No change: Cape Woolamai, Smiths Beach among protected boundaries
POTENTIALLY, the biggest winner out of the State Government’s long-winded Bass Coast Distinctive Areas and Landscapes (DAL) process is the Western Port Woodlands. Previously ignored as a ‘Distinctive Area’ within the shire, despite being the...
POTENTIALLY, the biggest winner out of the State Government’s long-winded Bass Coast Distinctive Areas and Landscapes (DAL) process is the Western Port Woodlands.
Previously ignored by the DAL process as a ‘Distinctive Area’ within the shire, despite being the largest remnant of intact coastal woodlands in the region, and home to the Southern Brown Bandicoot, rare fungi and orchids and Australia’s largest owl, the Powerful Owl; it only gained prominence through the campaign mounted by the ‘Save the Western Port Woodlands’ group.
When the DAL Standing Advisory Committee wrapped up on Thursday, April 27, after 27 days of hearings over two months, with final submissions from the Bass Coast Shire Council and the Minister for planning, it was clear that would-be developers of land on the edges of Cape Woolamai, Smith Beach, Ventnor, Cowes, Newhaven, Dalyston and Coronet Bay have been left with no options.
So dismissive was the of Department of Transport and Planning in its closing submission, for example, of developers' bids to expand the settlement of Cape Woolamai that you'd think the proposal to expand housing on to the old Phillip Airport site was dead for all time.
And while there was also little for the opponents of residential expansion in Cape Paterson to cheer about, legal representatives for the Department, made all the right noises in response to the woodlands’ campaign.
Speaking on behalf of the Minister for Planning, Julie Forsyth SC, said there was a lot of common ground between the department and the supporters of the Western Port Woodlands about the environmental values of the area and a lot of agreement that alterations to the shire’s draft Statement of Planning Policy are needed.
“The only divergence of opinion is the extent to which it can be carried out within this process, or as part of another process.”
Ms Forsyth said the advisory committee couldn’t make recommendations about such things as a moratorium on sand mining, with the importance of both the biodiversity values of the woodlands and the value of the extractive industries needing to be acknowledged.
“Whether it be designated as an ‘Investigation Area’ or something else, there is agreement about the biodiversity values of the Western Port Woodlands being included the SPP,” Ms Forsyth said.
The issue of properly mapping the woodlands area and proposed wildlife corridors were also addressed, that limits should be placed on the further expansion of extractive industries and investigations into alternative sources of sand and other materials for the construction sector, away from an area clearly acknowledged as an area of national environmental significance.
But as much as both the Department of Transport and Planning, and Bass Coast Shire Council’s submissions concentrated on the need to protect the woodlands, there was also extensive coverage given to the main issue for the DAL advisory committee, the introduction of Protected Settlement Boundaries around most of the shire’s 25 settlements.
And while the responsible authority, the Bass Coast Shire Council, argued strongly that the government should hold off on declaring these hard boundaries, requiring a decision of State Parliament to change, until missing strategic planning work was undertaken, the department representatives said there was no reason why the protected boundaries couldn’t be introduced within the next few months.
The department did however provide some wriggle room for Cape Paterson, saying there were parts of the proposed northern development area that might be excluded from future residential expansion and possible alterations to the existing settlement boundary.
But the department is strongly of the opinion that the future expansion of Cape Paterson can go ahead.
Ms Forsyth said there were a couple of reasons why the department looked at Cape Paterson differently to other coastal settlements in the shire when it came to hosting further residential growth; one it was in the network of towns; Inverloch, Cape Paterson and Wonthaggi well supplied for services by Wonthaggi, and the expansion was proposed away from the coast, to the north of the town.
“The impacts in general are diluted, and the impact on nesting birds, and such things as town lighting are also lessened by being back from the coast.”
The department gave a summary of what it believes the advisory panel should recommend in relation to the various settlements, especially knocking back most of the advances made by would-be developers.
But the devil, as they say, may well be in the detail with Ms Forsyth recommending that the advisory panel need not look at crossing every ‘t’ and dotting every ‘I’ as they considered what changes were appropriate to the shire’s SPP.
Chair of the panel, Kathy Mitchell, said she was prepared to take the advice on board but also noted that the committee also had a responsibility to provide full and accurate advise to the Minister.
In amongst all the argy bargy over Protected Town Boundaries, ridgeline protection, saving the woodlands and the expansion of Cape Paterson, there barely a nod of recognition to the planning restrictions that may impact commercial farming in the area, although the representatives of the DTP said there would be a response made to submissions within the closing remarks from the department.
The planning department's barrister Ms Forsyth also gave short shrift to the submission by the Bass Coast Shire Council's lawyer David Vorchheimer of HWL Ebsworth Lawyers, that extensive strategic planning work still needed to be done before a new SPP could be put in place, saying the cost of that work should be funded by the State Government because the DAL process was a government initiative.
Ms Forsyth said the allocation of government funding was a matter for the government not the responsible authority.
The process now is that the advisory committee has 40 working days to respond to the whole DAL process, the deadline being close of business on June 23, 2023 but there is no timeframe on a response from the Minister.