of the precautionary principle. 

The Independent Planning Panel made the following observations about Pioneer Bay: 

• Properties near the coast are already at risk from sea level rise due to their 

low elevation; 

• More frequent storm activity due to climate change will exacerbate existing 

risks; and 

• It does not appear that allowing new development would be prudent in this 

situation. 

In conclusion, the Panel made the following recommendations: 

• The Structure Plan for Pioneer Bay/The Gurdies be adopted subject to the 

deletion of the extension area to the south of Pioneer Bay. 

• The proposed wording of Clause 21.10-11 be amended to delete reference to 

the rezoning of 1200 Bass Highway, Pioneer Bay to R1Z (Residential 1 Zone). 

Grantville 

In considering the proposed Strategic Framework Plan for Grantville, the Independent 

Planning Panel had to reconcile a number of issues: 

• The low elevation of land adjacent to the coast identified for rezoning; and 

• The strong community and commercial services base. 

The Independent Planning Panel generally agreed with strategic position of Council 

that Grantville functioned as a service centre for the northern region of the 

municipality. In broader discussion, the Panel recognised that new growth should be 

concentrated in Grantville, as one of the ‘settlements with the best access to urban 

service’. 




However, the Independent Planning Panel: 

… also has serious concerns about rezoning land for urban purposes in locations 

vulnerable to climate change impacts. This is especially so in Grantville, where future 

development should be more focused away from the low-lying areas to land east of the 

highway. 

In its conclusion, the Independent Planning Panel has recognised that there is already 

development west of Bass Highway, but that any future development should have a 

low impact on the area and importantly any rezoning of land, subject to a Coastal 

Hazard Vulnerability Assessment. 

The Independent Planning Panel recommendations for Grantville reflect this: 

• The Structure Plan for Grantville be adopted subject to the following 

modifications: 

o Adding a notation that the urban rezoning of land between Western 

Port Bay and the Bass Highway below 5m AHD (Australian Height 

Datum) must be exhibited with a DPO (Development Plan Overlay) to 

implement the recommendations of the CHVA (Coastal Hazard 

Vulnerability Assessment) required by Ministerial Direction 13 including 

delineating the boundary of the developable area and introduce 

required mitigation measures. 

o Deletion of the proposed additional B1Z (Business 1 Zone) fronting the 

Bass Highway south of the existing commercial area. 

o Retention of the three lots in Pier Street between the commercial 

area and Paul Street in the B1Z (Business 1 Zone). 

o Retention of the land between the southern end of Paul Street and 

Queensferry Road as LDRZ (Low Density Residential Zone). 

o Deletion of the proposed extension area on the northern side of 

Grantville-Glen Alvie Road. 

o Designation of the land between Dougherty Road and Acacia Drive 

for intermediate term rezoning from (Low Density Residential Zone) to 

(Residential 1 Zone). 

o Modification of the designation of the land bounded by Acacia Drive 

and Grantville-Glen Alvie Road to add a requirement for a flora and 

fauna assessment. 

o The exhibited rezoning of land east of the Bass Highway at Grantville 

be adopted, subject to the deletion of the land on the northern side of 

Grantville-Glen Alvie Road. 

The Independent Planning Panel also made a number of recommendations regarding 

the proposed planning controls that were proposed to manage and guide 

development. The Independent Planning Panel recommended that: 

• The exhibited DPO3 (Development Plan Overlay Schedule 3) on the corner of 

Bass Highway and Grantville-Glen Alvie Road be adopted. 

• The exhibited DPO16 (Development Plan Overlay - Schedule 16) on land on the 

north side of Grantville-Glen Alvie Road be abandoned. 

• The proposed changes to DPO5 (Development Plan Overlay - Schedule 5) not 

be adopted but be addressed by way of a separate amendment. 




Tenby Point 

The Independent Planning Panel agreed with the Council approach to Tenby Point and 

provided the following recommendation: 

• The exhibited Structure Plan for Tenby Point be adopted. 

Corinella 

The Independent Planning Panel generally agreed with the proposed Strategic 

Framework Plan for Corinella exhibited as part of Amendment C93. 

It was recognised that Corinella had a modest but good foundation of community 

services, including a bus to Wonthaggi, and childcare facilities. 

The Independent Planning Panel noted that in this context the proposed level of 

growth for Corinella set out in the Strategic Framework Plan was appropriate. 

However, there were a number of issues that the Independent Planning Panel had 

concern about, including: 

• Proposed linear expansion of urban areas along the coast; 

• Existing significant vegetation in the area proposed for growth; and 

• Erosion of the cliffs south of Settlement Point. 

In considering the proposed direction of urban growth, the Independent Planning 

Panel provided the following thoughts: 

While the extension of Corinella adjacent to the coast is also of concern to the Panel, 

there are other planning objectives against which this must be balanced. Corinella is 

bounded by Western Port Bay to the north and west. The eastern boundary of the 

settlement is Jamieson Road, marking a very clear transition from urban area to open 

farmland, and any extension to the east would clearly compromise this strong visual 

break. The proposed extension to the south ends at O’Connor Road, providing another 

clear transition point. It is therefore appropriate to conclude that, if Corinella is to 

expand, it should be to the south. 

It was recognised that the environmental issues, the vegetation and the potential 

impact of erosion could be managed through appropriate assessment mechanisms in 

conjunction with any future rezoning of the land. 

The Independent Planning Panel concluded that: 

• The Structure Plan for Corinella be adopted subject to: 

o The addition of a notation to the effect that any future rezoning 

adjoining the coast or coastal reserve must be preceded by an 

assessment of erosion risk as a means of defining the boundary of the 

developable area. It should also indicate that a DPO (Development Plan 

Overlay) must also be exhibited with the rezoning to ensure 

implementation of the erosion risk study outcomes. 

Coronet Bay 

There were four key issues that the Independent Planning Panel considered critical to 

the assessment of the proposed Strategic Framework Plan for Coronet Bay: 

• A limited community and commercial services base; 

• Proposed linear expansion of urban areas along the coast; 




• The speculative nature of projected demand for growth; and 

• The availability of undeveloped land within the existing settlement boundary. 

The Independent Planning Panel did not agree with the extent of the growth that had 

been designated for Coronet Bay. They also had concern about the linear expansion 

of the settlement along the coast. 

The Independent Planning Panel provided the following summary in response to these 

issues: 

Overall, the Panel believes that an outcome where infill development and a new inland 

area of low density development to meet established demand is consistent with the 

coastal strategies and the State Planning Policy Framework, and with the priorities for 

‘low spatial growth capacity’ settlements identified in the Municipal Strategic Statement 

and Coastal Strategy. 

In conclusion, the Independent Planning Panel recommended: 

Bass 

• The Strategic Framework Plan for Coronet Bay be modified to delete the 

proposed extension areas to the north and south of the existing settlement; 

• The rezoning of the land to the east to LDRZ (Low Density Residential Zone) be 

approved; and 

• The reference to ‘off-leash’ dog exercise in the Structure Plan be removed. 

The Independent Planning Panel noted that Bass has a higher rate of permanent 

population than the Bass Coast average, and there is an established demand for low 

density lots in the area. 

They agreed with the strategic direction for Bass that Council had proposed in 

Amendment C93. 

In conclusion, the Independent Planning Panel recommended that: 

• The Strategic Framework Plan for Bass should be adopted as exhibited except 

that the Katelea Pastoral land should be designated for short-term rezoning 

to LDRZ (Low Density Residential Zone). 

• The exhibited rezoning from RLZ (Residential 1 Zone) to LDRZ (Low Density 

Residential Zone) at Bass be adopted. 

Kilcunda 

The Independent Planning Panel generally agreed with the proposed extent of growth 

proposed in the Strategic Framework Plan for Kilcunda. 

However, the Independent Planning Panel, thought that more could be done to 

protect the view sheds from the east, and to manage drainage outcomes in the long 

term. 

With these issues in mind, the Independent Planning Panel made the following 

recommendations: 

• The Strategic Framework Plan for Kilcunda be adopted. 

• The exhibited rezonings (as corrected by Council) be approved. 

• The Panel also recommends that: 




o The existing DDO1 (Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 1) be 

extended to include the north-east extension area and the 

undeveloped land in the south-east of the settlement, by way of a 

separate amendment. 

• A new DPO (Development Plan Overlay) addressing drainage issues be 

introduced over the north-east extension area by way of a separate 

amendment. 

Harmers Haven 

The Independent Planning Panel agreed with the strategic direction recommended for 

Harmers Haven in Amendment C93, it noted: 

The Panel supports the limitation of the settlement boundary to existing zoned land. It 

would be strategically inappropriate to extend this settlement given servicing limitations 

and fire hazards. 

During the Panel Hearing, a discussion about the locations of the shared pathway in 

the coastal reserve was resolved by agreement to remove the reference to it. 

In conclusion, the Independent Planning Panel recommended that: 

• The Structure Plan for Harmers Haven be adopted subject to removal of the 

proposed shared pathway through the coastal reserve. 

Cape Paterson 

The Independent Planning Panel thought that key issues for consideration when 

assessing the Strategic Framework Plan for Cape Paterson was the proposed extent 

of growth and the location of that growth. 

Council had submitted during the Panel Hearing that the apparent disproportionate 

level of growth planned for Cape Paterson was a result of the methodology 

established in the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework to guide the 

distribution of projected demand: 

Existing activity nodes (settlements) to accommodate demand for additional 

development, with selected nodes accommodating more development than others, 

according to environmental, landscape and infrastructure opportunities and constraints. 

Council also submitted to the Independent Planning Panel that the: 

… position adopted by Council in 2008 took into the consideration high growth in 

Wonthaggi and surrounds, and Cape Paterson’s proximity to the commercial, retail 

health, and community services provided in Wonthaggi. 

In response, the Independent Planning Panel made the following observations: 

A key factor in assessing an appropriate settlement boundary for Cape Paterson is its 

role and function. Unlike most other settlements in Amendment C93, it is within a few 

minutes drive of Wonthaggi, a regional centre with higher order goods and services, 

employment opportunities, hospital and medical facilities, primary and secondary schools 

and a TAFE facility. Its close proximity to these urban services mean that it is more 

appropriate for growth than the more isolated settlements, and likely to be more 

sustainable as a community in the longer term. 




The Panel went on to conclude that: 

…it is appropriate for Cape Paterson to expand to absorb a percentage of the 

anticipated growth. However, the two proposed extension areas still need to be 

separately evaluated against coastal planning strategies and potential environmental 

impacts. 

In the subsequent evaluation, the Independent Planning Panel concluded that the 

proposed extension to the west was broadly inconsistent with Coastal Planning 

Policy, and presented a higher level of potential environmental impacts, in particular 

to the endangered Hooded Plover population on the adjacent surf beach. 

In conclusion, the Independent Planning Panel made the following recommendations: 

• The Strategic Framework Plan for Cape Paterson be adopted subject to 

deletion of the extension area to the west of the existing settlement. 

Comment 

The Independent Planning Panel has taken a consistent approach in the assessment of 

the Strategic Framework Plans for each of the Coastal Settlements. They have looked 

at the distribution of growth in conjunction with the availability of community services 

and existing community infrastructure. The changes to the Strategic Planning 

Frameworks recommended by the Independent Planning Panel are focused on 

providing long term sustainable communities, recognising the importance of the 

environment, and supporting Coastal Planning Policy initiatives. 

None of the proposed changes are at odds with the broader policy objectives set out 

in the Municipal Strategic Statement. 

The Independent Planning Panel has also recommended that Council: 

• Review the wording in Clause 21.10 to: 

o Ensure that the key points in the Framework relating to each 

settlement are included. 

o Ensure it is consistent with the relevant Strategic Frameworks Plans as 

amended as a result of the Panel’s recommendations. 

o Exclude references to matters outside the Strategic Framework Plan 

area and matters that are the responsibility of other agencies. 

• Revise the Strategic Framework Plans, to incorporate the Panel’s 

recommendations where necessary, and include them in Clause 21.10. 

This work has been undertaken and a revised Clause 21.10 Local areas, with the 

updated Strategic Framework Plans is included here at Attachment 3. 

Other Clauses in the Municipal Strategic Statement 

There were a number of other minor changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement 

recommended by the Independent Planning Panel. These changes, incorporate an 

introductory reference to the respective Coastal Settlements, and incorporate the 

appropriate supporting strategic documents as reference documents. The 

Independent Planning Panel made the following specific recommendations: 

• Clause 21.01 be amended to list the names of all the towns covered in Clause 

21.10; 

• The Framework be listed as a reference document in Clause 21.12 subject to 

updating of the Structure Plans and population data; and 




• The Victorian Coastal Strategy 2002 and Victorian Coastal Strategy 2008 be 

listed in Clause 21.12 as reference documents. 

Other Matters Raised by the Independent Planning Panel 

Emergency Management 

A number of submissions to the Independent Planning Panel reflected the growing 

awareness and concern about managing and planning for emergencies. The key issue 

to emerge through the Panel hearing was that a number of the settlements in Bass 

Coast only have one point of access. 

As a land use issue, it is one layer in the general consideration of whether a 

settlement should be designated for growth. In this case, the settlements with only 

one point of access have not been designated as growth areas. 

The issue then becomes one of management and responding to local conditions. 

The Independent Planning Panel has recommended that: 

• The Council should consult with local residents and the CFA regarding the 

need for, and the feasibility of providing, alternative emergency exit for 

residents of the settlements of Tenby Point, Harmers Haven and Jam Jerrup. 

Interpreting Ministerial Direction 13 

The Independent Planning Panel was concerned that there was some ambiguity about 

how to apply Ministerial Direction 13. 

The purpose of the Ministerial Direction is to set out the general requirements for 

consideration of the impacts of climate change on the Victoria coast. It applies to: 

• … any planning scheme amendment that provides for the rezoning of nonurban 

land for urban use and development of all land: 

o Abutting the coastline or a coastal reserve. 

o Less than 5 metres Australian Height Datum within one kilometre of 

the coastline including the Gippsland Lakes. 

The Independent Planning Panel provided the following observations: 

It is unclear whether the Direction is intended to relate only to rezonings of land below 5 

metres AHD which abuts the coastline or a coastal reserve, or is also intended to relate 

to rezonings of land above this height which abuts the coastline or a coastal reserve. 

The Panel notes also that the Direction appears to strictly apply only to rezonings from 

rural to urban use while they are in progress rather than the designation of land for 

future rezoning to urban use in structure plans. 

In response to these observations, the Independent Planning Panel has provided the 

following recommendations: 

• Clarification should be sought as to whether Ministerial Direction 13 is to be 

applied to rural to urban rezonings of land above 5 m AHD (as well as below 

5 m AHD (Australian Height Datum)) abutting the coast or coastal reserve. 

• Where rural to urban rezonings abutting the coast or coastal reserve are 

implied in structure plans, the future application of the Ministerial Direction 

to those rezonings should be foreshadowed in those structure plans. 




• In the Structure Plans for Coronet Bay, Grantville and Pioneer Bay and their 

description in Clause 21, indicate that proposed rezonings for urban use of 

land below 5 metres AHD (Australian Height Datum) abutting the coast or 

coastal reserve are to be exhibited with a Development Plan Overlay 

requiring the implementation of the required Coastal Hazard Vulnerability 

Assessment. 

This recommendation has been included in the updated Clause 21.10 Local Areas for 

these areas: 

• If later advice to the Council indicates that Ministerial Direction 13 applies 

also to land above 5 metres AHD (Australian Height Datum) (see 

Recommendation 6), then the structure plans for these and other settlements 

which contain land proposed for future urban rezoning above 5 metres AHD 

(Australian Height Datum) abutting the coast or coastal reserve should also 

indicate the future requirement for a DPO (Development Plan Overlay) 

implementing the required Coastal Hazard Vulnerability Assessment. 

Council officers will work with the Department of Planning and Community 

Development through the approval process with a view to addressing these 

recommendations and clarifying the expected application of Ministerial Direction 13. 

However, it should be noted that: 

• These issues do not directly affect the adoption Amendment C93, and any 

changes that might emerge out of this process will relate specifically to the 

process of future assessments; 

• Coastal planning strategies are dynamic, and the Coastal Planning Policy is 

under constant review, Council will utilise the most up to date planning 

strategies when assessing any future rezoning request; and 

• As a base line, Council applies the precautionary principle when considering 

whether an assessment is required in Coastal Areas. 

Conclusion 

The preparation and implementation of the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning 

Framework has been a long and complex project. Council has arrived at this point 

against the context of a planning environment that has been subject to numerous 

changes. Since work commenced on the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning 

Framework, the State Government has released two Victorian Coastal Strategy 

documents, the Minister for Planning has amended the State Planning Policy 

Framework to reflect the objectives of these documents, and as the Independent 

Planning Panel noted: 

…much of the policy and science relating to climate change impacts emerged after 

preparation of the Framework and, in some cases, after exhibition of the Amendment. 

The Panel hearing was conducted in a manner that reflected this dynamic 

environment. The Panel hearing provided a forum for reviewing the cumulative body 

of policy development undertaken by the State Government, and the Council 

application of this policy. 

The community submissions to Panel Hearing and the ensuing discussions scrutinised 

the fundamental principles of Coastal Planning Policy, and the aspiration for 

sustainable communities at the core of State Planning Policy. 




The Independent Planning Panel has provided clear direction on a number of matters, 

including: 

• Linear urban development adjacent to Coastal areas; and 

• The importance of community services and infrastructure in planning for 

sustainable communities; 

A number of recommendations that result from these directions do not support the 

position adopted by Council in 2008, specifically the proposals to extend Cape 

Paterson, Coronet Bay, and Pioneer Bay along the coast. However, there is general 

support from the Independent Planning Panel with regard to the broader strategic 

objectives that underpin the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework, including: 

• Protection of the non-urban coastal spaces between settlements; 

• The design guidelines for coastal areas; and 

• Managing long term growth on our coast. 

The Independent Planning Panel has also provided support for the work Council has 

undertaken to implement the Bass Coast Strategic Coastal Planning Framework. Subject 

to the modifications set out in this report, the Independent Planning Panel supports 

the adoption of Amendment C93. 

For the reasons set in this report, it is recommended that Council support the 

recommendations of the Independent Planning Panel, implement the changes the 

Strategic Framework Plans for each settlement, and adopt Amendment C93. 


1. That Council, having complied with Sections 22, 23 & 27 of the 

Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolve to adopt, in accordance 

with Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, 

Amendment C93 to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme in accordance 

with the recommendations of the Independent Panel. 

2. That Council forward Amendment C93 to the Minister for Planning 

for approval in accordance with Section 31(1) of the Planning and 

Environment Act 1987. 

Attachments 

AT-1 C93 Panel Report 245 Pages 

AT-2 Proposed Design & Development Overlay 2 Pages 

AT-3 Revised MSS - Clause 21.10 Local Areas 63 Pages 





Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. Ross Smith 


Cr Barlow called for a division 

For Against 

Cr Barlow Cr Daly 

Cr Paul Cr Duscher 

Cr Dowman Cr Smith 

Cr Wright 

Moved: Cr. John Duscher / Seconded: Cr. Phil Wright 

That Council adopt Amendment C93 with the following changes to the 

Amendment as it affects Cape Paterson: 

LOST 

• Retain land to the west of the town within the town boundary; and 

• Review the amount of land to be included in the town boundary to 

the north. 

Cr Barlow called for a division 

For Against 

Cr Daly Cr Barlow 

Cr Duscher Cr Paul 

Cr Smith Cr Dowman 

Cr Wright 

Meeting adjourned 

The meeting was adjourned at 6.36pm 

Meeting resumed 

The meeting was resumed at 6.42pm 

Cr Wright was absent at the resumption of the meeting. 

Cr Wright rejoined the meeting at 6.43pm. 

CARRIED 




J.2 Amendment to fix up minor errors in the Bass Coast Planning Scheme 




Declaration 

The Author has no direct or indirect interest in this issue. 

Summary 




communities. 

The Bass Coast Planning Scheme is one of Council’s key strategic documents. It is 

also a living, dynamic document that is subject to regular change. Over the past 18 

months the content and form of the document has been subject to a number of 

significant updates. There have been a number of key strategic planning projects 

undertaken by Council that have required changes to the Municipal Strategic 

Statement. The Department of Planning and Community Development have also 

reviewed and amended the State Planning Policy Framework. Through this process of 

change, the Planning Scheme can inherit minor errors. In addition, the ongoing 

process of review reveals a number of historical aberrations. 

Council officers have collated a number of errors in the Bass Coast Planning Scheme 

that can be fixed through the process of a planning scheme amendment, as a Section 

20(4) Ministerial Intervention. 

Introduction 

This report has been prepared to provide: 

• An outline of the minor errors contained within the Bass Coast Planning 

Scheme; 

• A recommendation that Council resolve to request the Minister undertakes 

to prepare a Planning Scheme amendment under Section 20(4) to fix up 

minor errors in the planning scheme ordinance and maps. 


Section 12(1)(c) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires Council to regularly 

review the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 

Finances 

Costs to Council principally involve officer time and administrative fees. 

Stakeholders 

Stakeholders include the entire municipality who have an interest in making sure the 

Bass Coast Planning Scheme is accurate, up-to-date and effective in achieving the 

Shire’s land use and development planning objectives. 





The Planning and Environment Act 1987 outlines the statutory procedure Council must 

follow when amending the Planning Scheme. 

Other Options 

There are three options available to Council. 

Option 1 - The first option is to prepare this amendment and refer the amendment 

to the Minister for Planning for authorisation. 

Implications 

The effect of this is that the Planning Scheme will continue to operate with the 

appropriate land use controls. 

Option 2 - The second option is to prepare the amendment with changes. 

Implications 

If the changes were substantial Council officers may be required to re-submit the 

report with further recommendations. 

Option 3 - The third option is to not prepare this amendment. 

Implications 

The effect of this is that the planning scheme will continue to operate with these 

minor errors. 


This report documents a diverse range of errors in the Planning Scheme maps and 

Ordinance. Errors range from spelling errors to zoning errors and also there have 

been some changes in the administration of land management that have failed to be 

identified. The list below outlines the errors and recommendations to fix them. 

The errors include: 

1. The property at the corner of Bass Highway and Stanley Road in Bass is currently 

zoned as Public Use Zone 1. Aerial photo shows the site looks like a quarry. The 

property is also listed as privately owned by Hill, E & R. 


Other sand extraction sites around Grantville are controlled by the Special Use 

Zone – Schedule 2 (Extractive Industry). This zone is specifically written to 

recognise and address use and development associated with extractive industry. 

It is recommended that the site at Corner of Stanley and Bass Highway be 

rezoned from the Public Use Zone-Schedule 1 to Special Use Zone – Schedule 2 

2. A small parcel of land in between 2 and 2A Beach Street, Cowes is currently 

shown as Residential 1 Zone; it is nominated as a Reserve and provides path 

access to the Phillip Island Yacht Club site. 


It is recommended that the zoning is changed to recognise the public function of 

the site. It is recommended that the Public Park and Recreation Zone that 

applies to the Phillip Island Yacht Club site is extended to apply to the subject 

site. 




3. Heritage Overlay Schedule 111 is attached to the incorrect property at 706 

Loch-Wonthaggi Road and should be 704 Loch-Wonthaggi Road. 


Change planning scheme Map 22 Heritage Overlay to reflect the proper 

designation. 

4. Land at the corner of Kitty Miller Bay Road and Watts Road is zoned as Public 

Use Zone 4 (transport) however the land is managed by the Phillip Island Nature 

Park and should be Public Use Zone 7 (any other public use). There is also an 

Environment Significance Overlay - Schedule 1 which should be removed. 


a. It is recommended that the zoning is changed to Public Use Zone Schedule 7 

(Any other Public Use) to reflect that the site is not used for transport. 

b. Amend Planning Scheme Map 37 Environment Significance Overlay and 

remove the overlay from the property that is 2041/PP3389. 

5. Land at the corner of Williams Street and High Street, Inverloch is currently 

Public Use Zone 1 but should be Mixed Use Zone, in alignment with properties 

to the north and south along Williams Street and the Inverloch Design 

Framework Plan. 


It is recommended that the zoning at 12 Williams Street is changed to Mixed Use 

Zone to reflect the current and surrounding land use. 

6. White Road, between McKenzie Street and Korumburra Road, is incorrectly 

zoned as a Vic Roads road. 


The Planning Scheme maps should be changed to reflect that the section of 

White Road between McKenzie Street and Korumburra Road is managed by 


A number of spelling and grammatical errors have also been identified within the 

Planning Scheme Ordinance. The relevant clauses, along with mark-ups are attached, 

and include: 

Clause 21.03 

Clause 21.10 

Clause 43.02.03 

Clause 45.05 

Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 1 

The provisions of the Significant Landscape Overlay currently allows for noxious 

weeds to be exempt from requiring a permit for removal. This should be extended to 

include environmental weeds. Also, the word 'vegetation' should be replaced with 

'trees/shrubs'. 




This amendment involves minor matters to the Planning Scheme that will assist in the 

administration and enforcement of scheme provisions. It will ensure the scheme is 

kept up to date and effective. It is on this basis that Council should refer the 

amendment to the Minister for Planning for authorisation and approval. 

Conclusion 

The correction of minor errors outlined in this report is required to ensure that the 

appropriate land use planning controls are applied throughout the shire. The 

recommended changes to zones and overlays reflect the current and surrounding land 

status and use. 

In addition, the Bass Coast Planning Scheme is a public document which should not 

contain spelling and grammatical errors. The amendments will uphold the integrity 

and professional image of Bass Coast Shire. 


1. That Council seek the authorisation from the Minister for Planning to 

prepare the Amendment to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 

2. That Council seek exemption from giving notice of the amendment in 

accordance with Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 

1987. 

3. That Council ask the Minister for Planning to approve the Amendment 

in accordance with Section 20 of the Planning and Environment Act 

1987. 

Attachments 

AT-1 MSS - Clause 21.03 2 Pages 

AT-2 MSS - Clause 21.10 40 Pages 

AT-3 Schedule to Restructure Overlay 1 Page 


Moved: Cr. Peter Paul / Seconded: Cr. Gareth Barlow 


CARRIED 




J.3 C117 Removal of Dalyston Restructure Overlay Request - Post exhibition 







communities. 

Previous Items: SR1/09 - Removal of Dalyston Restructure Overlay Request - 

Council - 19 August 2009 

SR3/10 - Proposed Amendment to the Bass Coast Planning 

Scheme and Combined Planning Permit Application, Dalyston- 

Glen Forbes Road, Dalyston, Remove the Restructure Overlay 

& 100019 Resubdivide existing 11 lots into 8 lots - Council - 17 

February 2010 

Declaration 

The author has no direct or indirect interests you may have in relation to the issue. 

Summary 

In November 2009, Council received a request to amend the Bass Coast Planning 

Scheme. The request was to delete the Restructure Overlay from Lots 1-11 on 

Lodged Plan 5558 in the northern part of Dalyston and Lot 1 TP 924899. Council 

also proposed to remove the Restructure Overlay from Lots 14-24 on Lodged Plan 

5558, to facilitate the orderly development of the area. 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 17 February 2010, Council considered the 

proposed planning scheme amendment in conjunction with a planning permit 

application 100019 to subdivide part of the land into eight allotments. 

Council made the following resolution: 

1. That Council seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning in 

accordance with Section 8A(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 

to prepare a combined amendment to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme 

and planning permit 100019. 

2. Subject to authorisation from the Minister for Planning, exhibit the 

combined amendment to the Bass Coast Planning Scheme and planning 

permit that seeks the following changes: 

• Remove Restructure Overlay - Schedule 6 from Lots 1-11 on Plan 

of Subdivision 5558 and Lots 14-24 on Plan of Subdivision 5558. 

• Subdivide part of the subject site into eight lots. 

3. That if there are submissions received in response to the exhibition of 

the amendment that Council consents to the submissions being 

forwarded directly to Planning Panels Victoria for consideration. 




Council received authorisation to prepare Amendment C117, from the Minister for 

Planning on 10 September 2010. 

Council placed the proposed amendment on exhibition on the 7 October 2010 for a 

period of 30 days. The exhibition period extended to 5 November 2010. 

At the completion of the exhibition period Council had received: 

• Six submissions from Referral Authorities. 

Council received internal advice from: 

• Infrastructure - Waste Management. 

This Council Report has been prepared to provide: 

• An overview of the submissions. 

• A recommendation that Council adopts Amendment C117 and sends the 

amendment to the Minister for approval. 

The proposed amendment and permit are generally consistent with the Bass Coast 

Planning Scheme and the recommendations of the Wonthaggi Dalyston Structure Plan. 

Introduction 

Planning Scheme Amendment 

The proposed amendment applies to land contained within Lots 1-11 on Lodged Plan 

5558, Lots 14-24 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Lot 1 Title of Plan 924811. Under Section 

96(A) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 a planning permit application to 

subdivide land at Lots 1-11 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Lot 1 Title of Plan 924811 was 

submitted in conjunction the planning scheme amendment. 

The land is located in the northern part of Dalyston in an area bounded by Dalyston- 

Glen Forbes Road to the east and Bent Street to the south. 

Figure 1: The subject site 




The amendment proposes to remove the Restructure Overlay from Lots 1-11 and 

14-24 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Title of Plan 924811 to allow for consolidation of 

urban development within the township boundary. 

The amendment is in accordance with the Bass Coast Planning Scheme and Wonthaggi 

Dalyston Structure Plan. 

The proposed subdivision plan includes subdividing this part of the subject site into 

eight lots, sized approximately 670 square metres, all individually fronting Dalyston- 

Glen Forbes Road. 

The entire site is identified in the Wonthaggi Dalyston Structure Plan as an area that 

should accommodate residential growth. 

History 

The Restructure Overlay was applied to the land under the former Bass Planning 

Scheme and was translated into the Bass Coast Planning Scheme in December 1999. 

The overlay was placed over the subject site at a time when there was no reticulated 

sewerage within the township and it was considered that the infrastructure 

requirements could not support a standard residential housing development. 

Dalyston was connected to the reticulated sewerage system in 1998, resulting in a 

superfluous overlay on the land. 

Dalyston is now connected to the reticulated sewerage system and it is considered 

that the subject site can now be developed to a standard density without jeopardising 

the amenity of the township. 

Submissions 

Surrounding land owners 

No submissions were received. 

Referral Authorities 

Submissions were received from: 

• Environment Protection Authority; 

• Westernport Water; 

• Department of Sustainability and Environment; 

• SPI Electricity Pty Ltd; 

• Telstra; and 

• APA Group (Alinta) 

The referral authorities had no objections to the planning scheme amendment and 

proposed subdivision. SPI Electricity Pty Ltd, Telstra, and Alinta submitted conditions 

to be included on any planning permit to be issued for the proposed subdivision. The 

submissions from the referral authorities can be found at Attachment 1. 

Internal Referrals 

The Waste Management team from the Infrastructure Directorate identified that 

there are no waste management issues with the proposal. 

Post Exhibition 

No issues were raised during the exhibition period and no submissions were received 

from surrounding landholders. 




Council officers have negotiated with the proponent to secure off-site and community 

infrastructure and prepared a draft Section 173 Agreement to secure these 

commitments. 




to be taken into account when making decisions. The following clauses should be 

considered in the assessment of the proposal. 

Clause 11 – Settlement 

Planning is to anticipate and respond to the needs of existing and future communities 

through provision of zoned and serviced land for housing, employment, recreation 

and open space, commercial and community facilities and infrastructure. 

Planning is to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing 

settlement patterns, and investment in transport and communication, water and 

sewerage and social facilities. 

Clause 11.02-1 Supply of urban land 

Planning is to ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, 

retail, industrial, recreational, institutional and other community uses. Planning for 

urban growth should consider opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment 

and intensification of existing urban areas. 

Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles 

Planning is to develop regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are 

prosperous and are environmental sustainable by directing growth to locations where 

utility, transport, commercial and social infrastructure and services are available or 

can be provided in the most efficient and sustainable manner. Planning is to ensure 

that there is a sufficient supply of appropriately located residential, commercial, and 

industrial land across a region to meet the needs identified at regional level. 

Planning is to maintain and enhance regional Victoria’s competitive advantages by 

providing adequate and competitive land supply to meet future housing and urban 

needs and to ensure effective utilisation of land. 

Planning is to promote liveable regional settlements and healthy communities by 

encouraging the development of compact urban areas which are based around 

existing or planned activity centres to maximise accessibility to facilities and services. 

Clause 15 – Built Environment and Heritage 

Clause 15.01-3 Neighbourhood and subdivision design 

Planning is to ensure the design of subdivisions achieves attractive, liveable, walkable, 

cyclable, diverse and sustainable neighbourhoods by creating compact neighbourhoods 

that have walkable distances between activities. Car dependence can be reduced by 

allowing for networks for walking and cycling and subdivision layouts that allow easy 

movement within and between neighbourhoods. 




Clause 15.02-1 Energy Efficiency 

Planning is to encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient 

use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions by consolidating 

urban development and supporting low energy forms of transport such as walking and 

cycling. 

Clause 16 - Housing 

Clause 16.01-1 Integrated housing 

Planning is to promote a housing market that meets community needs. Housing in 

existing urban areas should be increased in appropriate locations, including underutilised 

urban land. 

Clause 16.01-2 Location of residential development 

An adequate supply of redevelopment opportunities within the established urban area 

should be provided to reduce the pressure for fringe development. 

Clause 16.01-5 Housing affordability 

An objective of this clause is to deliver more affordable housing closer to jobs, 

transport and services and improve housing affordability by land supply is sufficient to 

meet demand. 

Clause 16.02-1 Rural residential development 

Planning and responsible authorities should reduce the proportion of new housing 

development provided in rural areas and encourage the consolidation in existing 

settlements where investment in physical and community infrastructure and services 

has already been made. 

Clause 18 - Transport 

Clause 18.02-1 Sustainable personal transport 

The objective of this clause is to promote the use of sustainable personal transport. 

Planning should encourage walking and cycling by creating environments that are safe 

and attractive as well as develop high quality pedestrian environments that are 

accessible to footpath-bound vehicles such as wheelchairs, prams and scooters. 

Development should provide opportunities to create more sustainable transport 

options such as walking, cycling and public transport. 

Clause 19 - Infrastructure 

Clause 19.03-1 Development contribution plans 

Planning is to facilitate the timely provision of planned infrastructure to communities 

through the preparation and implementation of development contributions plans. 

Local Planning Policy Framework 

The Municipal Strategic Statement provides a vision for the development of the Shire. 

It sets out key strategies that provide clear directions for land use and development 

within the municipality for the next 15 years. 

The Municipal Strategic Statement is consistent with State Policy and recognises key 

issues that influence land use and development in certain areas of the Shire. The 

Municipal Strategic Statement specifies that settlement patterns in the Shire indicate a 

need to accommodate approximately 4,400 dwellings by 2011. 




The following policies of the Local Planning Policy Framework should be considered 

by Council when making an assessment of the proposed amendment. 

Clause 21.03 Key issues 

The key issues for the Shire, relevant to this proposed amendment and subdivision 

include: 

Clause 21.03-1 Settlement 

• Managing expectations regarding future residential or rural residential 

development of rural land, and promote sustainable rural land use. 

• Managing significant pressure from population growth and visitors. 

• Avoiding development in inappropriate locations. 

Clause 21.03-2 Land uses 

Population and housing 

• Providing housing to meet the demands of a changing demographic profile. 

• Providing affordable housing in the municipality. 

Clause 21.03-4 Landscape and Built form 

• Maintaining individual settlement identity. 

Clause 21.03-5 Infrastructure 

• Providing cycling and walking tracks. 

Clause 21.04 Vision 

The relevant aspects of Council's vision include: 

Settlement 

• Communities with their own identity. 

• A quality urban environment and well-functioning towns that benefit both 


Housing 

• Diverse housing options and types for all ages meeting changing household 

characteristics. 

• Increased housing densities in proximity to commercial centres, community 

facilities and services. 

• Affordable housing options provided in the municipality. 

Environment 

• A high quality built environment enhancing the surrounding natural 

environment and landscape values. 


• New developments designed and sited to complement the specific context in 

which they sit and take account of existing land form, vegetation and urban 

character. 

Infrastructure 

• Effective and efficient road, pedestrian, cycling and drainage networks provided 

throughout the Shire. 




Clause 21.05-1 Growth of towns 

This clause deals with Settlement Hierarchy. Dalyston has been defined as a hamlet 

with low spatial growth capacity. Growth within existing urban or appropriately 

zoned land, primarily through infill capacity and defined settlement boundaries will be 

encouraged. 

The objectives and strategies of this clause include: 

Objective: To identify towns that are suitable for urban growth and to provide for 

sufficient land in these towns for growth until 2030. 

Strategies 

Ensure that the growth and consolidation of settlements is consistent the Settlement 

Hierarchy. 

Restrict urban development to existing urban areas. 

Objective: To ensure that residential development and related urban uses are 

restricted to existing or identified settlements. 

Clause 21.06-1 Housing 

Objective: To increase housing densities and the consolidation of urban areas in 

appropriate locations and restrict increased housing densities and the 

consolidation of urban areas in inappropriate locations. 

Strategy 

Discourage increased housing densities in Cape Paterson, Dalyston, Kilcunda, Bass, Corinella, 

Coronet Bay, Newhaven, Ventnor and Rhyll. Ensure that any development is consistent with 

the prevailing character of the area and is only located in areas where there is adequate 

infrastructure and community services. 

Objective: To ensure new residential development contributes to the new and 

upgraded infrastructure. 

Strategy 

Ensure new residential developments contribute towards the provision of infrastructure. 

Specific Implementation 

Development should achieve the following densities: 

• 1 dwelling per 450 sqm on land located within 800 metres of a main 

commercial activity centre or community facility. 

Clause 21.10 Local areas 

Clause 21.10-12 Dalyston 

The Dalyston Strategic Framework Plan establishes a clear direction for the future 

physical form of Dalyston in that it defines a town boundary for residential 

development. 

Settlement 

• Maintaining Dalyston as a small residential community. 

• Consolidating urban development within the township boundary. 




Land Uses 

• Encouraging infill development. 

• In response to the recent provision of infrastructure services for Dalyston, 

supporting the removal of the Restructure Overlay that applies to land in 

North Dalyston to cater for new residential growth. 

• Supporting the retention of a convenience store in the commercial area. 


• Encouraging high quality residential subdivisions that are responsive to the 

opportunities and constraints of a site and character of the area. 

Infrastructure 

• Improving infrastructure provision for footpaths, roads, and drains within the 

township. 

• Improving the pedestrian and bicycle connections to the Bass Coast Rail Trail. 

Clause 22.01 Stormwater Management Policy 

Council's Municipal Strategic Statement identifies stormwater drainage as a concern in 

urban areas where there is inadequate street drainage infrastructure. The objectives 

of this clause include: 

• To incorporate stormwater management considerations in the decisionmaking 

for the use and development of land. 

• To maintain and enhance stormwater quality introduced to the drainage and 

waterway environment of the Shire. 

• To maintain stormwater flows and discharges at a maximum of the predevelopment 

flow level. 

• To maximise the effectiveness of stormwater infrastructure in protecting the 

waters of Bass Coast Shire. 

Particular Provisions 

All subdivisions must meet the Clause 56 principles of the Bass Coast Planning 

Scheme. 

Clause 56 – Residential Subdivision 

Clause 56.03 Liveable and Sustainable Communities deals with Walkable 

Neighbourhoods, Built Environment and Neighbourhood Character. 

Objectives: To create compact neighbourhoods that are oriented around easy 

walking distances to activity centres, schools and community facilities, 

public open space and public transport. 

To create urban places with identity and character. 

To design subdivisions that respond to neighbourhood character. 

Clause 56.04 Lot Design deals with Lot Diversity and Distribution, Lot Area and 

Building Envelopes, Solar Orientation of Lots, Street Orientation and Common Areas. 

Objectives: To achieve housing densities that support compact and walkable 

neighbourhoods and the efficient provision of public transport services. 




To provide lots with areas and dimensions that enable the appropriate 

siting and construction of a dwelling, solar access, private open space, 

vehicle access and parking, water management, easements and the 

retention of significant vegetation and site features. 

To provide good solar orientation of lots and solar access for future 

dwellings. 

To provide a lot layout that contributes to community social 

interaction, personal safety and property security. 

To identify common areas and the purpose for which the area is 

commonly held. 

Clause 56.05 Urban Landscape deals with Integrated Urban Landscapes and Public 

Open Space. 

Objectives: To provide attractive and continuous landscaping in streets and public 

open spaces that contribute to the character and identity of new 

neighbourhoods and urban places or to existing or preferred 

neighbourhood character in existing urban areas. 

To incorporate natural and cultural features in the design of streets and 

public open space where appropriate. 

To protect and enhance native habitat and discourage the planting and 

spread of noxious weeds. 

To provide a network of quality, well-distributed, multi-functional and 

cost-effective public open space that includes local parks, active open 

space, linear parks and trails, and links to regional open space. 

To provide a network of public open space that caters for a broad 

range of users. 

To encourage healthy and active communities. 

Clause 56.06 Access and Mobility Management deals with Integrated Mobility, Walking 

and Cycling Networks, PublicTransport Networks, Neighbourhood Street Networks 

and Lot Access. 

Objectives: To provide for walking (including persons with impaired mobility), 

cycling, public transport and other motor vehicles in an integrated 

manner. 

To contribute to community health and well being by encouraging 

walking and cycling as part of the daily lives of residents, employees and 

visitors. 

To provide safe and direct movement through and between 

neighbourhoods by pedestrians and cyclists. 

To provide an arterial road and neighbourhood street network that 

supports a direct, efficient and safe public transport system. 

To encourage maximum use of public transport. 

To provide for safe vehicle access between roads and lots. 




Clause 56.07 Integrated Water Management deals with Drinking Water Supply, 

Reused and Recycled Water, Waste Water Management and Urban Run-off 

Management. 

Objectives: To reduce the use of drinking water. 

To provide an adequate, cost-effective supply of drinking water. 

To provide for the substitution of drinking water for non-drinking 

purposes with reused and recycled water. 

To provide a waste water system that is adequate for the maintenance 

of public health and the management of effluent in an environmentally 

friendly manner. 

To minimise damage to properties and inconvenience to residents from 

urban run-off. 

To ensure that the street operates adequately during major storm 

events and provides for public safety. 

To minimise increases in stormwater run-off and protect the 

environmental values and physical characteristics of receiving waters 

from degradation by urban run-off. 

Clause 56.08 Site Management 

Objectives: To protect drainage infrastructure and receiving waters from 

sedimentation and contamination. 

To protect the site and surrounds from environmental degradation or 

nuisance prior to and during construction of subdivision works. 

To encourage the re-use of materials from the site and recycled 

materials in the construction of subdivisions where practicable. 

Clause 56.09 Utilities deals with Shared Trenching, Electricity, Telecommunications 

and Gas, Fire Hydrants and Public Lighting. 

Objectives: To maximise the opportunities for shared trenching. 

Council Adopted Strategies 

To minimise constraints on landscaping within street reserves. 

To provide public utilities to each lot in a timely, efficient and cost 

effective manner. 

To provide fire hydrants and fire plugs in positions that enable fire 

fighters to access water safely, effectively and efficiently. 

To provide public lighting to ensure the safety of pedestrians, cyclists 

and vehicles. 

To provide pedestrians with a sense of personal safety at night. 

Wonthaggi Dalyston Structure Plan 

The Wonthaggi Dalyston Structure Plan 2008 provides a framework for the future 

development of Dalyston. The Structure Plan notes that residential growth within 

Dalyston should occur moderately. It also notes that there are no significant 

constraints to servicing future residential areas in Dalyston. 




The consideration for the removal of the Restructure Overlay is recommended in the 

Structure Plan. Therefore, the Structure Plan supports the combined amendment and 

permit. 

Finances 

The cost of preparing the planning scheme amendment and assessing the planning 

permit application are the responsibility of the proponent. 

Other costs principally involve officer time. 

Stakeholders 

The provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 set out the requirements for 

planning scheme amendments. 

Stakeholders include: 

• The Bass Coast community; 

• Surrounding landowners; 

• The Proponent; 

• Bass Coast Shire Council; and 

• A number of referral agencies. 

Referral authorities and surrounding landowners were sent copies of the amendment 

documentation. The proposed amendment and permit application were placed on 

exhibition through local media and the Department of Planning and Community 

Development website. 


The proposed amendment makes proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions, in 

particular the objectives of Planning in Victoria as set out in Section 4(1) of the 

Planning and Environment Act 1987. 

An amendment to the Planning Scheme is subject to the provisions of the Planning and 

Environment Act 1987 which stipulates the process Council must follow when 

preparing an amendment. 

Other Options 

Option 1 – Adopt Amendment C117, and issue a planning permit for application 

100019 in accordance with the draft planning permit attached to this report. 

Implications 

There are no negative implications for Council if it adopts this option. The process of 

negotiation after the exhibition means that the concerns of submitters have been 

addressed and the provision of an appropriate level of infrastructure has been secured 

through conditions and the section 173 agreement. 

Option 2 – Adopt Amendment C117, and issue a planning permit for planning permit 

application 100019 with some additional changes. 




Implications 

If the proposed changes were minor changes, or technical in nature, Council would 

need to provide supporting material to the Minister for Planning, justifying the 

changes. If the changes were substantial Council may be required to re-exhibit the 

combined planning scheme amendment and planning permit application. This would 

mean that Council incurs some additional costs for the process of re-exhibition. 

Option 3 – Council has an option to abandon Amendment C117. 

Implications 

The effect of this is twofold; Council would have to refuse the planning permit 

application 100019. Council would also be sending a confusing message to the 

community and development industry by abandoning a planning scheme amendment 

supported by Council policy and adopted strategic planning. 


Submissions 

There were no objections to the proposed amendment from referral authorities or 

internal directorates. No submissions were received from surrounding landholders. 

Conditions from Referral Authorities have also been included in the Planning Permit. 

Submissions can be viewed at Attachment 1. 

Proposed Section173 Agreement 

Council officers have worked with the proponent to prepare conditions for the 

planning permit for the proposed subdivision. The conditions have been incorporated 

into a section 173 agreement to provide on-site and off-site infrastructure. The 

proposed planning permit and section 173 agreement include provision of the 

following items: 

• Construction of a single concrete driveway crossing to each Lot on the 

proposed Subdivision; 

• Construction of property and road drainage kerb, channel and pavement 

backfill on the western side of that section of Dalyston-Glen Forbes Road 

abutting the Subject Land and including the kerb return into Bent Street; 

• Construction of a concrete footpath along Dalyston-Glen Forbes Road from 

the back of the kerb in Bent Street to the existing footpath construction for 

the Dalyston Church Estate to the north of the Subject Land; 

• Full construction and drainage of the full width of the Bent Street frontage of 

the Subject Land linking to the kerb return area from Dalyston-Glen Forbes 

Road, including kerb and channel on both sides; and 

• All construction works adjacent to the Subject Land shall include kerb and 

channel, an all weather sealed surface, signage, streetlighting and guide posts 

to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 

Particular Provisions - Clause 56 Assessment 

Council Officers have reviewed the Clause 56 assessment undertaken by the 

proponent and submitted as part of the planning scheme amendment and subdivision 

permit application material. 




The proposed subdivision layout generally meets the objectives and standards of 

Clause 56 of the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 

Planning permit conditions 

The proposed planning permit with conditions was exhibited as part of the 

amendment documentation. The referral authority conditions have been translated 

directly into the proposed planning permit. A copy of the revised proposed planning 

permit can be found at Attachment 2. 

Finalising the Amendment Documentation 

The amendment documentation has been modified to reflect minor errors in the 

description of land affected by the amendment and planning permit application. 

The amendment affects land contained within Lots 1-11 on Lodged Plan 5558, Lots 

14-24 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Lot 1 Title of Plan 924811. Under Section 96(A) of 

the Planning and Environment Act 1987 a planning permit application to subdivide land 

at Lots 1-11 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Lot 1 Title of Plan 924811 was submitted in 

conjunction the planning scheme amendment. 

The amendment documentation is included at Attachments 2 3, 4 5 6 7 and 8. 

Conclusion 

The proposed amendment supports the objectives of the State Planning Policy 

Framework, the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic 

Statement as well as the recommendations of the Wonthaggi Dalyston Structure Plan 

2008. 

The subdivision proposal is generally in accordance with the requirements of Clause 

56 of the Bass Coast Planning Scheme and is consistent with objectives and strategies 

of the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 

The proposed amendment and subdivision provides an excellent opportunity for infill 

development, consolidating urban development within the Dalyston township 

boundary, encouraged and supported by local policy. Without an amendment to the 

Bass Coast Planning Scheme, the part of the site Lots 1-11 on Lodged Plan 5558 and 

Title of Plan 924811 can only be developed into a maximum of six allotments. The 

amendment and subdivision will allow for eight allotments. 

As Bass Coast Shire grows, it is important that Council anticipates and responds to 

the needs of existing and future communities through provision of zoned and serviced 

land for housing, employment, recreation, and open space, commercial and 

community facilities and infrastructure. 

It is recommended that Council resolve to adopt Amendment C117 to the Bass 

Coast Planning Scheme and forward the amendment to the Minister for Planning for 

approval. It is also recommended that the Planning Permit 100019 for the subdivision 

of land contained within Lot 1 to 11 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Lot 1 Title of Plan 

924811 is sent to the Minister for Planning for approval. 





1. That Council resolve to adopt Amendment C117 to the Bass Coast 

Planning Scheme in accordance with Section 29(1) of the Planning and 


2. That Council forward Amendment C117 to the Minister for Planning for 

approval in accordance with Section 11(4) (b) of the Planning and 


3. That Council send the Planning Permit 100019 for the subdivision of 

land contained within Lot 1 to 11 on Lodged Plan 5558 and Title of Plan 

924811 into 8 residential lots, to the Minister for Planning for approval. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Referral Authority submissions 12 Pages 

AT-2 Proposed S173 agreement 9 Pages 

AT-3 C117 List of Amendments 1 Page 

AT-4 C117 Explanatory Report 6 Pages 

AT-5 C117 Instruction Sheet 1 Page 

AT-6 C117 List of Changes 1 Page 

AT-7 Proposed Planning Permit 100019 7 Pages 

AT-8 C117 - Map 1 Page 


Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. John Duscher 


CARRIED 




J.4 Proposed Development Plan - Schedule 19: Justice Road Cowes 







communities. 

Previous Items: SR3/10 - Proposed Development Plan - Schedule 19: Justice 

Road Cowes - Council - 20 October 2010 

Declaration 

The author has no direct or indirect interest in relation to this issue. 

Summary 

Amendment C95 rezoned land in west Cowes from the Low Density Residential 

Zone to the Residential 1 Zone and was gazetted in October 2009. It also applied a 

new Development Plan Overlay -Schedule 19 to land fronting Justice Road, Cowes. 

The Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 19 requires that a Development Plan be 

prepared and endorsed by Council before any planning permits can be issued for 

development. 




A Development Plan has been prepared by Council officers in accordance with the 

requirements of the Development Plan Overlay - Schedule 19. Key requirements for 

the Development Plan include: 

• Providing a convenient and safe internal road network; 

• Provides a convenient and safe pedestrian network in accordance with Bass 

Coast Shire’s adopted Bicycle Strategy; 

• Provides convenient and safe pedestrian and road linkages to surrounding 

areas; 

• Provides a sensitive residential interface with adjoining residential land in the 

form of the existing vegetation buffer zone on the eastern boundary of the 

lots; 

• Prevents any lots from gaining direct access from the subject land to Ventnor 

Road; and 

• Does not impact on significant vegetation. 

The proposed Development Plan is included at Attachment 1. 

The Development Plan and supporting material was placed on exhibition for public 

comment on 9 September 2010. The formal exhibition of the Development Plan is 

not required under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, but it provides further 

opportunity for interested parties to make submissions and be kept informed about 

the proposed development. The informal exhibition period closed on 24 September 

2010. 

One submission was received during this period. In addition, Council’s Infrastructure 

Directorate continues to provide advice and comment about traffic management and 

shared bicycle and pedestrian pathways. 

This Council report has been prepared to provide: 

Introduction 

• An overview of the proposed Development Plan 

• A recommendation that Council endorse the Development Plan. 

Amendment C95 

During the preparation of Amendment C95 which concerned the ‘Whitesands’ 

development, Council was approached by a planning consultant representing the 

majority of landowners in Justice Road, who requested that the land be included in 

the proposed rezoning. 

The inclusion of these lots in Amendment C95 was supported by the Bass Coast 

Planning Scheme and the Phillip Island and San Remo Design Framework. The land was 

within the identified urban boundary of Cowes, had the appropriate infrastructure 

services, and was void of any significant ecological or environmental attributes. 

Development Plan Overlay 

Amendment C95 also made provision for the introduction of a Development Plan 

Overlay which would apply to the Low Density Residential Zone properties on Justice 

Road. The decision to apply a Development Plan Overlay to the Justice Road 

properties responded to existing conditions in the area, including: 

• The existing subdivision pattern and separate ownership of each lot; 




• The depth and configuration of each lot; 

• The single road frontage; and 

• Planning for change on surrounding greenfield sites 

It was also considered to be an appropriate planning mechanism to ensure that an 

integrated planning outcome could be achieved across an extended period of time. It 

was anticipated that the different aspirations of landowners could not be coordinated 

without an overriding guide indicating how these properties should be developed in 

an integrated manner. 

Development Plan 

The Development Plan was prepared by Council officers in response to the 

Development Plan Overlay - Schedule 19. 

The guiding principles for the proposed layout were very simple; 

• Provide a midblock road reserve which avoided existing dwellings and 

provided two street frontages; 

• Limit the number of crossovers and control traffic movements on Justice 

Road; 

• Maximise the potential lot numbers, maintain good solar orientation for lots 

and introduce an indicative lot size that reflected surrounding subdivision 

patterns; and 

• Provide opportunities for pedestrian and cycle connections to existing and 

planned networks. 

Submissions 

The Development Plan and supporting material was placed on exhibition for public 

comment on 9 September 2010. 

Council received one formal submission. The submission raised the following issues: 

• Hope the changes do not occur while the owners are living at their property, 

as they ‘like ambiance of larger allotments’; 

• The property has a shed which is located entirely within the area of the 

proposed road; and 

• Seeking confirmation that the ‘plan can never be implemented on our property 

without our consent’. 

A response to this submission is provided in the Officer's comments section of this 

report. 




to be taken into account when making decisions. Sections of the State Planning Policy 

Framework considered relevant to an assessment of Development Plan – Schedule 19 

are: 

Clause 11.01 Settlement 

Planning is to anticipate and respond to the needs of existing and future communities 

through provision of zoned and serviced land for housing, employment, recreation, 

and open space, commercial and community facilities and infrastructure. 




Planning is to recognise the need for, and as far as practicable contribute towards: 

• Health and safety. 

• Diversity of choice. 

• Adaptation in response to changing technology. 

• Economic viability. 

• A high standard of urban design and amenity. 

• Energy efficiency. 

• Prevention of pollution to land, water and air. 

• Protection of environmentally sensitive areas and natural resources. 

• Accessibility. 

• Land use and transport integration. 

Planning is to prevent environmental problems created by siting incompatible land 

uses close together. 

Planning is to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing 

settlement patterns, and investment in transport and communication, water and 

sewerage and social facilities. 

11.02 Urban growth 

11.02-1 Supply of urban land 

Objective 

To ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, retail, 

industrial, recreational, institutional, and other community uses. 

The Strategies of this clause most relevant to the consideration of the Development 

Plan include: 

• Opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment, and intensification of 

existing urban areas. 

• Neighbourhood character and landscape considerations. 

• Restrict low-density rural residential development that would compromise 

future development at higher densities. 

11.02-2 Planning for growth areas 

Objective 

To locate urban growth close to transport corridors and services and provide 

efficient and effective infrastructure to create benefits for sustainability while 

protecting primary production, major sources of raw materials and valued 

environmental areas. 


Plan include: 

• Meet housing needs by providing a diversity of housing type and distribution. 

• Retain unique characteristics of established areas incorporated into new 

communities to protect and manage natural resources and areas of heritage, 

cultural and environmental significance. 




• Create well planned, easy to maintain and safe streets and neighbourhoods 

that reduce opportunities for crime, improve perceptions of safety and 

increase levels of community participation. 

Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage 

Planning should ensure all new land use and development appropriately responds to 

its landscape, valued built form and cultural context, and protect places and sites with 

significant heritage, architectural, aesthetic, scientific and cultural value. 

Creating quality built environments supports the social, cultural, economic and 

environmental wellbeing of our communities, cities and towns. 

Land use and development planning must support the development and maintenance 

of communities with adequate and safe physical and social environments for their 

residents, through the appropriate location of uses and development and quality of 

urban design. 

Planning should achieve high quality urban design and architecture that: 

• Contributes positively to local urban character and sense of place. 

• Reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations, and cultural identity of the 

community. 

• Enhances liveability, diversity, amenity, and safety of the public realm. 

• Promotes attractiveness of towns and cities within broader strategic 

contexts. 

• Minimises detrimental impact on neighbouring properties. 

15.01-3 Neighbourhood and subdivision design 

Objective 

To ensure the design of subdivisions achieves attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, 

diverse, and sustainable neighbourhoods. 

Strategy 


Plan include: 

• Creating compact neighbourhoods that have walkable distances between 

activities and where neighbourhood centres provide access to services and 

facilities to meet day to day needs. 

• Providing a range of lot sizes to suit a variety of dwelling and household types 

to meet the needs and aspirations of different groups of people. 

• Contributing to reducing car dependence by allowing for: 

o Convenient and safe public transport. 

o Safe and attractive spaces and networks for walking and cycling. 

o Subdivision layouts that allow easy movement within and between 

neighbourhoods. 

o A convenient and safe road network. 

• Creating a strong sense of place because neighbourhood development 

emphasises existing cultural heritage values, well designed and attractive built 

form, and landscape character. 




Local Planning Policy Framework 

Municipal Strategic Statement 

The Municipal Strategic Statement provides a vision for the future development of the 

Shire. It sets out the key strategies that provide clear directions for land use and 

development within the municipality for the next 15 years. 

The Municipal Strategic Statement is consistent with State Policy and recognises key 

issues that influence land use and development in certain areas of the Shire. 

Sections of the Local Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic 

Statement considered relevant to an assessment of the Development Plan are: 

Clause 21.04 

Vision 

Settlement 

• Residential development and related urban land uses contained to existing 

activity nodes. 

• A quality urban environment and well functioning towns that benefit both 


Environment 

• A high quality built environment enhancing the surrounding natural 

environment and landscape values. 

Clause 21.05 

Settlement 

21.05.1 Growth of Towns 

Objective 3 To encourage sustainable development, minimise impacts on 

the natural systems, increase natural reserves and vegetation 

in urban areas and improve the quality of life for the 

community. 

Strategy 3.1 Minimise the impact on significant environmental features within 

identified settlement boundaries, and address these impacts through 

the rezoning or development planning process. 

Objective 4 To discourage urban development that encroaches or 

impacts on significant environmental features and in areas 

affected by future climate change impacts. 

Strategy 4.1 Ensure that urban growth and development enhances significant 

environmental features by identifying and protecting these areas 

during the preparation of Structure Plans. 

Strategy 4.2 Manage climate change impacts by: 

• Identifying areas subject to future impacts of climate change. 

• Preparing a strategy to deal with the possible impacts of climate change for 

developments located within existing urban boundaries. 

• Avoiding development in areas outside of town boundaries where there are 

possible impacts as a result of climate change. 




Strategy 4.3 Ensure that development is set back from the coast to accommodate 

coastal features, vegetation and climate change impacts. 

Clause 21.10 

Local Areas (Cowes and Silverleaves) 

Settlement 

• Limit Land available for urban development to land contained within the 

defined settlement boundaries. 

Land uses 

Finances 

• Provide greater residential densities proximate to Cowes Activity Centre and 

those locations within the defined township where greater densities can be 

accommodated without impacting upon the established and valued character 

of existing communities. 

The preparation of the Development Plan has principally involved officer time. The 

activity of development planning is within the scope of the position description and 

part of the budget for Strategic Planning. 

Stakeholders 

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 does not have specific regulation regarding 

development plan processes, including notification. However, the Development Plan 

Overlay - Schedule 19 was exhibited to all of the affected landowners through the 

Planning Scheme Amendment process for Amendment C95. 

The Development Plan has now been exhibited to these landowners to make further 

comment on the more specific detail included in the Development Plan. 


As mentioned previously, there are no specific regulations regarding the assessment 

of development plans. 

Under the Development Plan Overlay, a planning permit cannot be issued for land 

within the Development Plan Overlay, unless it is in accordance with an approved 

Development Plan. 

Other Options 

There are three options available to Council. 

Option One 

The first, as recommended by this report, would be to adopt and endorse the 

proposed Development Plan. 

Implications 

There are no negative implications for Council if it chooses to support this option. 

The Development Plan implements the requirements of the Development Plan 

Overlay – Schedule 19 which is part of the Bass Coast Planning Scheme. 

Option Two 

Adopt and endorse the proposed Development Plan with changes. 




Implications 

There are no major implications for this course of action; however, it is 

recommended that if the changes are significant, the landowners are afforded an 

opportunity to comment on these changes before Council endorses the Development 

Plan. 

Option Three 

Do not adopt the Development Plan. 

Implications 

The Bass Coast Planning Scheme requires that a development plan be adopted by 

Council before any permits can be issued for the area affected by the Development 

Plan Overlay – Schedule 19. If Council chooses not to adopt the Development Plan, 

the subject land cannot be subdivided to reflect the purpose of the underlying 

Residential 1 Zone. 


Submissions 

Council received one formal submission. The submission raised the following issues: 

• Hope the changes do not occur while the owners are living at their property, 

as they ‘like ambiance of larger allotments’; 

• The property has a shed which is located entirely within the area of the 

proposed road; and 

• Seeking confirmation that the ‘plan can never be implemented on our property 

without our consent’. 

Council officers also spoke to another Justice Road landowner who expressed similar 

concerns about how and when the layout proposed in the Development Plan would 

be implemented. 

There are a number of points to make in response to these concerns: 

• The Development Plan only comes into effect when there is a planning permit 

application to change the way the land or a property is used; and 

• The landowner will need to initiate, or give consent to initiate, a planning 

permit to change the way a property is used. 

In most cases, an application to subdivide the land will trigger the need to design a lot 

layout that reflects the requirements of the Development Plan. 

The Development Plan ensures that development occurring in a non-sequential way 

anticipates the final layout of the subject area. The key element of this approach 

means that an applicant is required to make provision for a road that links adjacent 

lots and provides access to any new internal lots. 




The Development Plan 

Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 19 sets out the requirements for any 

development plan which would apply to the Justice Road properties. 

The Development Plan must show: 

• A clear indication of the location of all proposed land uses with the plan area. 

• The proposed layout pattern which: 

o Provides a convenient and safe internal road network; 

o Provides a convenient and safe pedestrian network in accordance with 

Bass Coast Shire’s adopted Bicycle Strategy; 

o Provides convenient and safe pedestrian and road linkages to 

surrounding areas; 

o Provides for a variety of lot sizes and housing types; 

o Does not provide lots backing onto public open space reserves and 

roads (where appropriate); 

o Provides a sensitive residential interface with adjoining residential land 

in the form of the existing vegetation buffer zone on the eastern 

boundary of the lots; 

o Prevents any lots from gaining direct access from the subject land to 

Ventnor Road; 

o Does not impact on significant vegetation. 

The Development Plan that has been prepared generally meets these requirements. The 

plan has included a clear indication of the pedestrian and cycle linkages to surrounding 

areas. The proposed road network provides internal access to the existing sites which 

are generally deep, and promotes a more efficient use of the individual lots. 

Indicative lot sizes shown on the Development Plan reflect the existing subdivision 

patterns and character of surrounding areas. The Development Plan also recognises the 

significant investment and development that has occurred at 113 – 119 Justice Road. 

There is no direct access from Ventnor Road, and the proposed internal road will 

provide a limitation to the number of crossovers on Justice Road, by directing any future 

traffic from internal lots to a single control point. Limiting access from Ventnor Road 

also ensures that significant vegetation on Ventnor Road can be protected, and the buffer 

between the residential areas and the arterial road maintained. 

The Development Plan has not gone so far as to prescribe the lot layout, but has 

recognised that opportunities for the existing lots to be subdivided in an efficient way. 

The lot layout shown on the Development Plan has been noted as indicative, as detailed 

below. 




The Development Plan is generally consistent with the objectives and policies of the 

State and Local Planning Policy Framework, including the recommendations of the 

Phillip Island and San Remo Design Framework. The Development Plan is also consistent 

with the recently approved rezoning of the land. 

The implementation of the Development Plan can be achieved taking into account the 

different timing constraints and aspirations of the individual land owners. 

The Development Plan is consistent with the requirements of Development Plan 

Overlay - Schedule 19. 

Infrastructure Requirements 

The Development Plan shows the base level infrastructure that will need to be 

provided in order for the land to be subdivided. This includes the road network, 

shared paths and the retention and augmentation of the vegetation buffer along the 

east boundary of the site. When an owner applies to subdivide the land detailed 

discussions will occur in relation to infrastructure requirements, and these 

requirements will be secured via a section173 Agreement. A section 173 Agreement 

commits the land owner to the terms of the agreement and passes onto to future 

owners, and therefore it is not possible to transact out of the requirements. 




At the permit stage it is possible to be more detailed about what Council’s 

requirements are as Council officers are responding to a detailed design rather than a 

conceptual plan. Matters that need to be considered at the permit stage are broadly 

set out in Clause 21.08-3 New Urban Subdivision of our Local Planning Policy 

Framework and detailed in Clause 56 Residential Subdivision. Council officers will 

then formulate detailed conditions relating to infrastructure contributions, 

streetscape construction and landscaping. 

Without the guidance provided by the Development Plan Council officers will be 

limited in their ability to include requirements for infrastructure that requires 

contribution from more than one party. 

Conclusion 

Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 19 was subject to scrutiny and review through 

the planning scheme amendment process for Amendment C95, which included an 

Independent Planning Panel. The rezoning of the subject land to Residential 1 and 

application Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 19 was adopted by Council and 

approved by the Minister for Planning on 1 October 2009. 

During the recent exhibition of the Development Plan, the only issue to emerge was 

the timing and control of change. The Development Plan does not take away the 

ability for each individual landowner to initiate change when it suits them; it only 

creates parameters for managing change on the ground. 

The Development Plan provides a simple, integrated design response that anticipates 

intensification of use. 

It is recommended that Council adopts and endorses the Development Plan. 


That Council resolve to approve the Development Plan under Schedule 19 

to the Development Plan Overlay (Clause 43.04 of the Bass Coast 

Planning Scheme). 

Attachments 

AT-1 Development Plan 1 Page 

AT-2 CONFIDENTIAL - Submission 1 Page 


Moved: Cr. Peter Paul / Seconded: Cr. Jane Dore Daly 


CARRIED 




J.5 Proposed discontinuance and sale of unused Road Reserve (lane) off John 

Street, Wonthaggi 


Department: Infrastructure 


Declaration 





The author of this report has no direct or indirect interests in relation to this issue. 

Summary 

This report deals with the proposed discontinuance and sale to the abutting property 

owner of unused sections of Road Reserve (lane) abutting properties in John Street, 

Wonthaggi. The location of the site and the area of road proposed to be 

discontinued and sold, are shown on the attached plans (AT-1 & AT-2). 

At its Ordinary Meeting of 16 June 2010 Council resolved to commence the statutory 

processes to discontinue the road and sell the land to the abutting property owner, 

and to place a public notice to that effect in the local press (Item I.7 refers). 

No submissions have been received in response to the public notice. This report 

recommends that Council resolve to finalise the road discontinuance process and sell 

the land in question to the abutting property owner. 

Introduction 

The owner of six lots in John Street, Wonthaggi has approached Council expressing 

interest in having an unused Road Reserve (lane) abutting their land discontinued and 

sold to them. 

While originally configured as six rectangular residential allotments with a ‘night cart’ 

lane to the rear, the land has never been developed for residential purposes. It is 

currently undeveloped grassy paddocks with trees and bushes around the perimeter. 

However, this area of Wonthaggi is likely to be rezoned as Industrial 1 in the near 

future. 

Council, SP AusNet (the electricity utility provider) and South Gippsland Water have 

no assets within the Road Reserve in question, and no requirements with respect to 

any easements. 

An independent valuer has provided a current market valuation for the area of land in 

question. He has assessed it as having a current market value of $34,300 (taking into 

account the likely rezoning). 




If Council were to offer to sell the land in question to the applicant on the basis of 

this valuation, the potential price of the land to them would be in the order of: 

Land at valuation $34,300 

plus GST $3,430 

Administration Fee $1,000 

plus GST $100 

TOTAL $38,830 

The Administration Fee recovers Council’s administrative, survey and legal costs. 

In addition the purchaser would be responsible for payment of their own 

conveyancing and legal costs associated with purchase and transfer, and responsible 

for ensuring that the land from the road is consolidated with the main property within 

two years. 

The applicant has formalised their offer to purchase the land on the basis outlined 

above. 

Council considered this matter at its Ordinary Meeting of 16 June 2010 (Item I.7 

refers) and resolved: 

1. That Council being of the opinion that the 704 square metre section of 

Road Reserve abutting Lots 1, 2, 3 & 4 TP97609 and Lots 1 & 2 TP85817 

Township of Wonthaggi shown hatched on the attached plan is not 

reasonably required as a road for public use, that it be discontinued and the 

land from the road be transferred to Council. 

2. That pursuant to Section 206 and Schedule 10 Clause 3 of the Local 

Government Act 1989, the statutory procedures be commenced to 

discontinue this road, and under Sections 207(a) and 223 of that Act public 

notice of the discontinuance be given in the South Gippsland Sentinel-Times. 

3. That Council being of the opinion that this area of land (Road Reserve) 

referred to above and shown on the attached plan is not required for public 

purposes, that it be sold (subject to being discontinued) by private treaty. 

4. That Council give notice, by means of a public notice placed in the South 

Gippsland Sentinel Times, of its intention to sell this area of land and invite 

submissions to be considered in accordance with Section 223 of the Local 

Government Act 1989. 

5. That the public notice referred to in points 2 and 4 above be published 

subject to the applicant first paying an initial instalment of $500 (plus GST) 

of Council’s Administration Fee. 

6. That a Committee of Council be appointed at this meeting to consider any 

submissions made in response to the public notice. 

Following payment of the first instalment of the Administration Fee the required 

public notice was published in the South Gippsland Sentinel-Times on 10 August 2010. 

No submissions were received in response to that public notice. 





The Vision for Council’s asset management function (as stated in the Asset 

Management Policy initially adopted by Council in 2002, and the revised Asset 

Management Policy and Asset Management Improvement Strategy 2006-2008 adopted 

by Council at its Ordinary meeting on 13 December 2006) is that: 

“We will provide and maintain assets in a sustainable manner to improve the quality of 

life and safety of the Bass Coast Community.” 

Council seeks to achieve this vision by ensuring that (among other strategies): 

• all council assets exist to support service delivery or enhance the 

environment and/or quality of life of the residents 

• all assets are created, acquired, maintained, rehabilitated or made obsolete to 

enable council to meet its corporate plan strategies and objectives 

• all council asset management activities will take place within a strategic 

framework that is driven by service delivery needs within resource limitations 

The section of Road Reserve in question fulfils no service delivery function for 

abutting property owners or the wider community. 

Finances 

If the land forming the section of Road Reserve (lane) in question were to be sold at 

current market valuation, Council would receive $34,300 net from the sale. 

Council’s legal, survey and administrative costs would be met by the Administration 

Fee ($1,000 plus GST) payable by the applicant. 

Stakeholders 

Council, abutting and nearby property owners, ratepayers in general, and relevant 

utility providers have an interest in the matter. 


Council has the power to formally discontinue roads or parts of roads under Section 

206 and Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1989. If discontinued the land will 

vest in Council and can be transferred as Council determines. 

To discontinue a road Council must resolve that it is not reasonably required for 

public traffic. 

Section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989 sets out the requirements which must 

be met if Council is to sell land: 

• the proposed sale must be advertised at least four weeks prior to sale 

• Council must obtain a valuation for the land not more than six months prior 

to sale 

• Council must formally consider any submission received. 

Council policy is that land be sold at a current market valuation and subject to 

payment of an Administration Fee of $1,000, unless there are sound public policy 

reasons to do otherwise. The Administration Fee is payable in two equal instalments. 

The first instalment is usually payable if Council resolves ‘in principle’ to sell the land, 

prior to placement of the required public notice in the local press. 




The requirements of Section 189 of the Act have been met in this case: 

• the proposed sale was advertised on 10 August 2010 

• while the initial valuation was provided on 24 March 2010, an updated 

valuation (from the same independent valuer) was provided on 22 October 

2010 (with there being no change in the assessed value of the land in 

question) 

• no submissions were received in response to the public notice. 

Other Options 

Council may choose not to discontinue the road and/or not to sell the land in 

question. 


While this area of Wonthaggi is currently rather undeveloped, the township’s 

imminent growth will lead to this area being rezoned as Industrial 1. Allowing the 

applicant to acquire the land in question will facilitate more efficient development of 

the site. 

The consensus view of Council officers who have considered this matter is that there 

is no reason to retain the Road Reserve in question, but that there are wider 

community benefits to be gained from discontinuance and sale. 

The statutory processes required public notice to be given of this proposed 

discontinuance and sale, and the wider community given an opportunity to make 

submissions on the matter. No member of the community took that opportunity to 

make such a submission. 

There would now appear to be no reason not to finalise the discontinuance of the 

Road Reserve and for Council to sell the land to the abutting property owner. 


That Council being of the opinion that the 704 square metre section of Road 

Reserve abutting Lots 1, 2, 3 & 4 TP97609 and Lots 1 & 2 TP85817 Township 

of Wonthaggi shown hatched on the attached plan is not reasonably required 

as a road for public use: 

1. Discontinues the road 

2. Directs that a notice be published in the Government Gazette 

3. Directs that the land from the road be sold to the abutting owner at 

current market valuation on condition that settlement occurs within 

180 days from the date of this resolution. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Location Plan 

AT-2 Road Discontinuance Plan 





Moved: Cr. John Duscher / Seconded: Cr. Jane Dore Daly 


CARRIED 




J.6 Section 86 Committee of Management - Surf Beach/Sunderland Bay 

Reserve 



Development 


Declaration 




communities. 

The reporting officer has no direct or indirect interests in relation to the issue. 

Summary 

Council owns three residential properties at 120-124 The Esplanade, Surf Beach. The 

land is undeveloped and maintained as open space. There are no facilities or play 

equipment on the land and the land abuts the coastal dune area. 

The Council has not developed plans for the Reserve and has considered the sale of 

the land in the past. The land is zoned public purposes recreation. 

The Phillip Island South Coast Community Planning Group has proposed the 

establishment of the “Surf Beach Community Park” as a priority project stemming 

from their emerging Community Plan. 

The Community Planning Group has requested that Council consider the formation 

of a Section 86 Committee of Management as part of the Phillip Island South Coast 

Community Planning Project. 

The request is supported by Council Officers and it is recommended that Council 

approve the community’s desire to establish a Section 86 Committee of Management 

for the reserve. 

Introduction 

The reserve is undeveloped and maintained by Council as a low maintenance area of 

open space. There are no facilities or play equipment on the land. The land abuts a 

sensitive coastal dune area. 

The Council has not developed plans for the Reserve and has considered the sale of 

the land in the past. The land is zoned public purposes recreation and therefore any 

development as a park is in keeping with the zoning. 

The reserve is not included in Council’s Playground Plan; however the Plan stipulates 

that any future playground provision on Phillip Island is to be of a ‘local level’(small 

local play area within walking distance of community). 

The Phillip Island South Coast Community Planning Group has proposed the 

establishment of the “Surf Beach Community Park” as a priority project stemming 

from their emerging Community Plan. 




The Community Park proposal is in response to an extensive community consultation 

process which identified the lack of community facilities, opportunities for social 

connection, children’s play areas and parks as key concerns for their local 

community. The Group suggested that local community focal points may address the 

concerns raised by the wider community. It tested the level of support for this 

priority project via a further ballot: and 67% of ratepayer respondents supported the 

project with 25% (over 50) of respondents indicating their preparedness to be 

involved. 

In consultation with Council’s Arts and Leisure Department, a highly motivated 

community planning project team explored the options before arriving at the 

location under current consideration. They have a vision for the Community Park 

which combines form and function in creating a public space where opportunities for 

social connection are increased, both during the establishment phase and in its 

ongoing operation. This aspect is vital in bringing together a community with a high 

non-resident population. The Group hopes to incorporate children’s play space, 

picnic shelter, community garden, noticeboard and indigenous planting into the design. 

The resulting transformation will also vastly improve the visual amenity of this 

previously underutilised area. 

The Group is fully behind the formation of a Section 86 Committee of Management 

with several community members keen to be involved, coupled with interest from the 

local Coast Action Group. Local community management will encourage community 

ownership of the Community Park and ensure the opportunities for continued 

community input and involvement are maximised. 

At the subject site there are issues with an unmade access road which is currently 

cutting across a corner of the site and through neighbouring properties. 

There have been many instances such as this across the Shire where roads have been 

physically constructed across private property. Effectively these roads have reached a 

“public highway” status through use by the public. In the longer term it is 

recommended that these issues be addressed through realigning the roads or creating 

a road reserve through subdivision (or compulsory acquisition). 

In this case negotiations could be undertaken to transfer land or to acquire the area 

of land required for the road reserve. 

Should Council adopt the recommendation to appoint a Committee of Management 

for the Reserve, an advertisement will be placed in the local newspaper seeking 

expressions of interest from interested persons. 


The involvement of community in the development of this reserve supports Council’s 

strategic objective of Cohesive Communities in its Council Plan. 

Finances 

Council’s Section 86 Committees of Management receive an annual grant to assist 

with maintenance of their respective facilities. The Committee would receive an 

initial allocation of $2575. 

Stakeholders 

The communities of the Phillip Island South Coast Planning Area, Bass Coast Shire 

Council and visitors and residents. 





The appointment as a Special Committee of Council is undertaken in accordance with 

Section 86 of the Local Government Act 1989. 

The Committee must act under an Instrument of Delegation which specifies the 

delegated duties that the Committee must act on. A copy of the draft Instrument of 

Delegation is attached for Council information. This delegation has been agreed to by 

the community representatives interested in the Community Park. 

Other Options 

The only alternative option would be not to agree to the formation of the Special 

Committee, however as the community is willing to assist with the management and 

development of the Reserve, this option is not recommended. 


The approach for the formation of a Special Committee was made by the community 

through the Community Planning process. In these days of reduced numbers of 

volunteers it is pleasing to see a community willing to take a grassroots interest in a 

local facility. 

The following is an extract from the Instrument of Delegation for the information of 

Council on the purpose and delegated duties of the Committee. 

These duties are based on the delegations for all other Council Special Committees. 

• Purpose of the Special Committee 

To undertake activities designed to protect, promote, utilise and develop the Surf Beach 

Community Park for the use and enjoyment of the local community and visitors. 

• Objectives of the Special Committee 

• Under the delegated and management powers conferred upon the Committee by the 

Bass Coast Shire Council, to effectively manage and maintain the Surf Beach 

Community Park as a community facility. 

o To ensure fairness in the use of the Surf Beach Community Park by 

individuals and community groups. 

o To work towards improving Surf Beach Community Park and its usefulness to 

the community. 

o To keep the Council informed on the operations improvements and 

advancements of the Surf Beach Community Park as and when required and 

provide a copy of minutes of ordinary and extraordinary meetings if 

requested to and to report annually on Committee operations in October 

each year. 

o To provide and maintain buildings, furniture and fittings within the Surf 

Beach Community Park in accordance with the Terms of Arrangement with 

the Council .. 

o To liaise with the local community and keep the community informed of the 

Committee’s plans and activities 

The Council undertook a similar appointment for South Dudley, Glen Forbes and 

Pioneer Bay Reserves. Small local areas with no other community facilities. These 

appointments have worked extremely well for the communities and the Council. 




As a recommended project from the Phillip Island South Coast Community Planning 

Group, the formation of a Section 86 Committee of Management and development of 

the Reserve would be positive outcomes emerging from the community planning 

project. The Surf Beach Community Park would be a focal point for the local 

community and provide a much needed community facility. 

It is further recommended that Council arrange for the surveying of the parcel of land 

and negotiate land transfer with the adjacent private land holder so that boundaries 

for the Community Park’s development can be established. Such survey plan will 

determine the area of the park and provide a basis for the Committee to commence a 

master plan for the Reserve. 


1. That the Council agree to the establishment of the Surf Beach 

Community Park Special Committee of Council under Section 86 of 

the Local Government Act 1989. 

2. That Expressions of Interest be called in order for interested persons 

to become members of the committee. 

3. That a survey be undertaken of the land to identify the boundaries of 

the land to be managed by the committee. 

4. That Council consider allocating funds in the December budget review 

to develop a management plan for The Esplanade Surf Beach 

(between Glen Street and Dunvegan Crescent) to investigate the 

provision of road access to adjoining properties. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Surf Beach Community Park Instrument of Delegation 16 Pages 


Moved: Cr. Phil Wright / Seconded: Cr. Jane Dore Daly 


CARRIED 




J.7 Petition - Reduction Wildlife Roadkill 


Department: Infrastructure 


Declaration 





The author of this report does not have any direct or indirect interests in relation to 

this issue. 

Summary 

A joint letter representing the Phillip Island community and containing 225 signatures 

was received by Council on 5 November 2010 and presented at the Council ordinary 

meeting of 17 November 2010. There was also a covering letter accompanying this. 

The joint letter states in part: 

1. A request to Bass Coast Shire Council to investigate ways to reduce the number of 

wildlife roadkill, in particular on the roads of Phillip Island. 

2. It is a depth of concern felt by the residents and also the tourists on the Island about 

the fresh wildlife roadkill seen daily on the roads there. 

In particular, the petition asks that Council take a more proactive approach to the 

reduction of wildlife roadkill. Council already works cooperatively with the Phillip 

Island Nature Park (PINP) to work on initiatives to reduce the wildlife roadkill, some 

of which are outlined in this report. 

Council will continue to work on strategies with those organisations that have the 

expertise on wildlife. 

Introduction 

A petition was presented to Council about the level of roadkill seen on local roads, 

particularly in Phillip Island. The petition asks Council to investigate ways to reduce 

the numbers of wildlife kills, in particular on the roads on Phillip Island. 

The main arterial roads, such as Phillip Island Tourist Road, Ventnor Road and Back 

Beach Road are managed by VicRoads. The local roads are managed by Bass Coast 

Shire Council. 

Research has shown a number of ways to reduce roadkill as follows: 

1. Reducing roadside vegetation. 

2. Increasing driver awareness (brochures and signage). 

3. Removal of roadkill (to ensure the safety of animals that feed on roadkill). 

The petition also asks for the production of brochures, increased signage and keeping 

roadside vegetation low. 




What does Council currently do to assist? 

Council currently works cooperatively with PINP on initiatives to reduce wildlife 

roadkill. 

On an annual basis PINP organise a workshop meeting to try and address 

conservation issues that affect corporate stakeholders like SPAusnet, VicRoads and 

Council. One of the outcomes was to modify the lighting covers along the San Remo 

Bridge to protect Shearwaters. 

Another was the initiation of a Shearwater protection trial on Woolamai Beach Road. 

The trial involved erecting “Care for our wildlife” signs and blue hatched line marking 

to create a visible conservation zone on a section of Woolamai Beach Road, south of 

The Cranny. The trial was jointly funded by Council and PINP. 

Council also has a number of programs that assist in the management of wildlife 

roadkill to: 

1. Reduce roadside vegetation on local roads, primarily to reduce fire hazards and 

improve driver safety. This must be a balanced approach as roadside vegetation 

can be significant and an important contributor to the regions biodiversity. 

2. Remove roadkill near roadsides. Removal can be initiated by Council Officers 

doing their day to day work, or through requests made by the public or other 

agencies. 

3. Pick up domestic animals that have escaped, and educating animal owners on 

the importance of keeping their animals safe. Wildlife can also be hunted by 

domestic animals. 


Council’s Environmental Sustainability Plan looks to protect wild flora and fauna by 

protecting and creating, where possible, new blocks of wildlife corridors. 

While Council does take actions to protect wildlife on roads, there is no direct link 

to any Council plans or strategies. 

Finances 

There are no additional impacts on Council’s budget as there are no additional 

actions proposed that would incur additional expenditure. 

If Council were to make a decision to start taking primary responsibility for the care 

of wildlife, or even to do research to keep data on wildlife roadkills then there would 

be impacts to budgets. This could be in the form of additional staff resources or skills 

development. 

Projects may be initiated by agencies that are responsible for the care and monitoring 

of wildlife and their numbers. If these projects required a contribution from Council, 

then they would be considered and prioritised through the budget process. 

Stakeholders 

Council, residents and visitors to Bass Coast Shire, users of Council roads, VicRoads 

and Phillip Island Nature Park. 


Traffic Engineering Manual – Wildlife Signs 




Other Options 

There were no other options considered that are consistent with Council’s strategies. 


Council already takes a number of actions that assist with the prevention of wildlife 

deaths. 

Where Council has introduced new initiatives to assist with prevention of wildlife 

deaths, such as the Shearwater Protection Trial, it has done so cooperatively with an 

agency that has expertise in the management of wildlife. Council assists by facilitating 

where it is appropriately skilled, such as the erection of road signs or road safety. 

The petition asked for increased roadsigns. Wildlife roadkill can be distressing to 

witness, and can be dangerous for drivers and other wildlife that feed off the roadkill. 

In relation to other signs, the Traffic Engineering Manual states: 

“….Prior to the erection of signs, the Department of Natural Resources & Environment 

should be consulted to ascertain wildlife numbers and migratory patterns and to confirm the 

need for signs. The erection of signs should only be considered where they will be beneficial 

to wildlife without detriment to road safety…” 

The organisations that are best placed to provide the data are the ones that deal with 

wildlife. 

A discussion with PINP has indicated that there are currently no indications that the 

roadkill has increased dramatically or is having a negative impact on the wellbeing of 

the general wildlife population. Council will work collaboratively with PINP or the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment if requests are made and it has the 

resources to do so. It should be noted that many of the higher speed arterial roads 

are managed by VicRoads. Council can forward the concerns of the petitioner to 

VicRoads 

The petition included an attachment of a brochure that was jointly produced by 

NRMA Motoring Services (Victoria’s equivalent is the RACV) and the Tooronga Zoo. 

It asked Council to consider production of a similar brochure. Information such as 

this is already produced by organisations such as RACV and Department of 

Sustainability and Environment. 

It is recommended that Council continue to offer assistance where it has the 

resources and expertise to do so, but not to take the lead role. 


That Council resolves to: 

1. Continue to work on strategies with those organisations that have 

the expertise on wildlife. 

2. Notify VicRoads of petitioners concerns. 

3. Inform the Head Petitioner of Council’s decision. 

Attachments 

AT-1 CONFIDENTIAL - Petition 25 Pages 






That Council 

1. consider allocating funding in the 2011/2012 budget to develop a 

management plan for the proactive removal of dead wildlife from 

roads and paths. 

That Council Officers 

1. meet with wildlife carers, Phillip Island Nature Park, Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, RACV, VicRoads and others to look 

at strategies to reduce wildlife deaths on roads 

2. develop a communication plan to inform drivers and visitors of the 

presence, and impacts, of wildlife on roads 

3. inform the Head Petitioner of Council’s decision. 

CARRIED 




J.8 Petition - Use of Recreational Vehicles and Trail Bikes at Baker Road, 

Krowera 



Development 





communities. 

Previous Items: 48/10 - Petition - Residents of Krowera - Council - 17 

November 2010 

Declaration 

The reporting officer has no direct or indirect interests in relation to the issue. 

Summary 

A petition was received in relation to Council Officers actions regarding the use of 

trail bikes on rural land in Krowera. The petition was tabled at Council’s Ordinary 

Meeting of 17 November 2010. 

The landowner has been advised that under Council’s General Local Law No 1 of 

2005, a landowner is unable to ride a recreational vehicle or trail bike on a rural 

property without approval from Council. 

The purpose of the local law is to protect the amenity of the municipality. A 

landowner can apply for Council approval to use a trail bike in a rural area however 

this would need to be accompanied by information relating to noise impacts (and 

other environmental impacts) in order for it to be considered by Council Officers. 

At this stage Council has not received a permit application and it is recommended 

that Council note the action of Council Officers in relation to the matter and advise 

the petitioner of Council’s decision. 

Introduction 

A petition and accompanying joint letter was received by Council in relation to the 

riding of motorbikes at a property located at Baker Road, Krowera. The petition was 

tabled at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 17 November 2010. 

The joint letter stated in part: 

1. We the undersigned rate payers and neighbours of 10 Baker Road, Krowera write to 

you to express our support of the above in his attempt to allow him (the landowner) 

to ride is motor bike on the property. 

The petition was generated after Council Officers took action to respond to 

community concerns regarding the riding of motorbikes at the property in Baker 

Road. 

Upon investigation it was found that there appeared to be a track on the property 

and it was confirmed that motorbikes regularly used the land. 




Subsequent to the investigation Council Officers wrote to the landowner of the 

property on 22 September 2010. The landowner was advised in writing of the 

requirements of Council’s Local Law. 

In particular the letter to the landowner advised that “…you are not able to use a trail 

bike on your property without the approval of Council. If you wish to seek this permission 

you must be able to demonstrate that there will be no impact of your trail bike use on the 

amenity of the area” 

An objective measurement of the impact on the amenity of the area would be 

through provision of evidence of noise levels at the property boundary. 

There has been no objective demonstration that the trail bike use does not impact on 

the amenity of the area, and therefore Council’s approval cannot be given for 

recreational vehicles or trail bikes to be ridden on the property. 

In response to the letter to the landowner the petition was presented to Council. 

The landowner also wrote to Council on 16 October expressing concern regarding 

the issue. A copy of the letter is attached for Council’s information. 


The primary strategic basis for the action taken by Council Officers is detailed in 

Council’s general local law. 

The purposes of the Local Law include to: 

“..provide for the peace, order and good government of, and the well being of people in, the 

Bass Coast Shire”, 

“enable people in the Bass Coast Shire to carry out their day to day activities and to enjoy 

their recreational pursuits without having their peace and enjoyment interfered with or 

destroyed” and 

“manage activities which may be dangerous, unsafe or detrimental to the quality of life or the 

environment or property.” 

Finances 

The only costs incurred by Council in relation to this issue have been Council 

Officers time dealing with the matter. 

Stakeholders 

The primary stakeholders in this matter are the landowners of the properties in the 

area of Baker Road. 


The primary statutory requirement in relation to this issue is Council’s General Local 

Law No 1 of 2005. The local law has the following provisions in relation to 

recreational vehicles and trail bikes: 

“122 Control of Recreational Vehicles and Trail Bikes 

A person in charge of a recreational vehicle or trail bike:- 

(1) must not ride or operate within a residential, commercial, industrial or rural 

zoned area, Council owned or managed land, parks or reserves or foreshore areas 

without approval from Council. This does not apply to any road designated by 

VicRoads. 




(2) may ride or operate in a rural zone if used for farming, work or an organised 

sporting event. 

123 Conduct When Using a Recreational Vehicle or Trail Bike 

A person who uses a recreational vehicle or trail bike or allows or permits a 

person in their care to use such a vehicle within a residential, commercial, 

industrial or rural zoned area, must ensure that the use does not inconvenience, 

obstruct, hinder, endanger, effect or cause detriment to the amenity of the area.” 

Other Options 

No other options have been considered as Council has set the strategic direction in 

relation to this matter through the implementation of the local law. 


The landowner has the option to seek approval from Council to ride a recreational 

vehicle or trail bike on the land. Approval would only be granted if the landowner is 

able to demonstrate that the use would not impact on the amenity of the area. This 

has not been demonstrated. 

Council has a duty to ensure that activities that impact on the amenity of the area are 

managed within the terms of the Local Law. 

It is therefore recommended that Council note the action taken by Council Officers is 

consistent with the local law and advise the head petitioner of Council’s decision. 


That Council 

1. Note the action of Council Officers is consistent with the provisions of 

Council’s General Local law in relation to Recreational Vehicle and 

Trail Bike use in a rural area. 

2. Advise the head petitioner of Council’s decision. 

Attachments 

AT- 

1 

CONFIDENTIAL - Landowner letter responding to Council regarding 

trail bike use - 20 October 2010 


Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. Peter Paul 


1 

Page 

CARRIED 




J.9 Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park Memorandum of 

Understanding 



Council Plan Strategic Objective: Advocacy 

Declaration 

We will use a strong voice and 

accurate information to advocate for 

the best quality lifestyle for our 

communities. 

The author of this report has no direct interest in relation to the report. 

Summary 

The purpose of the report is to: 

• Provide Council with information on the Memorandum of Understanding 

between Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park. 

• Seek Council’s endorsement to sign a new Memorandum of Understanding 

between Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park. 

Introduction 

The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to outline a code of 

cooperation between Bass Coast Shire Council and the Phillip Island Nature Park to 

enable them to individually and collectively maximise the achievement of their goals 

and objectives. 

The Memorandum of Understanding aims to improve the relationship between the 

parties and assist in good decision making and community consultation for Bass Coast. 


Phillip Island Nature Park is a major public land manager in the Bass Coast Shire, 

managing an excess of 1,850 hectares of Crown Land. Like Council, Phillip Island 

Nature Park aims to protect and enhance natural resources including the fauna, flora 

and landscapes within its care. They also aim to optimise the built infrastructure 

which supports visitors’ experiences across the Nature Park. 

Both organisations have a general interest in land management across the shire with a 

common goal to ensure a sustainable environment now and for future generations. 

Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park have a combined interest in 

tourism being one of the major industries in Bass Coast Shire. The Nature Park is a 

key asset in Victoria’s nature tourism. The Nature Park attracts over 800,000 

visitors, making it one of Victoria’s most popular tourist destinations with 55% of 

these visitors coming from overseas. It is important to both Bass Coast Shire 

Council and Phillip Island Nature Park to provide consistent land management to 

provide locals and visitors a world class visitor experience. It is essential that both 

parties are committed to continually upgrading facilities to meet visitor’s expectations. 




The Memorandum of Understanding is consistent with Bass Coast Shire Council’s, 

Council Plan 2009 – 2013, the Environment Sustainability Plan 2008 – 2013 and Phillip 

Island Nature Park’s Management Plan 2006 – 2011. 

Bass Coast Council Plan 2009 – 2013 

Council Plan objective: 

Environmental Sustainability- Ensure the natural assets of Bass Coast are promoted and 

managed in a sustainable manner so that they can be enjoyed now and by future generations. 

Bass Coast Environment Sustainability Plan 

Bass Coast Shire Council’s Sustainability Principals 

1. Ensuring that the things we do today do not comprise the ability of future generations to 

meet their own needs considering the economy, environment and community. 

2. A form of progress that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability 

of future generations to meet their needs. 

3. The ability to live and work in Bass Coast while protecting our natural assets while 

providing a high quality of life for residents. 

Phillip Island Nature Parks Management Plan 2006-11 

The key strategic goals outlined in the Management Plan are to: 

1. Integrate environmental sustainability principles into all areas of our operations. 

2. Enhance and expand the delivery of education, training and research both within and 

outside the Nature Park. 

3. Strive to achieve long term sustainability. 

4. Optimise the ways we meet the needs of visitors and our community 

Finances 

There are no budget implications to enter into the Memorandum of Understanding. 

Stakeholders 

Stakeholders include residents, ratepayer and visitors to Bass Coast Shire. The 

primary stakeholders are the Phillip Island community. 


Council has no statutory requirements to enter into a Memorandum of 

Understanding; however an agreement of this nature supports an important 

professional relationship between Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature 

Park. The outcome of such a relationship will result in both parties working together 

to achieve common goals and objectives. 

Other Options 

Council has two options in relation to the endorsement of the Memorandum of 

Understanding between Bass Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park. 

• Endorse the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between Bass 

Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park. 

• Not endorse the Memorandum of Understanding between Bass Coast Shire 

Council and Phillip Island Nature Park. 


The Memorandum of Understanding has been developed with input from both Bass 

Coast Shire Council and Phillip Island Nature Park. 




The Memorandum of Understanding clearly outlines a shared commitment for managing 

public land on Phillip Island for the benefit of the community, flora and fauna. A 

positive professional relationship will result in both organisations accomplishing better 

outcomes for the local community, visitors and the environment. 


That the Memorandum of Understanding between Bass Coast Shire 

Council and Phillip Island Nature Park be endorsed 

Attachments 



Moved: Cr. Jane Dore Daly / Seconded: Cr. Peter Paul 


CARRIED 




J.10 Fraud Policy 


Department: Corporate Services 


Declaration 





The author of this report does not have any direct or indirect interests in relation to 

the subject of this report. 

Summary 

A draft fraud policy has been endorsed by the Audit Committee and is being 

presented to Council for adoption. 

Introduction 

Council’s current fraud policy has been reviewed to ensure that it is reflective of 

current standards and practice. 

A draft policy was presented to the Audit Committee on Wednesday 24 November 

2010, and was reviewed and amended to ensure that it will meet Council’s needs. 


The preparation of a revised fraud policy that reflects current standards and practice 

is consistent with good governance practice. 

As well, the policy takes into account Australian Standard 8001-2008 Fraud and 

Corruption Control as well as guidelines from Council’s insurers. 


Council needs to have an effective fraud policy in place as part of good governance 

practice that is supported by the Office of Local Government and the Victorian 

Auditor General’s Office. 


Fraud can lead to financial loss, bad publicity for the Shire and loss of public 

confidence in the way that public money and other resources are being used. It is 

therefore important that the Council has robust systems and procedures in place to 

ensure that the risk of impropriety is minimised, as far possible, and that where 

instances do occur, there is a prompt and effective response to them. 

The purpose of this policy is to set out how Council will prevent and deter fraud 

from occurring and how any incidence of fraud will be detected, investigated and dealt 

with. 





That Council adopts the attached Fraud Policy. 

Attachments 

AT-1 Fraud Policy 7 Pages 


Moved: Cr. John Duscher / Seconded: Cr. Gareth Barlow 


CARRIED 




J.11 Councillor Ward Based Discretionary Funds 




Declaration 

The author has no direct or indirect interests in this matter. 

Summary 




communities. 

At the Ordinary Council meeting on 20 September 2006 Council passed a resolution 

that Council introduce a pilot program for ward-based discretionary funds as part of 

the 2006/2007 budget. This program has been continued in all following budgets. 

The Councillor Ward Based Discretionary Fund allows for expenditure within each 

ward for minor capital works and other minor operational projects and also allows 

funding to be allocated to community groups. 

This report recommends that any capital works projects proposed to be funded from 

the Ward Based Discretionary Fund be evaluated against similar criteria to that used 

to develop the Capital Works Program, and then the program be adopted by Council. 

Introduction 

A procedure for the administration of the funds including a policy, proforma and 

process flowchart were presented to Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 20 

September 2006. Council adopted the procedure outlined in that report. Under the 

adopted procedure all proposals lodged by individual Councillors would be assessed 

and reported to a Council meeting. 

Council developed a Ward Discretionary Fund process for Councillors that includes 

the following; 

• Projects are submitted on an agreed evaluation form 

• Projects are evaluated against predetermined evaluation criteria 

• A prioritised list is submitted to Council for approval. 

Other criteria considered through the process include; 

• Consistency with adopted Council master plans, design frameworks, strategies 

and policies 

• Community support and utilisation 

• Compliance with health and safety and other key legislation. 

The application/s attached to this report details the proposal/s and includes officer’s 

assessment of the project/s. 





The funds from the Ward Based Discretionary Program need to be allocated in a 

strategic manner. 

Finances 

The funds have been allocated, in Council’s Capital Works Program, as part of 

Council’s annual budget process and are consistent with Council’s four year strategic 

resources plan. For those projects that are operation those funds will need to be 

transferred from the Capital Budget to the Operational Budget. 

In previous years the total value of the proposed Ward Discretionary Fund Program 

was $84,000. This equated to $12,000 per ward. However, due to 2008 being a 

Council election year, a pro rata figure of $5,000 per ward was allocated in Councils 

2008/2009 Capital Works Program to be expended by the previous Councillors, prior 

to the caretaker period. The new Councillors have the remaining $7,000 available. 

Stakeholders 

Stakeholders include community, community groups, visitors to the area, the 

ratepayers of the municipality and Council. 


The particular statutory requirements and standards relevant to the allocation of the 

Discretionary Ward Funds Program include; 

• The Local Government Act – in particular the provisions relating to the 

approval of expenditure by Council as part of its budget process. 

• Council’s procurement procedures to ensure appropriate controls over 

expenditure. 

Other Options 

The only other option available to Council is to defer the consideration of the matter 

to the next meeting. 


The attachments to this report details the proposals and includes officer’s assessment 

of the projects. 





That the following project/s be approved: 

Anderson Ward 

Project 

National Vietnam Veterans Museum – Maintenance 

Workshop 

Churchill Ward 

Project 

$ 

requested 

$ 

remaining 

$3,000.00 $4,200.00 

$ 

requested 

$ 

remaining 

Junior Country Week - Cricket $75.00 $4,541.65 

Leadbeater Ward 

Project 

$ 

requested 

$ 

remaining 


Woolamai Races $500.00 $3,425.00 

Hovell Ward 

Project 

$ 

requested 

$ 

remaining 


Townsend Ward 

Project 

$ 

requested 

$ 

remaining 


Inverloch Foreshore works $7,895.00 $1,730.00 

McHaffie Ward 

Project 

Childrens Entertainment – Christmas and Carols Night, 

Cowes 

Junior Country Week - Cricket 

$ 

requested 

$1,000.00 

$75.00 

$ 

remaining 

$8,316.65 

$8,241.65 




Attachments 

AT- 

1 

AT- 

2 

AT- 

3 

AT- 

4 

AT- 

5 

CONFIDENTIAL - WBDF - Anderson - Vietnam Veterans Museum 2 

Pages 

CONFIDENTIAL - WBDF - McHaffie - Carols and Fireworks Night, 2 

Cowes 

Pages 

CONFIDENTIAL - WBDF - McHaffie, Leadbeater, Hovell, Townsend, 2 

Churchill - Junior Cricket Week 

Pages 

CONFIDENTIAL - WBDF - Leadbeater - Woolamai Races 2 

Pages 

CONFIDENTIAL - WBDF - Townsend - Inverloch Foreshore 2 

Pages 


Moved: Cr. Gareth Barlow / Seconded: Cr. Ross Smith 


CARRIED 




K Urgent Business 

K.1 Jet ski free zone - Cr Phil Wright 


Moved: Cr. Phil Wright / Seconded: Cr. Jane Dore Daly 

That Bass Coast Shire Council seek to have Smiths Beach declared a jet 

ski free zone. 

Background 

CARRIED 

Concern has been raised that the use of jet skis at Smiths Beach is unsafe and impacts 

on the health and safety of other beach users. 

This matter was raised with the State Government in 2008 when Parks Victoria was 

undertaking a review of the Boating Zones in Port Phillip and Western Port as the 

Port Manager. The outcome of this review is yet to be implemented, however no 

changes were proposed in relation to jet skis, and therefore no specific exclusions 

zones will be implemented. 

The Honourable Ken Smith MLA raised the matter in Parliament on 9 June 2009 

seeking Ministerial Intervention into the review. 

As Bass Strait is managed by Transport Safety Victoria any request for intervention 

would need to be made to the Minister for Ports, the Honourable Dennis Napthine 

MP. 

Council does not have the power to regulate the marine environment or declare a jet 

ski free zone. A jet ski is vessel under the relevant Marine Act and is subject to same 

regulations as a power boat. 

They must stay under 5 knots (walking pace) within 50 metres of swimmers and 200 

metres of waters edge. 

There can be as many jet skis and boats accessing a beach as will physically fit as long 

as they stay within the operating regulations. 

Jet ski users must pay a fee to launch at boat ramps managed by Bass Coast Shire 


Council is not responsible for (and is not able to) manage or enforce the regulations. 

If there are issues with speeding, hooning, or breaches of the speed or distance 

requirements concerned beach users are advised to ring 000 to report the issue. 

It is recommended to engage the Minister in discussions regarding this matter and to 

seek a meeting with him as soon as is practicable. 




J.12 Community Grant Allocations 2010/11 



Development 


Declaration 




communities. 

The Arts and Leisure Manager declares an interest in the assessment of the Gippsland 

Cattle Handler’s grant applications as she is has an association with the Group. 

The Events Co-ordinator and the Recreation Officer both declare an interest in the 

assessment of the Dalyston Football/Netball Club applications. 

It has been recommended by Council’s Audit Committee that Councillors also 

declare any conflicts of interest prior to consideration of grant allocations 

recommended by the Selection Panel. 

Summary 

Submissions for the three Council Community Grant programs have been considered 

by a Selection Panel of Council Officers, comprising: 

• Arts and Leisure Manager 

• Community Development Team Leader 

• Acting Environment Manager 

• Infrastructure Maintenance Officer 

• Events Co-ordinator 

• Recreation Planner 

Recommendations for the allocation of funds were discussed with at the Council 

policy workshop on 1 December 2010. This report seeks formal adoption of the 

allocations in the attached. 

Introduction 

The Council has provided community grants since amalgamation. This program was 

built on grant programs offered by the previous municipalities before amalgamation. 

The three grant categories are: 

• General Community Grants - to promote and assist organisations with self help 

initiatives and programs. 

• Special Event - aimed at events which are organised by community groups in 

the Bass Coast Shire 

• Minor Capital Works Scheme - funding up to $5,000 matched dollar for dollar 

(including in kind) for small scale facility development programs. 




This year a total of $220,000 is available in grant funding. This is comprised of 

$100,000 for minor facility capital grants, $60,000 for general grants, and $60,000 

for special events (please note that $40,000 has been allocated in the Council budget 

for ongoing annual events, leaving $20,000 grant funding available for other 

community events). 

To be eligible for grant support, applicants must: 

• demonstrate a proven ability to develop and deliver innovative community 

programs 

• be proposing an initiative consistent with Council’s priorities above 

• be a not-for-profit community group seeking the grant for that group only 

• be proposing an initiative that will commence in the financial year of the grant 

• be proposing an activity/project that will occur within the Shire boundaries 

• have acquitted any previous Council grants or other arrangements 

• carry no financial deficit 

• present a complete application (form and attachments) and ensure that the 

application is received by Council by the published closing date 

Priority has been given to projects that: 

• are new and innovative 

• increase participation and inclusion of communities who may be isolated, 

disadvantaged or have special needs 

• improve the health and wellbeing of residents 

• support and strengthen the capacity of local community organisations and 

groups 

• support environmental sustainability 

The following process was undertaken by the evaluation panel to ensure funding 

recommendations were within the allocated budget: 

• Arts and Leisure Manager prepared draft allocations for each of the programs, 

summarising each application and ensuring that the required documentation had 

been provided by the applicant group. 

• Panel Meeting convened to consider the applications, to recommend 

allocations, and ensure that applications met the funding criteria. 

• Assessment criteria and weighting (refer to Table 1) was used to determine the 

allocation of funds as recommended by the Council’s Audit Committee. 

• Where applications achieved an equal weighting, the Panel allocated a portion 

of the requested grant. 




The following table details the assessment criteria that have been applied to the 

evaluation of the projects. 

Criteria Weighting 

Innovation 

Ability to deliver an innovative and value-for-money 

activity/project. 

Bass Coast Shire Council Page 119 

10% 

Evidence to demonstrate commitment to Council’s priorities 30% 

Scope, Vision 

What will be achieved? Is there a clear vision for the project? 

Evidence of long term benefit to Bass Coast Shire residents. 

Has the ongoing viability of this project been considered? Has a 

need been identified? 

Planning and management 

Does the organisation have the necessary resources and 

experience to successfully manage the project? Is there evidence 

of active community involvement? 

The Special Events funding includes both cash grants and the in-kind cost to Council 

for the provision of assistance such as road closure/traffic management, signage, 

advertising of road closures, and erection of flags, bunting and similar. These costs 

are met by Council through the Special Events budget area and therefore are 

considered in the total allocation for each event. The cost break-up is provided in 

three separate areas: in-kind allocation; cash grant; and total allocation. 

As previously agreed to by Council, ongoing annual special events (such as Carols by 

Candlelight) have been funded through the annual budget process and within existing 

funding guidelines rather than being included in the Community Grant Program. Of 

the $60,000 Special Events grant funding, $40,000 was allocated to annual events, 

with $20,000 available to new or one-off events. 


The recommended allocations contribute to the Cohesive Communities Objectives 

in the Council Plan. 

In particular the recommended grants encourage a sense of community, 

encouragement and promotion of special events, provision of recreation 

opportunities and enhancement of the Shire’s culture and heritage. 

Finances 

Council allocated $220,000 in its 2010/2011 Budget for the three Community Grants 

categories. Of this total, $40,000 was allocated to the special event team’s budget for 

support of annual events, leaving $180,000 for allocation of community grants. 

Stakeholders 

Key stakeholders include the Council, community organisations who will gain a benefit 

from the financial assistance given through the grants process; local businesses; 

residents, ratepayers and visitors to the Shire. 

20% 

20% 

20%




Successful applicants must complete an ‘Acceptance of Grant’ form prior to receiving 

payment. At the completion of the project/activity, an acquittal form is submitted 

with supporting evidence detailing the benefits and costs of the project. This is in 

accordance with the Community Grants Policy. 

Council staff also undertake checks to ensure that the necessary forms have been 

received and that the funding has been expended on the agreed project or activity. 

Other Options 

Not applicable to this report. 


Each application has been considered by the Selection Panel and assessed using the 

criteria and weightings as outlined. 

This year 87 applications totalling $311,793 were received. The following table details 

the number of applications and total amounts requested along with the recommended 

allocations. 

It should be noted that the Minor Facility Capital Grant is over subscribed by $19,883, 

however the General Community Grant program is under subscribed and the 

shortfall can be met by the transfer of funds from this account. 

It is recommended that Council is asked to adopt the recommended allocations. 

Community grant applications received by category 

Grant 

Category 

General 

Community 

Grants 

Special Events 

Grants 

Minor Facility 

Capital Grants 

No. of 

Applications 

received 

Total $ 

amount 

requested 

Total 

available 

grant 

funding 

Total amount 

allocated 

33 $78,387 $60,000 $38,434 

7 $14,783 

cash 

$5,100 inkind 

$20,000 $13,000 cash 

$ 5,100 in kind 

47 $213,623 $100,000 $119,883 





That Council: 

1. Award the General, Minor Facility Capital and Special Event 

Community Grants to applicant organisations as detailed in the 

attached community grant allocations listing 2010-2011. 

2. Forward letters to unsuccessful applicant organisations, thanking them 

for their application and providing explanations as to why their 

application could not be supported. 

3. Refer the allocations for swimming pools at Cowes Primary School and 

Bass Valley Primary School for outside hours public access to the 

2011/2012 Budget for consideration 

Attachments 

AT-1 CONFIDENTIAL - Community Grants Allocations listing 2010-2011 11 Pages 


Moved: Cr. Peter Paul / Seconded: Cr. John Duscher 


Mayoral Announcement Of Next Meeting Of Council 

CARRIED 

The Mayor advised that the next meeting of Council will be the special meeting to be 

held on Wednesday 22 December 2010 in the Council Chamber at the Civic Centre, 

Wonthaggi. 

The meeting will be open to the public from 5.00pm onwards. 

Meeting closed 

The meeting closed at 7.40pm

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting - Bass Coast Shire Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?