URGENT,
WE ALL NEED TO ACT TOGETHER TO SAVE OUR LAND
PLEASE EMAIL YOUR GIPPSLAND MEMBER, PETER RYAN RIGHT NOW peter.ryan@parliament.vic.gov.au
ASK HIM TO RAISE THE ISSUE OF YOUR PROPERTY RIGHTS IN PARLIAMENT. WHICH IS NOW SITTING, OR PERSONALLY WITH THE MINISTER. ASK PETER TO URGE MINISTER MADDEN NOT TO SIGN OFF ON WELLINGTON SHIRE'S C48 PLANNING AMENDMENT ON THE 90 MILE BEACH.
Thankyou
Carol
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Saturday, August 18, 2007
New Planning Ammendment
If you haven't already done so please email your objection to planning ammendment C48 to justin.madden@parliament.vic.gov.au it is really important to lodge your objection
Friday, August 17, 2007
Great Letter Sent to Minister From Charlie Grech
Hon Justin Madden Mlc
Minister for planning
Level 17, 18 Nicholson St,
Melbourne Vic 3000
Dear Mr Madden,
I am in receipt of your response to my letter of 8/6/07 regarding issues concerning my property at Golden Beach. Your response is disheartening, and I put to you the following matters for your further consideration
Wellington shire council have adopted their nodal approach for the 90 mile beach on a one strategy suits all approach without any consideration to blocks past the nodal point which are not subject to any inundation, flooding or sinking problems.
They have adopted their Golden beach Nodal boundary to coincide with the end of the power lines purely for their convenience. They say this is because there is no infrastructure past this point.
And of course there is no infrastructure because of Wellington Council’s indecision, and their discouragement to landowners wanting to build and invest in the area. Wellington Shire say they want tourism, yet they are mismanaging this prime tourism asset.
With the State Government’s encouragement and Sustainable policies, a dwelling can easily be self sustainable with Solar Power, Rain water tanks, and On site Sewerage treatment. Therefore infrastructure is not an impediment to residential development.
My restructured block on Shoreline drive has never flooded or shown any signs of sinking as the doomsday people would have us believe, over the 40 years I have owned it. Indeed even during the recent heavy rains there was no water anywhere near the restructured blocks.
Yet Many areas of Gippsland were Flooded.
Whilst there were issues emanating from the original subdivision, these have been eliminated with the restructuring of blocks, and the elimination of land subject to inundation and flooding from the low density residential Zoning.
The request for interim controls by Wellington shire are therefore unnecessary, and raise high suspicion about the motivations of those promoting this wholesale denial of our rights to build on our land.
Wellington shire council which is supposed to represent all their ratepayers fairly and equitably have treated 90 mile beach land owners as outcasts as it seeks to have you, the minister, apply controls over our properties, without any concern for us the landowners.
An honourable council representing all ratepayers is bound to make sure that landowners are not disadvantaged, and if so that they are compensated at to-days prices.
Wellington Shire are quite happy to demand and collect rates from us, without providing us any tangible services, and then go about using these rates to work against our interests.
Their blanket nodal approach is flawed and discriminatory, and needs to be revisited by a committee represented by your office, council, and Landowners.
It is a sad fact of government these days that decisions are driven by bureaucrats who have no concern for people, and are driven purely by ideology. I am aware that there are inter departmental, and council committees making recommendations to you on the ninety mile beach issues, and these do not have any landowner representatives on them to give you a balanced recommendations.
I urge you to apply your governments policy of fairness to all Victorians by not acceding to Wellington Shire’s request, and to ensure that landowners are represented and consulted at all times.
In summary
1 The problems of flooding, inundation, sustainability and sinking are NOT widespread to the Whole of the Ninety Mile beach area.
2 The nodal approach assumes that it is. It is hard fisted and discriminatory as there are hundreds of blocks outside this nodal area which are sustainable and not beset by any problems.
3 Sustainable, Independent and envoiremently friendly infrastructure can be provided on all blocks of land.
4 Camping is permitted and encouraged by Parks Vic. Along the foreshore of Ninety mile Beach, indicating that even government departments don’t believe the sustainability rhetoric that is being advanced by Wellington Shire and others.
5 Landowners must be represented on all committees making recommendations on the Ninety Mile Beach area (Our Land). Council and Government must desist from their divide and conquer attitude.
6 If the State Government and Council are to persist with their current policy on the Ninety Mile Beach area, COMPENSATION levels should be set Now, and NOT when our land is made valueless by State Government and Wellington council policies
Hoping the above gets serious and fair consideration
Yours
…………………………. Charlie Grech
Minister for planning
Level 17, 18 Nicholson St,
Melbourne Vic 3000
Dear Mr Madden,
I am in receipt of your response to my letter of 8/6/07 regarding issues concerning my property at Golden Beach. Your response is disheartening, and I put to you the following matters for your further consideration
Wellington shire council have adopted their nodal approach for the 90 mile beach on a one strategy suits all approach without any consideration to blocks past the nodal point which are not subject to any inundation, flooding or sinking problems.
They have adopted their Golden beach Nodal boundary to coincide with the end of the power lines purely for their convenience. They say this is because there is no infrastructure past this point.
And of course there is no infrastructure because of Wellington Council’s indecision, and their discouragement to landowners wanting to build and invest in the area. Wellington Shire say they want tourism, yet they are mismanaging this prime tourism asset.
With the State Government’s encouragement and Sustainable policies, a dwelling can easily be self sustainable with Solar Power, Rain water tanks, and On site Sewerage treatment. Therefore infrastructure is not an impediment to residential development.
My restructured block on Shoreline drive has never flooded or shown any signs of sinking as the doomsday people would have us believe, over the 40 years I have owned it. Indeed even during the recent heavy rains there was no water anywhere near the restructured blocks.
Yet Many areas of Gippsland were Flooded.
Whilst there were issues emanating from the original subdivision, these have been eliminated with the restructuring of blocks, and the elimination of land subject to inundation and flooding from the low density residential Zoning.
The request for interim controls by Wellington shire are therefore unnecessary, and raise high suspicion about the motivations of those promoting this wholesale denial of our rights to build on our land.
Wellington shire council which is supposed to represent all their ratepayers fairly and equitably have treated 90 mile beach land owners as outcasts as it seeks to have you, the minister, apply controls over our properties, without any concern for us the landowners.
An honourable council representing all ratepayers is bound to make sure that landowners are not disadvantaged, and if so that they are compensated at to-days prices.
Wellington Shire are quite happy to demand and collect rates from us, without providing us any tangible services, and then go about using these rates to work against our interests.
Their blanket nodal approach is flawed and discriminatory, and needs to be revisited by a committee represented by your office, council, and Landowners.
It is a sad fact of government these days that decisions are driven by bureaucrats who have no concern for people, and are driven purely by ideology. I am aware that there are inter departmental, and council committees making recommendations to you on the ninety mile beach issues, and these do not have any landowner representatives on them to give you a balanced recommendations.
I urge you to apply your governments policy of fairness to all Victorians by not acceding to Wellington Shire’s request, and to ensure that landowners are represented and consulted at all times.
In summary
1 The problems of flooding, inundation, sustainability and sinking are NOT widespread to the Whole of the Ninety Mile beach area.
2 The nodal approach assumes that it is. It is hard fisted and discriminatory as there are hundreds of blocks outside this nodal area which are sustainable and not beset by any problems.
3 Sustainable, Independent and envoiremently friendly infrastructure can be provided on all blocks of land.
4 Camping is permitted and encouraged by Parks Vic. Along the foreshore of Ninety mile Beach, indicating that even government departments don’t believe the sustainability rhetoric that is being advanced by Wellington Shire and others.
5 Landowners must be represented on all committees making recommendations on the Ninety Mile Beach area (Our Land). Council and Government must desist from their divide and conquer attitude.
6 If the State Government and Council are to persist with their current policy on the Ninety Mile Beach area, COMPENSATION levels should be set Now, and NOT when our land is made valueless by State Government and Wellington council policies
Hoping the above gets serious and fair consideration
Yours
…………………………. Charlie Grech
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Everyone needs to write to the minister
See below section of a large document submitted by the shire for signing by DSE and the minister. It is not available on the DSE web as it is suppose to be confidential - we have copies of the entire document changing various clauses to the planning schemes, mostly it is asking for a two year halt on all development so council can work on their strategy.
Everybody needs to write to the minister urgently and get this stopped.
Planning and Environment Act 1987
WELLINGTON PLANNING SCHEME
AMENDMENT C48
EXPLANATORY REPORT
Who is the planning authority?
This amendment has been prepared by GHD Pty Ltd on behalf of the Wellington Shire Council. The planning authority for this amendment is the Minister for Planning.
The amendment has been made at the request of the Wellington Shire Council.
Land affected by the amendment.
The amendment applies to land along the Ninety Mile Beach between The Honeysuckles and Paradise Beach, as shown on the attached Precinct Plans.
What the amendment does.
The amendment introduces reference to the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ in the MSS and incorporates the key strategies of that document as policy under Clause 21.04. This Strategy is included as a reference document in Clause 21.09.
The amendment includes a new local policy, “Ninety Mile Beach Policy”, in Clause 22.08.
The amendment also adds an incorporated document, ‘Ninety Mile Beach Use, Development and Subdivision Controls’ to Clause 52.03 and list its inclusion within the Schedule of Clause 81.01.
Strategic assessment of the amendment
· Why is the amendment required?
The coastal subdivisions of the Ninety Mile Beach have for many years been considered inappropriate due to a lack of infrastructure and environmental factors. Although some lots are developed, a full development scenario would have significant and unacceptable impacts on the coastal and lakes environment. Various approaches to restricting development have been initiated over the last three decades with limited success and with continued uncertainty for landowners. The area is likely to be under increasing development pressure in the future. Planning and management reforms are needed and land ownership issues need resolution.
The Shire of Wellington adopted the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ to assist with resolving these issues. This strategy provides a preferred settlement structure for the Wellington Coast between Paradise Beach and The Honeysuckles, as a way to encourage development that responds appropriately to environmental values and community needs. This amendment aims to implement the strategy by including its key strategies as policy in the Wellington Planning Scheme.
Through the implementation of this policy, the Wellington Coast will provide for the settlement, recreation, tourism and environmental aspirations of the community. Settlement patterns and development outcomes will respond to the values and capacities of the natural environment, the cost of infrastructure, and will seek to include equitable solutions for all ratepayers and landowners in the Shire.
In February 2007 the Victorian Government established a Project Control Group to examine the implications and options available for implementing the Strategy and recommend an appropriate response. The Project Control Group is due to deliver its recommendations to Government at the end of 2007. In the interim, however, Council has refused several planning permits in line with the Strategy, which are now the subject of appeals to VCAT. Council wishes to amend the Planning Scheme to ensure adequate policy and regulatory reference to the Strategy to further support its discussions on planning permits.
The amendment to Clause 52.03 provides an interim means of development control to ensure that development along Ninety Mile Beach will not compromise the orderly planning until the Planning Control Group recommendations have been finalised and appropriate long term planning controls are in place.
· How does the amendment implement the objectives of planning in Victoria?
The amendment will implement the following objectives of planning in Victoria under Section 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987:
4(1)(a) to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land;
4(1)(b) to provide for the protection of natural and man-made resources and the maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity;
4(1)(c) to secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for all Victorians and visitors to Victoria;
4(1)(d) to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value;
4(1)(e) to protect public utilities and other assets and enable the orderly provision and co-ordination of public utilities and other facilities for the benefit of the community;
4(1)(f) to facilitate development in accordance with the objectives set out in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e);
4(1)(g) to balance the present and future interests of all Victorians.
The amendment implements these objectives of planning in Victoria by encouraging orderly development that responds appropriately to environmental values and that minimises adverse impacts on the coastal and lakes environment. It also aims to provide and improve access to utilities, community services and infrastructure where appropriate.
· How does the amendment address the environmental effects and any relevant social and economic effects?
The amendment addresses the environmental effects by encouraging orderly development that responds appropriately to environmental values and that minimises adverse impacts on the coastal and lakes environment. The inclusion of precinct plans to the Ninety Mile Beach Policy provides for the environmental management of areas that are subject to inundation, that have coastal values and that have not been substantially modified. These areas will be protected from inappropriate subdivisions and unserviced development.
The amendment addresses social and economic effects by focusing development in defined urban nodes. This would improve access to utilities, community services and infrastructure where it is deemed appropriate. The amendment also aims to provide for recreation, tourism and related commercial activities in designated areas.
· Does the amendment comply with the requirements of any Minister’s Direction applicable to the amendment?
This explanatory report addresses the requirements of Ministerial Direction No. 11 – Strategic Assessments of Amendments.
The amendment is consistent with the Ministerial Direction on the Form and Content of Planning Schemes under section 7(5) of the Act.
· How does the amendment support or implement the State Planning Policy Framework?
The amendment directly supports and implements the SPPF, in particular Clauses 14.01, 15.02, 15.08 and 18.09. The objectives of these clauses are:
Clause 14.01 – Planning for urban settlement
To facilitate the orderly development of urban areas.
Clause 15.02 – Floodplain management
To assist the protection of:
§ Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard.
§ The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways.
§ The flood storage function of floodplains and waterways.
§ Floodplain areas of environmental significance.
Clause 15.08 – Coastal Areas
To protect and enhance the natural ecosystems and landscapes of the coastal and marine environment.
To ensure sustainable use of natural coastal resources.
To achieve development that provides an environmental, social and economic balance.
To recognise and enhance the community’s value of the coast.
Clause 18.09 – Water supply, sewerage and drainage
To plan for the provision of water supply, sewerage and drainage services that efficiently and effectively meet State and community needs and protect the environment.
· How does the amendment support or implement the Local Planning Policy Framework?
The amendment supports the MSS by including a reference to the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ within the relevant Clauses 21.04 and 21.09. The existing MSS already provides guidance in regard to managing coastal development, however it needs to be strengthened with additional references to the preferred settlement structure for the Wellington Coast between Paradise Beach and The Honeysuckles. This encourages development that responds appropriately to environmental values and community needs.
The amendment strengthens the Local Planning Policy Framework by including a new local policy: the Ninety Mile Beach Policy. This policy applies to the use, development and subdivision of land along the Ninety Mile Beach between The Honeysuckles and Paradise Beach, as shown on the precinct plans included in this new Clause 22.08. The policy provides guidance on managing the use, development and subdivision of land in accordance with the Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy.
· Does the amendment make proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions?
The amendment makes proper use of the Victorian Planning Provisions. The inclusion of the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ as a Reference Document is an appropriate mechanism for controlling land use and development in accordance with this strategy.
The use of Clause 52.03 and the associated incorporated document is an appropriate means of controlling development in the interim until such a time as appropriate zoning can be implemented.
· How does the amendment address the views of any relevant agency?
The amendment is generally in accordance with the Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy, which was developed with consideration of community feedback from extensive discussions and consultation with landowners, residents and other interested community groups.
The Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy was developed in accordance with the relevant coastal planning and management principles of the Victorian Coastal Strategy, 2002 prepared by the Victorian Coastal Council, and the Gippsland Coastal Board’s Coastal Action Plans.
The amendment also addresses the views of the Department of Sustainability and Environment by giving due consideration to its Coastal Spaces Recommendation Report.
· What impact will the new planning provisions have on the resource and administrative costs of the responsible authority?
The amendment will not cause detrimental impact on the resource and administrative costs of Council as existing zones and overlays already trigger the need for permit applications. The amendment will provide clearer policy and decision guidelines for the assessment of applications within the area, and in this way may reduce resource and administrative costs for the responsible authority.
Where you may inspect this Amendment.
The amendment is available for public inspection, free of charge, during office hours at the following places.
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Planning Information Centre
Ground Floor
8 Nicholson Street
East Melbourne 3002
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Gippsland Regional Office 71 Hotham StreetTraralgon VIC 3844
Wellington Shire Council
Port of Sale Civic Centre
70 Foster Street
Sale 3850
Wellington Shire Council
Yarram Customer Service Centre
156 Grant Street
Yarram 3971
Everybody needs to write to the minister urgently and get this stopped.
Planning and Environment Act 1987
WELLINGTON PLANNING SCHEME
AMENDMENT C48
EXPLANATORY REPORT
Who is the planning authority?
This amendment has been prepared by GHD Pty Ltd on behalf of the Wellington Shire Council. The planning authority for this amendment is the Minister for Planning.
The amendment has been made at the request of the Wellington Shire Council.
Land affected by the amendment.
The amendment applies to land along the Ninety Mile Beach between The Honeysuckles and Paradise Beach, as shown on the attached Precinct Plans.
What the amendment does.
The amendment introduces reference to the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ in the MSS and incorporates the key strategies of that document as policy under Clause 21.04. This Strategy is included as a reference document in Clause 21.09.
The amendment includes a new local policy, “Ninety Mile Beach Policy”, in Clause 22.08.
The amendment also adds an incorporated document, ‘Ninety Mile Beach Use, Development and Subdivision Controls’ to Clause 52.03 and list its inclusion within the Schedule of Clause 81.01.
Strategic assessment of the amendment
· Why is the amendment required?
The coastal subdivisions of the Ninety Mile Beach have for many years been considered inappropriate due to a lack of infrastructure and environmental factors. Although some lots are developed, a full development scenario would have significant and unacceptable impacts on the coastal and lakes environment. Various approaches to restricting development have been initiated over the last three decades with limited success and with continued uncertainty for landowners. The area is likely to be under increasing development pressure in the future. Planning and management reforms are needed and land ownership issues need resolution.
The Shire of Wellington adopted the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ to assist with resolving these issues. This strategy provides a preferred settlement structure for the Wellington Coast between Paradise Beach and The Honeysuckles, as a way to encourage development that responds appropriately to environmental values and community needs. This amendment aims to implement the strategy by including its key strategies as policy in the Wellington Planning Scheme.
Through the implementation of this policy, the Wellington Coast will provide for the settlement, recreation, tourism and environmental aspirations of the community. Settlement patterns and development outcomes will respond to the values and capacities of the natural environment, the cost of infrastructure, and will seek to include equitable solutions for all ratepayers and landowners in the Shire.
In February 2007 the Victorian Government established a Project Control Group to examine the implications and options available for implementing the Strategy and recommend an appropriate response. The Project Control Group is due to deliver its recommendations to Government at the end of 2007. In the interim, however, Council has refused several planning permits in line with the Strategy, which are now the subject of appeals to VCAT. Council wishes to amend the Planning Scheme to ensure adequate policy and regulatory reference to the Strategy to further support its discussions on planning permits.
The amendment to Clause 52.03 provides an interim means of development control to ensure that development along Ninety Mile Beach will not compromise the orderly planning until the Planning Control Group recommendations have been finalised and appropriate long term planning controls are in place.
· How does the amendment implement the objectives of planning in Victoria?
The amendment will implement the following objectives of planning in Victoria under Section 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987:
4(1)(a) to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land;
4(1)(b) to provide for the protection of natural and man-made resources and the maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity;
4(1)(c) to secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for all Victorians and visitors to Victoria;
4(1)(d) to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value;
4(1)(e) to protect public utilities and other assets and enable the orderly provision and co-ordination of public utilities and other facilities for the benefit of the community;
4(1)(f) to facilitate development in accordance with the objectives set out in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e);
4(1)(g) to balance the present and future interests of all Victorians.
The amendment implements these objectives of planning in Victoria by encouraging orderly development that responds appropriately to environmental values and that minimises adverse impacts on the coastal and lakes environment. It also aims to provide and improve access to utilities, community services and infrastructure where appropriate.
· How does the amendment address the environmental effects and any relevant social and economic effects?
The amendment addresses the environmental effects by encouraging orderly development that responds appropriately to environmental values and that minimises adverse impacts on the coastal and lakes environment. The inclusion of precinct plans to the Ninety Mile Beach Policy provides for the environmental management of areas that are subject to inundation, that have coastal values and that have not been substantially modified. These areas will be protected from inappropriate subdivisions and unserviced development.
The amendment addresses social and economic effects by focusing development in defined urban nodes. This would improve access to utilities, community services and infrastructure where it is deemed appropriate. The amendment also aims to provide for recreation, tourism and related commercial activities in designated areas.
· Does the amendment comply with the requirements of any Minister’s Direction applicable to the amendment?
This explanatory report addresses the requirements of Ministerial Direction No. 11 – Strategic Assessments of Amendments.
The amendment is consistent with the Ministerial Direction on the Form and Content of Planning Schemes under section 7(5) of the Act.
· How does the amendment support or implement the State Planning Policy Framework?
The amendment directly supports and implements the SPPF, in particular Clauses 14.01, 15.02, 15.08 and 18.09. The objectives of these clauses are:
Clause 14.01 – Planning for urban settlement
To facilitate the orderly development of urban areas.
Clause 15.02 – Floodplain management
To assist the protection of:
§ Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard.
§ The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways.
§ The flood storage function of floodplains and waterways.
§ Floodplain areas of environmental significance.
Clause 15.08 – Coastal Areas
To protect and enhance the natural ecosystems and landscapes of the coastal and marine environment.
To ensure sustainable use of natural coastal resources.
To achieve development that provides an environmental, social and economic balance.
To recognise and enhance the community’s value of the coast.
Clause 18.09 – Water supply, sewerage and drainage
To plan for the provision of water supply, sewerage and drainage services that efficiently and effectively meet State and community needs and protect the environment.
· How does the amendment support or implement the Local Planning Policy Framework?
The amendment supports the MSS by including a reference to the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ within the relevant Clauses 21.04 and 21.09. The existing MSS already provides guidance in regard to managing coastal development, however it needs to be strengthened with additional references to the preferred settlement structure for the Wellington Coast between Paradise Beach and The Honeysuckles. This encourages development that responds appropriately to environmental values and community needs.
The amendment strengthens the Local Planning Policy Framework by including a new local policy: the Ninety Mile Beach Policy. This policy applies to the use, development and subdivision of land along the Ninety Mile Beach between The Honeysuckles and Paradise Beach, as shown on the precinct plans included in this new Clause 22.08. The policy provides guidance on managing the use, development and subdivision of land in accordance with the Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy.
· Does the amendment make proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions?
The amendment makes proper use of the Victorian Planning Provisions. The inclusion of the ‘Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy: The Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, February 2007’ as a Reference Document is an appropriate mechanism for controlling land use and development in accordance with this strategy.
The use of Clause 52.03 and the associated incorporated document is an appropriate means of controlling development in the interim until such a time as appropriate zoning can be implemented.
· How does the amendment address the views of any relevant agency?
The amendment is generally in accordance with the Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy, which was developed with consideration of community feedback from extensive discussions and consultation with landowners, residents and other interested community groups.
The Wellington Coast Subdivision Strategy was developed in accordance with the relevant coastal planning and management principles of the Victorian Coastal Strategy, 2002 prepared by the Victorian Coastal Council, and the Gippsland Coastal Board’s Coastal Action Plans.
The amendment also addresses the views of the Department of Sustainability and Environment by giving due consideration to its Coastal Spaces Recommendation Report.
· What impact will the new planning provisions have on the resource and administrative costs of the responsible authority?
The amendment will not cause detrimental impact on the resource and administrative costs of Council as existing zones and overlays already trigger the need for permit applications. The amendment will provide clearer policy and decision guidelines for the assessment of applications within the area, and in this way may reduce resource and administrative costs for the responsible authority.
Where you may inspect this Amendment.
The amendment is available for public inspection, free of charge, during office hours at the following places.
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Planning Information Centre
Ground Floor
8 Nicholson Street
East Melbourne 3002
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Gippsland Regional Office 71 Hotham StreetTraralgon VIC 3844
Wellington Shire Council
Port of Sale Civic Centre
70 Foster Street
Sale 3850
Wellington Shire Council
Yarram Customer Service Centre
156 Grant Street
Yarram 3971
VCAT Hearing
There was a VCAT hearing held in Melbourne 15th August for planning approval for 7 permits.
Seems that the hearing went well for our members, some interesting points out of VCAT.
* Suggestion from VCAT that council coastal strategy is breaking planning laws
* Asked council what new rezoning they proposed for our area - council solicitor replied "Rural Conservation" - "VCAT informed council that if zoning rural conservation it would not effect the rights of these people obtaining permission to build".
* Council confirmed the recent ammendment submitted to Justin Madden for approval to stop all development for 2 years so they can continue work on their strategy.
We are hoping a decision is handed down in the not to distant future
Seems that the hearing went well for our members, some interesting points out of VCAT.
* Suggestion from VCAT that council coastal strategy is breaking planning laws
* Asked council what new rezoning they proposed for our area - council solicitor replied "Rural Conservation" - "VCAT informed council that if zoning rural conservation it would not effect the rights of these people obtaining permission to build".
* Council confirmed the recent ammendment submitted to Justin Madden for approval to stop all development for 2 years so they can continue work on their strategy.
We are hoping a decision is handed down in the not to distant future
Thursday, August 2, 2007
New Valuation Notices
As you are all probably aware council has issued its new valuations, once again with valuations way below their true worth. Council claim that part of the coastal strategy they became aware of the frustrations of increasing rates for properties that are unable to be developed (sensitive bunch) and have valued properties accordingly.
* Suggest you do a goggle search on real estate in our area and property values in the deemed "safe area" and see how much your property is really worth. Dont forget our land has already been rezoned as Low Density Residential - Restructured Allotments after the last "inappropriate subdivision label" and therefore able to be developed if you have a restructured block.
* To be also noted is at our recent meeting it was suggested if government approve the stategy and fund it, property owners should not expect "market value" more like our rate notices or less.
Although we have otherwise been informed that legally this would not happen and should they compulsory acquire our properties in the future the valuations would be in accordance with correct market value without the stategy effecting valuations - your judgement call on what avenue you would like to take.
For those of you who would like to object to valuations you need to fill in this form and submit it to council.... http://www.wellington.vic.gov.au/page/Download.asp?name=Lodging_a_Valuation_Objection.pdf&size=15483&link=../Files/Lodging_a_Valuation_Objection.pdf
* Suggest you do a goggle search on real estate in our area and property values in the deemed "safe area" and see how much your property is really worth. Dont forget our land has already been rezoned as Low Density Residential - Restructured Allotments after the last "inappropriate subdivision label" and therefore able to be developed if you have a restructured block.
* To be also noted is at our recent meeting it was suggested if government approve the stategy and fund it, property owners should not expect "market value" more like our rate notices or less.
Although we have otherwise been informed that legally this would not happen and should they compulsory acquire our properties in the future the valuations would be in accordance with correct market value without the stategy effecting valuations - your judgement call on what avenue you would like to take.
For those of you who would like to object to valuations you need to fill in this form and submit it to council.... http://www.wellington.vic.gov.au/page/Download.asp?name=Lodging_a_Valuation_Objection.pdf&size=15483&link=../Files/Lodging_a_Valuation_Objection.pdf
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Council Meeting
Meeting at Wellington Shire 23rd August -
Attendees:- Bruce Graham and Ian Hatfield (Council Coastal Strategy) Peter Ryan - Local Member and Paul Theogolou, Mark Williams, Kim Harpur (Group Members)
Points from meeting:-
* In the eyes of the council strategic genius the strategy is progressing well with planned submission of planning changes expected Jan - Feb next year. (Well just happened that the new ammendment was submitted the same day as our meeting).
* Mark keen to obtain letter of existing use rights for all existing houses or properties with existing planning permits. Council would treat property owners individually not as a group - so individuals need to write or email ihatifeld@bigpond.net.au or BruceG@wellington.vic.gov.au or if you have no luck peter.ryan@parliament.vic.gov.au.
* Peter Ryan suggested that if government fund this project property owners should not expect to get market value for properties.... something more like the recent rate notices or less.
* Ian Hatfield is going to send another letter to all property owners on progress.... have asked for our contact details to be on letter to enable property owners to contact us. (only taken 18 months of negiotation... will see if this really happens).
* Informed of two committees set up which consists of "high level representatives" working on business case to submit to government. When questioned once again about why there is not one property owner on either committees the smiling assassins felt it was not necessary.
* We spoke about the recent flooding with Golden Beach "subject to inundation areas" not inundated - "Mark told Bruce Graham it showed that Mark was safer at home than Bruce at work as the council offices were inundated"..
Basically another frustrating meeting ... Highlights "Had a nice cup of coffee in Sale"
Attendees:- Bruce Graham and Ian Hatfield (Council Coastal Strategy) Peter Ryan - Local Member and Paul Theogolou, Mark Williams, Kim Harpur (Group Members)
Points from meeting:-
* In the eyes of the council strategic genius the strategy is progressing well with planned submission of planning changes expected Jan - Feb next year. (Well just happened that the new ammendment was submitted the same day as our meeting).
* Mark keen to obtain letter of existing use rights for all existing houses or properties with existing planning permits. Council would treat property owners individually not as a group - so individuals need to write or email ihatifeld@bigpond.net.au or BruceG@wellington.vic.gov.au or if you have no luck peter.ryan@parliament.vic.gov.au.
* Peter Ryan suggested that if government fund this project property owners should not expect to get market value for properties.... something more like the recent rate notices or less.
* Ian Hatfield is going to send another letter to all property owners on progress.... have asked for our contact details to be on letter to enable property owners to contact us. (only taken 18 months of negiotation... will see if this really happens).
* Informed of two committees set up which consists of "high level representatives" working on business case to submit to government. When questioned once again about why there is not one property owner on either committees the smiling assassins felt it was not necessary.
* We spoke about the recent flooding with Golden Beach "subject to inundation areas" not inundated - "Mark told Bruce Graham it showed that Mark was safer at home than Bruce at work as the council offices were inundated"..
Basically another frustrating meeting ... Highlights "Had a nice cup of coffee in Sale"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)