NOTICE of an APPLICATION for PLANNING PERMIT PLANNING and ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS 2005 Form 2

NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS 2005 Form 2

Section 52 (Planning & Environment Act 1987)

The land affected by the 33 & 35 East Street, Daylesford application is located at: Lots 11 & 12 PS 614545 PSH PWO

The application is for a Construction of two warehouses, waiver of carparking permit for: requirements

The applicant for the permit I Planning Services Pty Ltd is:

The application reference PA 2259 number is: Municipal Offices: You may look at the Hepburn Shire Council application and any Customer Services Building documents that support the Corner Duke and Albert Streets, application at the office of the responsible authority: Daylesford Planning Department - Ph: 03 5348 1577

Planning applications may also be viewed on Council's web site under tab 'Statutory Planning'. Follow the link to 'Applications on Advertising'.

This can be done during office hours and is free of charge.

Any person who may be affected by the granting of the permit may object or make other submissions to the responsible authority.

An objection must * be sent to the Responsible Authority in writing, * include the reasons for the objection, and * state how the objector would be affected.

The Responsible Authority will not 16 / 7 / 2019 decide on the application before:

If you object, the Responsible Authority will tell you of its decision.

1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break Copyright State of Victoria. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) and for the purposes of Section 32 of the Sale of Land Act 1962 (Vic) or pursuant to a written agreement. The information is only valid at the time and in the form obtained from the LANDATA REGD TM System. The State of Victoria accepts no responsibility for any subsequent release, publication or reproduction of the information.

REGISTER SEARCH STATEMENT (Title Search) Transfer of Page 1 of 1 Land Act 1958 VOLUME 11123 FOLIO 277 Security no : 124075122258A Produced 28/11/2018 02:23 PM 1987 ACT LAND DESCRIPTION SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Lot 12 on Plan of Subdivision 614545H.PLANNING PARENT TITLE Volume 08136 Folio 369 available PLANNING made Created by instrument PS614545HHEPBURN 12/03/2009 is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 REGISTERED PROPRIETOR the Act for process Estate Fee Simple its considerationplanning of a Environment used Joint Proprietors & be EDWARD NICHOLAS COMELLI part not MALINKA SOPHIA COMELLI bothPlanning of 1 COMELLIS must ROAD DAYLESFORDmay VIC 3460 PS614545H 12/03/2009 the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any ENCUMBRANCES, CAVEATS AND NOTICESbreak

Any encumbrances created by Section 98 Transfer of Land Act 1958 or Section 24 Subdivision Act 1988 and any other encumbrances shown or entered on the plan set out under DIAGRAM LOCATION below.

DIAGRAM LOCATION

SEE PS614545H FOR FURTHER DETAILS AND BOUNDARIES

ACTIVITY IN THE LAST 125 DAYS

NIL

------END OF REGISTER SEARCH STATEMENT------

Additional information: (not part of the Register Search Statement)

Street Address: 33 EAST STREET DAYLESFORD VIC 3460

DOCUMENT END

Title 11123/277 Page 1 of 1 Imaged Document Cover Sheet

The document following this cover sheet is an imaged document supplied by LANDATA®, Land Use Victoria. 1987 ACT SCHEME ENVIRONMENT Document Type& PLANNINGPlan available PLANNING made HEPBURN is enablingas Document Identification PS614545Hof documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act Number of Pagesfor 4 process consideration its a planning (excluding this cover sheet)of & Environment used part be not may Document AssembledPlanning28/11/2018 must14:47 the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Copyright and disclaimer notice: break © State of Victoria. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act and for the purposes of Section 32 of the Sale of Land Act 1962 or pursuant to a written agreement. The information is only valid at the time and in the form obtained from the LANDATAÂ® System. The State of Victoria accepts no responsibility for any subsequent release, publication or reproduction of the information.

The document is invalid if this cover sheet is removed or altered. 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break Copyright State of Victoria. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) and for the purposes of Section 32 of the Sale of Land Act 1962 (Vic) or pursuant to a written agreement. The information is only valid at the time and in the form obtained from the LANDATA REGD TM System. The State of Victoria accepts no responsibility for any subsequent release, publication or reproduction of the information.

REGISTER SEARCH STATEMENT (Title Search) Transfer of Page 1 of 1 Land Act 1958 VOLUME 11123 FOLIO 276 Security no : 124075122344G Produced 28/11/2018 02:25 PM 1987 ACT LAND DESCRIPTION SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Lot 11 on Plan of Subdivision 614545H.PLANNING PARENT TITLE Volume 08136 Folio 369 available PLANNING made Created by instrument PS614545HHEPBURN 12/03/2009 is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 REGISTERED PROPRIETOR the Act for process Estate Fee Simple its considerationplanning of a Environment used Joint Proprietors & be EDWARD NICHOLAS COMELLI part not MALINKA SOPHIA COMELLI bothPlanning of 1 COMELLIS must ROAD DAYLESFORDmay VIC 3460 PS614545H 12/03/2009 the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any ENCUMBRANCES, CAVEATS AND NOTICESbreak

Any encumbrances created by Section 98 Transfer of Land Act 1958 or Section 24 Subdivision Act 1988 and any other encumbrances shown or entered on the plan set out under DIAGRAM LOCATION below.

DIAGRAM LOCATION

SEE PS614545H FOR FURTHER DETAILS AND BOUNDARIES

ACTIVITY IN THE LAST 125 DAYS

NIL

------END OF REGISTER SEARCH STATEMENT------

Additional information: (not part of the Register Search Statement)

Street Address: 35 EAST STREET DAYLESFORD VIC 3460

DOCUMENT END

Title 11123/276 Page 1 of 1 Imaged Document Cover Sheet

The document following this cover sheet is an imaged document supplied by LANDATA®, Land Use Victoria. 1987 ACT SCHEME ENVIRONMENT Document Type& PLANNINGPlan available PLANNING made HEPBURN is enablingas Document Identification PS614545Hof documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act Number of Pagesfor 4 process consideration its a planning (excluding this cover sheet)of & Environment used part be not may Document AssembledPlanning28/11/2018 must14:49 the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Copyright and disclaimer notice: break © State of Victoria. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act and for the purposes of Section 32 of the Sale of Land Act 1962 or pursuant to a written agreement. The information is only valid at the time and in the form obtained from the LANDATAÂ® System. The State of Victoria accepts no responsibility for any subsequent release, publication or reproduction of the information.

The document is invalid if this cover sheet is removed or altered. 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break 1987 STORM Rating ReportACT

TransactionID: 757309 SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Municipality: HEPBURN PLANNING Rainfall Station: DAYLESFORD available PLANNING made Address: Lot 11 EastHEPBURN Street is of enablingas review documentpurpose and under Daylesford This sole 1987 the process Act VIC for3460 consideration Assessor: Troy Janssens its planning of a Environment used Development Type: Industrial & be part not Allotment Site (m2): 490.00 Planning must may STORM Rating %: 105 the which document The purposecopyright. Description Impervious Area Treatment anyType anyTreatment Occupants / Treatment % Tank Water (m2) for Area/Volume Number Of Supply break (m2 or L) Bedrooms Reliability (%)

Roof & paving 311.00 Raingarden 100mm 3.00 0 105.00 0.00

Date Generated: 09-Apr-2019 Program Version: 1.0.0 1987 STORM Rating ReportACT

TransactionID: 757315 SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Municipality: HEPBURN PLANNING Rainfall Station: DAYLESFORD available PLANNING made Address: Lot 12 EastHEPBURN Street is of enablingas review documentpurpose and under Daylesford This sole 1987 the process Act VIC for3460 consideration Assessor: Troy Janssens its planning of a Environment used Development Type: Industrial & be part not Allotment Site (m2): 489.50 Planning must may STORM Rating %: 112 the which document The purposecopyright. Description Impervious Area Treatment anyType anyTreatment Occupants / Treatment % Tank Water (m2) for Area/Volume Number Of Supply break (m2 or L) Bedrooms Reliability (%)

Roof & paving 425.00 Raingarden 100mm 5.00 0 112.00 0.00

Date Generated: 09-Apr-2019 Program Version: 1.0.0 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

1987 ACT SCHEME

& ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process consideration its a planning of & Environment used part be not Planning must may the which

documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

Hepburn Planning Scheme

Planning Report for the Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and a Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements

Address: 33-35 East Street, Daylesford Reference: P-00616

Hepburn Shire Council

iPlanning Services Pty Ltd – November 2018

Page i of iii Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Prepared for:

Mr Eddy Comelli 1987 ACT Prepared by: SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT iPlanning Services Pty Ltd PLANNING PO Box 1401 available PLANNING made Bakery Hill HEPBURN is of enablingas Ballarat Vic 3354 review T 0408 577 880 documentpurpose under This sole and 1987 E [email protected] the process Act ABN 45 160 262 000 for considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may Quality Information the which documentpurpose copyright. The any Document Planning Report for any Reference No. P-00616 break Date November 2018 Prepared by James Iles

The information contained in this document produced by iPlanning Services Pty Ltd is solely for the use of the Client identified on the cover sheet for the purpose for which it has been prepared and iPlanning Services Pty Ltd undertakes no duty to or accepts any responsibility to any third party who may rely upon this document. All rights reserved. No section or element of this document may be removed from this document, reproduced, electronically stored or transmitted in any form without the written permission of iPlanning Services Pty Ltd.

Page ii of iii Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Table of Contents

1987 1. Introduction ...... ACT 1 2. Permit Trigger/s ...... SCHEME 1 3. Subject Site and Site Context ...... & ENVIRONMENT 1 PLANNING 4. Proposal ...... available 3 PLANNING is made enabling 5. Planning Controls ...... HEPBURN of as 3 documentpurpose reviewunder 5.1 Zoning ...... This sole and 1987 3 the Act 5.2 Use ...... for process 4 its considerationplanning 5.3 Buildings and Works ...... of a Environment used 6 & be 6. Overlays ...... part not 6 Planning must may 6.1 Environmental Significance Overlaythe ...... which 6 document 7. Particular Provisions...... purposecopyright. 9 The any for any 7.1 Native Vegetation ...... break 9 7.2 Car Parking ...... 9 8. General Provisions ...... 12 8.1 Decision Guidelines ...... 12 9.1 Planning Policy Framework ...... 13 9.2 Local Planning Policy Framework ...... 15 10. Conclusion ...... 17 11. Photos of the site and surrounds ...... 18

Page iii of iii Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

1. Introduction

iPlanning Services Pty. Ltd. has been engaged by Mr Eddy Comelli to1987 submit a Planning Permit Application on his behalf for the development of two (2) warehouses and a dispensationACT of car parking requirements located at 33-35 East Street, Daylesford. SCHEME

& ENVIRONMENT 2. Permit Trigger/s PLANNING available PLANNING made A Planning Permit is requiredHEPBURN for the above proposalis under ofthe enabling followingas provisions of the Planning Scheme:

documentpurpose reviewunder . Industrial Zone This soleClause 33.02-1and Use as1987 a Warehouse the Act for Clause 33.02-4process Buildings and Works . Car Parking considerationClauseplanning 52.06-5 Dispensation of car parking requirements its a Environment used of & be 3. Subject Site and Site Contextpart not Planning must may the which The subject site is located on the eastern side of East Street and the southern side of Mink Street.in Daylesford. documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

The site consists of two Titles, described as follows;

. Title one: Vol. 11123 Fol. 277 Lot 12 on Plan of Subdivision No. 614545H. The lot is rectangular in shape with a northern boundary of 25.01 metres, a frontage to East Street of approximately 19.63 metres, a southern boundary of approximately 25.01 metres and an eastern boundary of 19.63 metres, with an overall area of approximately 491m2. . Title two: Vol. 11123 Fol. 276 Lot 11 on Plan of Subdivision No. 614545H. The lot is rectangular in shape with a northern boundary of 25.01 metres, a frontage to East Street of approximately 19.68 metres, a southern

Page 1 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

boundary of approximately 25.01 metres and an eastern boundary of 19.57 metres, with an overall area of approximately 491m2. 1987 The site is currently vacant of any buildings or vegetation. TheACT land slopes from the west to the east where there is an existing easement that contains drainage and sewer. SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas review documentpurpose under This sole and 1987 the process Act for considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

The surrounding development includes industrial development to the north, south, and east. There are a number of industrial uses in the immediate area consisting predominantly of warehousing, industry and manufacturing. To the south of the site Daylesford & Co Mineral Springs Company borders the site. To the north is the Daylesford Car Wash.

To the west of the site residential land exists where single storey dwellings exist on lots varying from 600m2 to 1000m2. The residential and industrial interface occurs along the length of East Street.

The subject site and the surrounding land located to the north, south, and east is located within the Industrial 1 Zone and is also affected by the Environmental Significance Overlay Schedules 1 and 2. General Residential Zone Schedule 1 exists on the west side of East Street and further east from the Public Use Zone covers the Railway.

East Street is a sealed two-lane bitumen road that has wide partially treed road reserves on both sides with open cut drains located on both the east and west. Grassed naturestrips are located on both sides where overhead power lines are present within the east of the road reserve. No foot paths are present. Mink Street is a sealed dual lane bitumen road. Mink Street has wide road reserves on both sides with sealed curb drains located on both the north and south. Grassed naturestrips are located on both sides. Hepburn Shire City Council controls and maintains both East Street and Mink Street.

Page 2 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

4. Proposal

The proposal seeks a planning permit for the use and development of1987 two warehouses and a dispensation in car parking requirements, below is a breakdown of the proposal: ACT SCHEME Proposed Warehouse - 33 East Street & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING The proposed warehouse will have an overall area of approximatelyavailable 298 square metres with dimensions of 17 PLANNING made metres x 17.25 metres. TheHEPBURN proposed warehouse iswill have ofan enablingoverall heightas of 6 metres and will feature a flat roof. The warehouse will be clad in concrete tilt panel walls. The warehouse will have access via a 4 x 4.5 metre roller documentpurpose reviewunder door located on the northernThis elevation frontingsole Mink Street.and Four (4) aluminium1987 framed windows and a standard access door are proposed on the westernthe elevation whichprocess will front East Act Street. for considerationplanning The proposed warehouse will beits sited 5.0a metres Environmentfrom the East Street usedfrontage, 3.0 metres from the eastern of & be boundary (due to a 3.0 metre widepart easement) and 2.0 metres fromnot the northern boundary. The southern wall will be built along the southern boundaryPlanning of the lot. must may the which Proposed Warehouse - 35 East Street documentpurpose copyright. The any for any The proposed warehouse will have an overall areabreak of approximately 385 square metres with dimensions of 19.68 metres x 20 metres. The proposed warehouse will have an overall height of 6 metres and will feature a flat roof. The warehouse will be clad in concrete tilt panel walls and will have access via a 4 x 4.5 metre roller door located on the East Street elevation. Three (3) aluminium framed windows and a standard access door are proposed on the western elevation which will front East Street.

The proposed warehouse will be setback 5.0 metres from the East Street frontage and built to all other boundaries except for a small portion at the northeast corner of the site where there is a 3.0 metre by 3.0 metre easement.

Car Parking & Access:

No. 33 East Street is provided with four (4) car parking spaces and No. 35 East Street is provided with three (3) car parking spaces.

The access for delivery vehicles to and from the site will be via either East Street or Mink Street and loading and unloading will occur inside the building.

Landscaping:

Designated 1.0 metre wide landscaping strip is provided along the East Street frontage and a 2.0 metre wide landscape strip along the Mink Street frontages.

5. Planning Controls

5.1 Zoning

The subject site is situated within the Industrial 1 Zone (IN1Z).

Page 3 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

1987 ACT

SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas review documentpurpose under This sole and 1987 the process Act for considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

Clause 33.01 of the Planning Scheme refers to the Industrial 1 Zone and the purpose of the Zone is:

. To implement the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework. . To provide for manufacturing industry, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses in a manner which does not affect the safety and amenity of local communities.

Response:

The site is located within the industrial area along the eastern side of East Street, Daylesford which contains a variety of industrial uses on varying lot sizes. The proposed warehouses are consistent with the purpose of the Industrial 1 Zone as adequate access is available to the site, the buildings design is consistent with the surrounding industrial development, landscaping has been included which reduces the impacts of the development on the streetscape and adequate car parking areas on site help with keeping vehicles off the roadside.

5.2 Use

Under Clause 73.03-5 of the Planning Scheme a Warehouse is defined as:

‘Land used to store or display goods. It may include the storage and distribution of goods for wholesale Warehouse Fuel depot and the storage and distribution of goods for online retail. It does not include premises allowing in-person retail or display of goods for retail or allowing persons to collect goods that have been purchased online.’

Page 4 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Clause 33.01 of the Planning Scheme identifies the use of the land for the purposes of a Warehouse as a Section 2 use when it is located within 30 metres of residentially zoned land, as the western side of East Street is zoned General Residential, the proposed development becomes a section 21987 use. ACT Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate: SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Decision Guidelines PLANNING Responseavailable The Municipal PlanningPLANNING Strategy and the Planningis madeThe enabling proposal is consistent with the relevant sections Policy Framework HEPBURN ofof the Municipalas Planning Strategy and the relevant review documentpurpose and policy framework.under Any natural or cultural valuesThis on or nearsole the land. The property is not1987 sited within an area of aboriginal the process Act for cultural heritage significance. Streetscape character. considerationplanning The site exists within an interface of residential and its a Environment used of & industrial land.be East Street is a large road reserve part not Planning mustwith residential may development on the west which is the setbackwhich from the main road pavement. The development will continue the growth of the industrial documentpurpose copyright. The any area and is consistent with existing industrial for any break buildings in the area as can be found at 46 East Street (Daylesford Cottage Supplies) and 26 East Street (Carwash). No detrimental impacts will occur given the sympathetic design of the site. Built form. The building’s designs are consistent with the surrounding industrial development, landscaping has been included which reduces the impacts of the development on the streetscape and adequate car parking areas on site help with keeping vehicles off the roadside. Landscape treatment. Landscaping design concepts have been included on the submitted site plan. 1.0 metre wide garden beds have been included along east Street and 2.0 metre wide along Mink Street. Interface with non-industrial areas East Street has large road reserve and is mostly developed on the western residential side. The buildings design is consistent with the surrounding industrial development, landscaping has been included which reduces the impacts of the development on the streetscape and adequate car parking areas on site help with keeping vehicles off the roadside. The interface will likely continue to develop on other lots in the future with the proposed warehouses an appropriate outcome for this site. Parking and site access. Parking has been provided on both sites.

Loading and service areas. Both sites have dual crossovers with one dedicated to accessing a 4 x 4.5 roller door to act as an area of loading and unloading of goods and services to and from the proposed warehouses. Outdoor storage. No outdoor storage is proposed with the development.

Page 5 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Lighting. Lighting bollards can be included within the development to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, 1987although they were deemed unnecessary in theACT original concept as to reduce negative amenity impacts with the residential interface on the western SCHEME side of East Street. & ENVIRONMENT Stormwater discharge. PLANNING All stormwater discharge will be directed to the nominatedavailable legal point of discharge to the satisfaction PLANNING made HEPBURN is ofof the enabling Responsibleas Authority.

documentpurpose reviewunder 5.3 Buildings and Works This sole and 1987 the process Act Under Clause 33.01-4 of the Planningfor Scheme, a Planning Permit is required to construct a building or construct considerationplanning or carry out works on land includedits within thea IndustrialEnvironment 2 Zone. used of & be part not An application to construct a buildingPlanning or construct or carry out works is alsomay exempt from the requirements of public the must notification and third-party appeal. This exemption does not applywhich to an application for a building or works within 30 metres of land (not a road) which is in a residentialdocument zonepurpose or landcopyright. used for a hospital or an education centre or land The any in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquiredfor for a hospitalany or an education centre. break Relevant decision guidelines include streetscape character, built form, parking and access and state and local planning policies

Response:

The buildings and works require a planning permit under Clause 33.01-4. The warehouse and subsequent works have been designed to respond to the unique characteristics of the site and surrounding area. The proposed buildings will be landscaped to both roadside frontages and will feature car parking. The buildings have been designed with modern materials which are commonly found in industrial settings. The scale and form of the warehouses will blend in with existing infrastructure in the industrial park and presents an appropriate outcome for the development of the site.

6. Overlays

6.1 Environmental Significance Overlay

The subject site is included within the Environmental Significance Overlay (ESO1 & ESO2).

Page 6 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

1987 ACT

Clause 42.01 of the Planning Scheme refers to the Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 1 and the purpose of the Overlay is:

. To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. . To identify areas where the development of land may be affected by environmental constraints. . To ensure that development is compatible with identified environmental values.

Schedule 1 of Clause 42.01 of the Planning Scheme refers to the Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 1 and specifically to the Proclaimed Catchment Protection, the statement of significance states:

Hepburn Shire is situated in the Central Highlands at the source of a number of catchments linked to Port Phillip Bay or the Murray River. Protection of the quality of this water has significant local and regional implications, specially where these catchments provide domestic water supply.

The environmental objective to be achieved includes;

. To protect the quality of domestic water supplies within the Shire and the broader region. . To maintain and where practicable enhance the quality and quantity of water within watercourses. . To prevent increased runoff or concentration of surface water leading to erosion or siltation of watercourses. . To prevent erosion of banks, streambeds adjoining land and siltation of watercourses, drains and other features. . To prevent pollution and increased turbidity and nutrient levels of water in natural watercourses, water bodies and storages.

Clause 3.0 of the Schedule outlines the following mandatory requirements:

Page 7 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

. All on-site wastewater must be treated and disposed of in accordance with the relevant EPA Code of Practice – On Site Wastewater Management. . All stormwater must be managed and discharged to the satisfaction1987 of the responsible Authority and generally in accordance with the principles described in Urban Stormwater:ACT Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines (Victorian Stormwater Committee 1999). SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Clause 4.0 of the Schedule refers to BuildingsPLANNING and Works which states: available PLANNING made . A permit is not requiredHEPBURN for: is of enablingas . Buildings and works for a dwelling connected to a reticulatedreview sewer system. . Buildings and works associateddocument withpurpose an existing dwelling providedunder the building and works are: This sole and 1987 . Extensions which dothe not generate additionalprocess waste water Act i.e any domestic waste water other than stormwater. for considerationplanning . Connected to a reticulatedits sewera systemEnvironment used of & be . Buildings and works if partall of the following conditions arenot met: . all waste water (if any)Planning is discharged to a reticulatedmust seweragemay system . any site cut requiredthe is less than one metre in depthwhich . any site cut required is less documentthan 300 purposesquare metrescopyright. in area The any . no effluent is discharged lessfor than 100 metresany from a waterway . no stormwater is discharged lessbreak than 100 metres from a waterway unless into an approved drainage system. . Buildings and works for a sign or fence. . Constructing a dam under 3ML capacity if they are not on a waterway and is for stock and domestic purposes only. . Development undertaken by a public authority to regulate the flow of water in a watercourse, regulate flooding or to construct or redirect a watercourse. . Activities conducted on public land by or on behalf of the Department of Sustainability and Environment under the relevant provisions of the Reference Areas Act 1978, the National Parks Act 1975, the Fisheries Act 1995, the Wildlife Act 1975, the Land Act 1958, the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 or the Forests Act 1958. . The construction of a building or carrying out of works associated with a utility installation required for the Goldfields Superpipe Project. The building and works must be in accordance with the Project Impact Assessment and Environmental Management Plan approved by the Secretary of the Department of Sustainability and Environment and the native vegetation offset plan approved by the Minister for Environment.

Response: No planning permit is required for the proposed development of the warehouses under the provisions of the ESO1. All stormwater discharge will be directed to the nominated legal point of discharge to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No site cut greater than 1.0 metre is required in order to develop the buildings.

Schedule 2 of Clause 42.01 of the Planning Scheme refers to the Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 2 and specifically to the Mineral Springs and Ground Water Protection, the statement of significance states:

The mineral springs that occur within the Hepburn Shire have natural, cultural and economic significance. The protection of the springs, their aquifers and their environs from the impacts of waste disposal and drainage is a fundamental component of the future management of this asset.

The environmental objective to be achieved includes;

. To protect the mineral springs, their aquifers and their environs from the impacts of effluent and drainage.

Page 8 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

. To protect water bores that provide town water supply

A permit is not required for: 1987 ACT . Emergency works, minor works, repairs and routine maintenance to existing buildings and works. . Works that will not result in changes to surface or SCHEMEgroundwater runoff or contribute to a decline in spring & ENVIRONMENT water quality. PLANNING . Works associated with a minor utility installation. available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas Response: review documentpurpose under This sole and 1987 The proposed warehouse and subsequentthe buildings and processworks do not Act require planning assessment against the provisions of the ESO2. All stormwaterfor discharge will be directed to the nominated legal point of discharge to the considerationplanning satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.its a Environment used of & be part not 7. Particular Provisions Planning must may the which 7.1 Native Vegetation documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Clause 52.17 of the Planning Scheme refers to Nativebreak Vegetation regulations and the purpose of the Clause is:

. To ensure that there is no net loss to biodiversity as a result of the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation. This is achieved by applying the following three step approach in accordance with the Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation (Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2017) the Guidelines: 1. Avoid the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation. 2. Minimise impacts from the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation that cannot be avoided. 3. Provide an offset to compensate for the biodiversity impact if a permit is granted to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation. . To manage the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation to minimise land and water degradation.

Clause 52.17-1, a permit is required to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation, including dead native vegetation. This does not apply:

. If the table to Clause 52.17-7 specifically states that a permit is not required. . If a native vegetation precinct plan corresponding to the land is incorporated into this scheme and listed in the schedule to Clause 52.16. If the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation specified in the schedule to this clause.

Response:

No native vegetation is to be removed from the site.

7.2 Car Parking

Clause 52.06 of the Planning Scheme refers to car parking and the purpose is:

. To ensure that car parking is provided in accordance with the State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework. . To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the demand likely to be generated, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality.

Page 9 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

. To support sustainable transport alternatives to the motor car. . To promote the efficient use of car parking spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities. . To ensure that car parking does not adversely affect the amenity1987 of the locality. . To ensure that the design and location of car parking is ACTof a high standard, creates a safe environment for users and enables easy and efficient use. SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT A breakdown of the proposed buildings andPLANNING works and the car parking requirements of facet is included below; available PLANNING made Figure 1: Proposed buildings,HEPBURN floor area and caris parking.of enablingas review Proposed buildings and Floordocument Area purpose Requiredunder No. of car No. of car parking This sole and 1987 works the processparking spacesAct spaces to be provided for onsite considerationplanning Warehouse its687 squarea metresEnvironment 13used 7 of & be part not Car Parking rates have been calculatedPlanning using the Warehouse formula locatedmay in Clause 52.06 which stipulates the must each warehouse to provide for 2 car parking spaces plus an additionalwhich 1.5 spaces per 100m2 of net floor area. documentpurpose copyright. The any Response: for any break The application has provided for 7 carparking spaces and requires a dispensation of 6 spaces. An analysis of the impacts has been included below.

Clause 52.06-3 Permit requirement states that a permit is required to:

. Reduce (including reduce to zero) the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 or in a schedule to the Parking Overlay. . Provide some or all of the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 or in a schedule to the Parking Overlay on another site. . Provide more than the maximum parking provision specified in a schedule to the Parking Overlay.

This does not apply if:

. A schedule to the Parking Overlay specifies that a permit is not required under this Clause; or . A permit is not required to reduce the number of car parking spaces required for a new use of land if the following requirements are met: . The number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 or in a schedule to the Parking Overlay for the new use is less than or equal to the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 or in a schedule to the Parking Overlay for the existing use of the land. . The number of car parking spaces currently provided in connection with the existing use is not reduced after the new use commences. . A permit is not required to reduce the required number of car parking spaces for a new use of an existing building if the following requirements are met: . The building is in the Commercial 1 Zone, Commercial 2 Zone or Activity Centre Zone. . The gross floor area of the building is not increased. . The reduction does not exceed 10 car parking spaces. . The building is not in a Parking Overlay with a schedule that allows a financial contribution to be paid in lieu of the provision of the required car parking spaces for the use.

Clause 52.06-5 Number of car parking spaces required under Table 1 sets out the car parking requirement that applies to a use listed in the Table. A car parking requirement in Table 1 may be calculated as either:

Page 10 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

. a number of car parking spaces; or . a percentage of the total site area that must be set aside for car parking 1987 The table details the following requirement for an Industry are:ACT

. Industry: 2 per warehouse plus an additional 1.5 perSCHEME 100m2 of net floor area. & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING Before granting a permit to reduce the number of spaces belowavailable the likely demand assessed by the Car Parking PLANNING made Demand Assessment, theHEPBURN responsible authority mustis considerof enablingthe following,as as appropriate: review Decision Guidelines documentpurpose Responseunder This sole and 1987 The Car Parking Demand Assessmentthe See figureAct 1 above for process Any relevant local planning policy or incorporated plan Not applicable its considerationplanning The availability of alternative car parking ina the localityEnvironment of Not applicable used of & be the land, including: part not Planning must may the Not whichapplicable . Efficiencies gained from the consolidation of documentpurpose copyright. shared car parking spaces. The any Not applicable . Public car parks intended to servefor the land. any break . On street parking in non-residential zones. On street car parking is common along the western . Streets in residential zones specifically managed and eastern sides of East Street as the large road for non-residential parking reserves and relatively low-density development allow sufficient space for vehicles. On street parking in residential zones in the locality of the Not applicable land that is intended to be for residential use. The practicality of providing car parking on the site, Not applicable particularly for lots of less than 300 square metres. Any adverse economic impact a shortfall of parking may The site is situated within the Industrial 1 Zone and is have on the economic viability of any nearby activity surrounded by other industrial uses predominantly centre. warehouses and industries to the south, east and north. Given the site and its surrounds it is viewed that the shortfall will not have a negative effect on economic viability in the area as very few sites within the precinct operate as commercial outlets dealing direct to the public. The future growth and development of any nearby activity Not applicable centre. Any car parking deficiency associated with the existing The site is currently vacant. use of the land. Any credit that should be allowed for car parking spaces Not applicable. provided on common land or by a Special Charge Scheme or cash-in-lieu payment. Local traffic management in the locality of the land. Not applicable The impact of fewer car parking spaces on local amenity, On street car parking is common along the western including pedestrian amenity and the amenity of nearby and eastern sides of East Street as the large road residential areas. reserves and relatively low-density development allow sufficient space for vehicles.

Pedestrian movements will not be affected by the shortfall of the required 6 car parking spaces given the

Page 11 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

low density nature of residential development and the current lack of footpath along East Street. The need to create safe, functional and attractive parking The proposed1987 parking facilities of 7 spaces are both areas. safeACT and functional. Access to or provision of alternative transport modes to SCHEMENot applicable. and from the land. & ENVIRONMENT The equity of reducing the car parking requirementPLANNING having Not applicable. regard to any historic contributions by existing available PLANNING made businesses. HEPBURN is of enablingas The character of the surrounding area and whether The reduction will have no impacts on the design documentpurpose reviewunder reducing the car parking provisionThis wouldsole result in a andoutcome of the 1987existing industrial uses in the area. the Act quality/positive urban design outcome.for process Any other matter specified in a scheduleits consideration to theplanning Parking Not applicable. Overlay. of a Environment used & be part not Planning must may 8. General Provisions the which

documentpurpose copyright. 8.1 Decision Guidelines The any for any break Under the provisions of Clause 65.01, before deciding on an application or approval of a plan, the responsible authority must also consider, as appropriate:

Clause 65.01- Application or approval of a plan Comments The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local The development is consistent with the State Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) and the Local Strategic Statement and local planning policies Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) including the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS). A detailed response to both the SPPF and LPPF has been provided. It is considered that the proposed buildings and works will not result in a detrimental impact on the existing industrial area nor the abutting residential area on the western side of East Street. The purpose of the zone, overlay or other provision Please refer to Zones and Overlay discussion above. Any matter required to be considered in the zone, Please refer to Zones and Overlay discussion above. overlay or other provision The orderly planning of the area The developed site within the Industrial 1 Zone is an appropriate site for the subject use. The effect on the amenity of the area The site has been in an established industrial area for many years. With modem design buildings, the site only enhances the surrounding area. The proximity of the land to any public land Not applicable. Factors likely to cause or contribute to land degradation, Not applicable. salinity or reduce water quality Whether the proposed development is designed to Appropriate stormwater measures will be implanted maintain or improve the quality of stormwater within and as per the current construction standards. exiting the site The extent and character of native vegetation and the Not applicable. likelihood of its destruction Whether native vegetation is to be or can be protected, Not applicable. planted or allowed to regenerate

Page 12 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

The degree of flood, erosion or fire hazard associated Not applicable. with the location of the land and the use, development or management of the land so as to minimise any such 1987 hazard ACT SCHEME 9. Policy Context & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING It is considered the proposal is consistent with the relevant Stateavailable and Local Planning Policies as outlined below:- PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas 9.1 Planning Policy Framework documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 Clause 12.01 – Biodiversity – Containsthe policies relating to the protectionAct of habitat and native vegetation for process management. consideration its a planning of & Environment used part be Response: not Planning must may the which No native vegetation is to be removed from the site. documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Clause 12.05 – Significant Environments andbreak Landscapes – Contains policies relating to environmentally sensitive areas and landscapes.

Response:

There will be no environmental impacts felt from the continued use of the land as warehouses.

Clause 13.05-1S – Noise Abatement – To assist the control of noise effects on sensitive land uses.

Ensure that development is not prejudiced, and community amenity is not reduced by noise emissions, using a range of building design, urban design and land use separation techniques as appropriate to the land use functions and character of the area.

Response:

The surrounding community amenity has not been negatively affected by noise emissions from existing industrial uses. The proposed warehouses are not intended to emit any noise in excess of regular traffic and household noise levels. Through a range of building designs the character of the area will not been affected through excess noise.

Clause 13.06-1S – Air Quality Management – To assist the protection and improvement of air quality

Response:

The construction techniques will be in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards.

Page 13 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Clause 13.07-1S Land Use Compatibility – To safeguard community amenity while facilitating appropriate commercial, industrial or other uses with potential off-site effects: through: 1987 . Directing land uses to appropriate locations. ACT . Using a range of building design, urban design, operational and land use separation measures. SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT Response: PLANNING The proposed warehouses are consistent with the purposeavailable of the Industrial 1 Zone as adequate access is PLANNING made available to the site, HEPBURN the buildings design isis consist entof enabling with theas surrounding industrial development, landscaping has been included which reduces the impacts of the development on the streetscape and documentpurpose reviewunder adequate car parking areasThis on site helpsole with keeping vehiclesand off the roadside.1987 the process Act for considerationplanning Clause 15.03 – Heritage – Containsits policiesa relatingEnvironment to heritage conservation used and aboriginal cultural heritage. The of & be objectives of these policies are: part not Planning must may . To ensure the conservationthe of places of heritage significance.which . To ensure the protection and conservationdocument of purposeplaces of Aboriginalcopyright. cultural heritage significance. The any for any break

Areas of Possible Cultural Heritage Sensitivity

Subject Site

Response:

The site is located within an area of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sensitivity. The land has been significantly disturbed in the past by the creation of the subdivision, with earthworks to construct sewer, water, drainage and roads.

Page 14 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Clause 17-03-2S – Industrial Development Siting– To facilitate the sustainable development and operation of industry. Through: 1987 . Ensure that industrial activities requiring substantial thresholdACT distances are located in the core of industrial areas. . Encourage activities with minimal threshold requirementsSCHEME to locate towards the perimeter of the industrial & ENVIRONMENT area. PLANNING . Minimise inter-industry conflict and encourage like industriesavailable to locate within the same area. PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas Response: documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act The warehouses provide for foran orderly development of processthe industrial area, the buildings and works designed that won’t compromise the existingits consideration streetscape.planning The site is located close to a full range of services and the of a Environment used proposal makes efficient use of existing infrastructure.& The proposal isbe consistent with orderly and sustainable development within Daylesford.part not Planning must may the which Clause 19.03-3S – Water Supply, Seweragedocument and Drainagepurpose –copyright. This policy aims to plan for the provision of water The any supply, sewerage and drainage services for that efficientlyany and effectively meet State and community needs and protect the environment. break

Response:

All services are currently provided to each lot.

9.2 Local Planning Policy Framework

9.2.1 Municipal Strategic Statement

Clause 21.06 - Infrastructure – aims:

. To encourage appropriate development in serviced areas, support industrial and residential growth and to encourage alternative on-site effluent disposal.

The strategy that is relevant to this application is:

. Encourage infill development in existing or proposed serviced urban areas and provide scope for diverse development options.

Response:

The proposed development is located on the urban growth boundary of the Daylesford and is in close proximity to all services. The proposed development will very little impact on the surrounding area with lots in the immediate vicinity of similar size. Both lots are connected to reticulated sewerage.

Clause 21-07 Economic Development – aims:

. To encourage well-designed and locally appropriate industrial development, optimising the use of infrastructure and services.

Page 15 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

The strategies that are relevant to this application are:

. Support industrial and commercial development in existing industrial1987 and commercial areas and provide opportunities for expansion in accordance with approvedACT structure plans. . Encourage high quality design of industrial buildings, landscaping and transport access to minimise impacts on surrounding industrial and non-industrial land uses.SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available Response: PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas The proposed development is withindocument an industrialpurpose area of review Daylesford.under The buildings will be designed as warehouses and with appropriateThis car soleparking and landscapingand the warehouses1987 will have no impact on the the Act surrounding area. for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be Clause 21.09 - Environment andpart Heritage – aims: not Planning must may . To protect surface and groundwaterthe quality at a local and whichregion level. . To encourage water and energy efficiencydocument in allpurpose development, copyright. including subdivision, construction of buildings The any and infrastructure. for any break The strategies relevant to this application are:

. Promoting residential development that acknowledges and enhances the valued character of neighbourhood areas. . Require use of rainwater tanks and grey water reuse in new development.

Response:

The proposal will provide for mush needed warehouse use for Daylesford. It will maximise the utilisation of existing infrastructure. The site is also in close proximity to a full range of commercial and social services.

9.2.2 Local Planning Policies

Clause 22.01 Catchment and Land Protection – aims:

. To ensure the sustainable use of natural resources including soil and water in water catchment areas. . To ensure that the use and development of land and water is undertaken with consideration of impacts on long term resource quality and quantity. . To promote consistency with regional catchment strategies and other regional land and water management plans.

Response: All stormwater discharge will be directed to the nominated legal point of discharge to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, the site will be connected to reticulated sewage ensuring all wastewater can be managed this mitigates any environmental significance concerns about the sites impact on the environment and natural resource base in the Hepburn Shire and the Central Highlands region.

Page 16 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

10. Conclusion

In summary, it is respectfully submitted that the use and development1987 of two (2) warehouses, and dispensation of car parking requirements is consistent with the objectives and strategiesACT of both the State and Local Planning Policy Framework of the Hepburn Shire Planning Scheme, whichSCHEME seek to encourage growth through the industrial sector.

& ENVIRONMENT In conclusion, it is considered that the proposedPLANNING use and development is appropriate to the site and its surrounds given the following: available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas . The proposal meets the State and Local planning policy objectives. documentpurpose reviewunder . The proposal is consistentThis with thesole purpose of theand Industrial 1 Zone. 1987 . The proposal responds positivelythe to the decision guidelinesprocess of ClausesAct 65.01. . The proposal is of no consequencefor to the provisions of Clause 52.06 Car Parking; considerationplanning . The proposal will result in itsan enhanceda industryEnvironment with within the municipality.used of & be . The resulting use and developmentpart will have no detrimental not environmental or design and siting impacts upon the subject site. Planning must may . The proposal is consideredthe to be an appropriate use and whichdevelopment. documentpurpose copyright. The any For all of the reasons outlined above, whichfor have beenany expanded upon throughout this report, it is respectfully requested that the Hepburn Shire Council supportbreak the application and issue a planning permit to allow for the use and development of two (2) warehouses and dispensation of car parking requirements located at 33 & 35 East Street, Daylesford.

…………..……….……….. James Iles Town Planner

Page 17 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

11. Photos of the site and surrounds

1987 The subject site looking ACT southeast from the northwest corner. SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Looking east along the break southern boundary.

Looking northeast from the southwest corner of the site.

Page 18 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Looking east from the northwest corner of the site. 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break Looking south from Mink Street frontage.

Looking west along the northern boundary of the site.

Page 19 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Looking west from the eastern boundary of the site. 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break Looking west from the eastern boundary of the site.

Looking west along the southern boundary of the site.

Page 20 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Looking northwest from the southeast corner of the site. 1987 ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which

documentpurpose copyright. Looking north along the East The any for any Street frontage. break

Existing industrial building on the northeast corner of Mink Street and East Street.

Page 21 of 22 Use and Development of Two (2) Warehouses and Dispensation of Car Parking Requirements 33 & 35 East, Daylesford

Existing large warehouse building to the south of the 1987 site. ACT SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which

documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

Page 22 of 22

33-35 East Street, Daylesford: Due Diligence Cultural Heritage Assessment 1987 and Site Inspection ACT SCHEME

& ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available Report PreparedPLANNING for: James Iles (iPlanningmade Services Pty Ltd) HEPBURN is of enablingas Date: February 21st, 2019 documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process Prepared By: Annette Millar considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which

documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

iv Executive Summary 1987 ACT Introduction SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT This due diligence cultural heritage assessmentPLANNING has been prepared for the property located at 33- 35 East Street, Daylesford, herein referred to as the Studyavailable Area (see Maps 1-3). The proposed PLANNING made activity to be undertakenHEPBURN in relation to theis Study of Area enabling is theas development of the land for construction of two industrial sheds. documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act The Study Area is located at,for and is comprised of,process the property known as 33-35 East Street, Daylesford and is approximately 950m2 in area. The Study Area is bounded to north by Mink its considerationplanning Street, to the east by vacant industofrial a land, toEnvironment the south by an existingused concrete factory and to & be the west by East Street. The propertypart is located 270m northnot-east of Smiths Creek at its closest Planning must may point. the which

documentpurpose copyright. The Study Area is located within Thean established any industrial area and is currently vacant land (see for any Map 3, Plates 1-8). The Study Area comprisesbreak of generally flat, levelled ground with unnatural dips and hollows on the ground surface. The Study Area is sparsely grassed with red-brown clay loams visible on the ground surface; ground surface visibility throughout the Study Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%.

A glossary of terms is included as Appendix 1.

Results of the Desktop Assessment

A review of the environmental data relevant to human settlement and the ethnographic and archaeological data relevant to the local area has indicated that:

• There are no registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) located in the Study Area;

• There has been no previous archaeological assessment of the Study Area;

• The majority of the site types represented in the geographic region (Table 1) are Low Density Artefact Distributions (LDAD’s) (n=4) although there is also one Object Collection;

• The LDAD’s are located approximately 1.8 km to the north of the Study Area in association with the waterways Bund Creek and Stoney Creek.

• Previous archaeological assessments in the region have indicated that Aboriginal archaeological sites within the region are likely to be located on high ground adjacent to creeks and rivers;

• The Study Area is located on Dja Dja Wurrung Country;

• The Study Area is located on the geomorphological unit ‘Eruption points and volcanic plains (Creswick, Ballarat plains, Mt. Franklin, Mt. Blackwood, Metcalfe); 1987 ACT • The Study Area is located on the geological formation ‘Newer Volcanics’; SCHEME • There would have been& aENVIRONMENT range of plant, animal and mineral resources available for Aboriginal people living in, or PLANNINGin the region of, theavailable Study Area; PLANNING made enabling • The existing vegetationHEPBURN of the Study Areais bearsof no resemblasance to 1750 EVC - Herb-rich review foothill forest (EVC 23); documentpurpose and under This sole 1987 the process Act • The Study Area has beforen subject to ground disturbance as a result of its previous use as a considerationplanning timber yard and as partits of ana industrial Environment subdivision; however, used the extent to which the of & be Study Area has beenpart subject to ground disturbance not must be established by a site inspection. Planning must may the which A site prediction model is intended to bedocument used aspurpose a guideline copyright. to designing the field survey and as The any an indication of the types of archaeologicalfor sites any which may occur in a given area. The site prediction model is tested against the resultsbreak of the field survey.

Prior to European settlement, the Study Area and surrounding land would have offered a number of resources such as plants and animals that could have been utilised by traditional Aboriginal owners.

In spite of this evidence however, there is a low probability that Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) will occur within the Study Area. This is because:

1) The Study Area has been subject to ground disturbance as a result of its previous use as a timber yard and as part of an industrial subdivision;

2) The Study Area is located on the geological formation ‘Newer Volcanics’ which tends to be characterised by shallow soils and therefore any Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) are likely to have been disturbed or destroyed by its use as a timber yard and as part of an industrial subdivision;

However:

3) the extent to which the Study Area has been subject to ground disturbance must be established by a site inspection.

Results of the Site Inspection

A summary of the results of the site inspection, in consideration of the results of the desktop assessment has indicated that:

• A brief site inspection of the Study Area was undertaken by Heritage Advisor John Young on 30th January, 2019;

iii

• The site inspection was limited in its effectiveness by fill deposits overlying the natural ground surface; 1987 ACT • Evidence of ground disturbance observable during the site inspection was as follows: SCHEME o unnatural topography characterised& ENVIRONMENT by dips and hollows; o elevation above the propertiesPLANNING to the north andavailable south (but at the same level as those to the east and west); PLANNING made enabling o construction ofHEPBURN stormwater pipeline; is of as o construction of track that runs west-east throughreview Study Area (see Figure 3, Plate 6); and documentpurpose and under o underground serviceThis in the roadsole reserve of both East Street and1987 Mink Street. the Act for process • No remnant native vegetationconsideration remainsplanning in the Study Area; its a Environment used of & be part not • The Study Area is sparselyPlanning grassed with redmust-brown clay may loams visible on the ground surface; ground surfacethe visibility throughout the Studywhich Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%; documentpurpose copyright. The any for any • No areas of potential archaeologicalbreak sensitivity were identified in the Study Area during the site inspection;

• No Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) were identified within the Study Area during the site inspection; and

• It is considered unlikely that Aboriginal cultural heritage will be located in the Study Area.

After the site inspection I concluded, with reference to the results of the desktop assessment (including the geotechnical assessment) that it was likely that the Study Area had been subject to significant ground disturbance as defined in the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018. This conclusion was primarily based on the testimony of John Comelli who described scraping off the topsoil from the natural ground surface to lay a rock hardstand for the Daylesford Timber Yard (as communicated to him by Brian Williams). The results of the site inspection support John Comelli’s assertions that:

• Mink Street had to be excavated to a greater depth than standard to remove the timber logs buried in the soil; and • When he excavated the foundations for the large concrete factory to the south of the Study Area he found timber logs at a depth of 1m. as the Study Area is elevated above both Mink Street and the property to the south.

An inspection of the exposed stratigraphic section on the southern boundary of the Study Area did not show a clear transition between fill and natural soils and neither did the foundations that had been excavated across the road and were subject inspection (see Plates 7-8). The results of the geotechnical assessment state that the silty clays underling the fill deposits and overlying clays are typical of the area’s geology; however, no comment is made as to whether these deposits are truncated or have been subject to disturbance. That said, there was no prior grass layer, humic

iv soil, or ‘topsoils’ visible in the sections with the stratigraphic section presenting as a homogenous red-brown silty clay. This supports John Comelli’s assertion that the topsoil had been scraped off the natural ground surface to lay a rock hardstand for the Daylesford1987 Timber Yard. ACT Conclusions and Recommendations SCHEME ENVIRONMENT A Cultural Heritage Management& Plan (CHMP) is required under Section 47 of the Aboriginal PLANNING available Heritage Act 2006PLANNING if any high impact activity ismade planned in a statutory area of cultural heritage sensitivity. HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder A mandatory CHMP is requiredThis as sole the followingand conditions have1987 been triggered under the the Act Aboriginal Heritage Amendmentfor Regulations 2018 (Divisiprocesson 1, R.7); consideration its a planning a) all or part of the Study Area for theof activity & is Environment within an area of culturalused heritage sensitivity and; part be b) all or part of the activity is a high impact activity not Planning must may the which The Study Area is located within a statutory area of cultural heritage sensitivity in accordance with documentpurpose copyright. R.37 ‘Volcanic cones of western VictoriaThe ’ any– the volcanic cones of western Victoria are areas of for any cultural heritage sensitivity. break

The proposed activity is a high impact activity in accordance with R.46 ‘Buildings and works for specified uses’ - the construction of a building or the construction or carrying out of works on land is a high impact activity if the construction of the building or the construction or carrying out of the works— a) would result in significant ground disturbance; and b) is for, or associated with, the use of the land for any one or more of the following purposes— (xxix) a warehouse

A Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is not required if it can be demonstrated that the entirety of the Study Area has been subject to significant ground disturbance as defined in the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018. Significant ground disturbance means disturbance of— (a) the topsoil or surface rock layer of the ground; or (b) a waterway— by machinery in the course of grading, excavating, digging, dredging or deep ripping, but does not include ploughing other than deep ripping.

On the basis of the results of the desktop assessment and site inspection it is concluded that it is likely that the Study Area has been subject to significant ground disturbance as defined in the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 and that therefore there is no requirement to undertake a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) for the proposed activity.

Table of Contents 1987 ACT

SCHEME Executive Summary ...... & ENVIRONMENT...... ii PLANNING Table of Contents ...... available...... 6 PLANNING made enabling 1.0 Introduction ...... HEPBURN ...... is of ...... as ...... 8 documentpurpose reviewunder 2.0 Activity Description andThis Existing Conditionssole ...... and ...... 1987 ...... 12 the process Act 2.1 Location and Physical Descriptifor on of the Property ...... 14 considerationplanning 3.0 Report on the Results of theits Desktopa AssessmentEnvironment ...... used...... 16 of & be part not 3.1 Methodology for Desktop AssessmentPlanning ...... may ...... 16 the must 3.2 Results of Desktop Assessment ...... which ...... 17 documentpurpose copyright. Search of the Victorian AboriginalThe Heritage any Register ...... 17 for any The Geographic Region ...... break...... 17 Registered Aboriginal Places in the Geographic Region ...... 17 Previous Works in the Geographic Region Relevant to the Study Area ...... 18 Historical and ethno-historical accounts in the geographic region...... 22 Landforms and Geomorphology of the Study Area...... 25 Resources Available to Aboriginal People within the Study Area ...... 25 Land Use History ...... 28 3.3 Conclusions of Desktop Assessment ...... 34 4.0 Report on the Results of the Site Inspection ...... 36 Aims of the Site Inspection ...... 36 Site Inspection Methodology ...... 36 Site Inspection Limitations ...... 36 Results of Site Inspection ...... 36 Land Disturbance ...... 37 Ground Surface Visibility and Effective Survey Coverage ...... 38 Area of Potential Archaeological Sensitivity...... 39 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Identified ...... 39 Conclusions of the Site Inspection ...... 39 5.0 Recommendations ...... 46 Bibliography ...... 47

Maps:

Map 1: Study Area Location Map – Regional ...... 10 Map 2: Study Area Location Map – Local ...... 11 Map 3: Study Area Location Map – Aerial ...... 15

Tables:

Table 1: Site types in the region of the Study Area ...... 1987 ...... 18 Table 2: Study Area: Photos of the Existing Conditions...... ACT ...... 45 SCHEME Figures: & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available Figure 1: DevelopmentPLANNING Plan ...... made ...... 13 Figure 2: 1946 Aerial PhotographHEPBURN ...... is ...... of enablingas ...... 32 Figure 3: 2016 Aerial Photographdocument ...... purpose ...... reviewunder ...... 33 This sole and 1987 the Act Plates: for process consideration its a planning of & Environment used Plate 1: View of Study Area facingpart south from Mink Street. (J. Youngbe 30/01/2018) ...... 42 Plate 2: View of Study Area facing northwest from southeasternnot corner of Study Area (J. Young Planning must may 30/01/2018) ...... the ...... which ...... 42 Plate 3: View of Study Area facing west showing deep cut along southern boundary of Study documentpurpose copyright. Area (J. Young 30/01/2018) ...... The any ...... 43 for any Plate 4: View of Study Area facing north frombreak southern boundary of Study Area (J. Young 30/01/2018) ...... 43 Plate 5: View of exposed ground surface in the Study Area (J. Young 30/01/2018) ...... 44 Plate 6: View of track running west to east across the Study Area (J. Young 30/01/2018) .... 44 Plate 7: View of exposed stratigraphic section along the southern boundary of the Study Area facing east (J. Young 30/01/2018) ...... 45 Plate 8: View of open foundation excavations on property across the road showing fill, overlying silty clay, overlying rock (J. Young 30/01/2018) ...... 45

1.0 Introduction 1987 This due diligence cultural heritage assessment hasACT been prepared for the property located at 33-35 East Street, Daylesford, herein SCHEMEreferred to as the Study Area (see Maps 1-3). The proposed activity to be undertaken in relation to the Study Area is the & ENVIRONMENT development of the land for constructionPLANNING of two industrialavailable sheds .

PLANNING is made enabling The Study Area is locatedHEPBURN at, and is comprised of, theof propertyas known as 33-35 East Street, Daylesford and is approximatelydocument 950m2purpose in area. Thereview Studyunder Area is bounded to north by This sole and 1987 Mink Street, to the east by vacantthe industrial land,process to the Actsouth by an existing concrete factory and to the west byfor East Street. The property is located 270m north-east of Smiths its considerationplanning Creek at its closest point. of a Environment used & be part not Planning must may The Study Area is located withinthe an established industrialwhich area and is currently vacant land (see Map 3, Plates 1-8). The Study Area comprises of generally flat, levelled ground with documentpurpose copyright. unnatural dips and hollows onThe the groundany surface. The Study Area is sparsely grassed for any with red-brown clay loams visible onbreak the ground surface; ground surface visibility throughout the Study Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%.

A glossary of terms is included as Appendix 1.

Name, Qualifications and Experience of Cultural Heritage Advisor

The Heritage Advisor who has authored this due diligence cultural heritage assessment is Annette Millar who holds a Graduate Diploma in Archaeology (2018) from La Trobe University and who has had one year experience working in the field of Aboriginal archaeology. Annette was overseen by John Young who holds a Bachelor of Arts in Archaeology (2004) with Honours (2006) and a Master of Professional Archaeology (2018) from La Trobe University and who has had 12 years’ experience working in the field of Aboriginal archaeology both as a consultant archaeologist and as the Heritage Manager of a Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP).

Location of the Study Area

The Study Area is located at 33-35 East Street, Daylesford, Victoria, and covers an approximate area of 950m² known as Lot 12 and Lot 13 on PS 614545H in the Parish of Wombat, County of Talbot in the Hepburn Shire Council.

The Study Area is bounded to the north by Mink Street, to the east by vacant industrial land, to the south by an existing concrete factory and to the west by East Street. The property is located 270m north-east of Smiths Creek at its closest point.

The Study Area comprises of generally flat, levelled ground with unnatural dips and hollows on the ground surface. 1987 ACT The Study Area is located in GDA94 MGA Zone 54. The Study Area is located within the Township of Daylesford, which lies approximatelySCHEME 100km northeast of the Melbourne CBD (see Map 1). & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made RAPs with ResponsibilityHEPBURN for the Study Areais of enablingas

documentpurpose reviewunder The Registered AboriginalThis Party (RAP)sole with responsibilityand for the1987 Study Area is the Dja Dja the Act Wurrung Clans Aboriginalfor Cor poration (DDWCAC).process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

1987 ACT

SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

Map 1: Study Area Location Map – Regional

1987 ACT

Map 2: Study Area Location Map – Local

1987 2.0 Activity Description and Existing ConditionsACT

The proposed activity to be undertaken in relationSCHEME to the Study Area is the development & ENVIRONMENT of the land for construction of twoPLANNING industrial sheds (Figure 1). available PLANNING made For the purposes of thisHEPBURN due diligence culturalis heritageof enabling assessmentas it is considered that the proposed activity will cause significant ground disturbancereview to the entire Study Area. documentpurpose and under This sole 1987 the process Act The sequence of activitiesfor which will occur during the course of the development is likely considerationplanning to be as follows: its a Environment used of & be part not 1. Clearance of the ActivityPlanning Area i.e. removal of vegetationmay and rubbish; the must 2. Installation of drainage, utilising heavy machinerywhich through the excavation of documentpurpose copyright. open cut trenches only.The The topany surface of the existing stripped ground 1.0m to for any either side of the trench may be breakdisturbed during this work; 3. Installation of services (electricity, telecommunications, gas, water) utilising heavy machinery. The trench excavations will cause significant ground disturbance; 4. Where possible, shared trenching or common works areas will be used; 5. Industry construction of new industrial sheds; and 6. Landscaping works will also occur according to the needs of each individual purchaser.

The Study Area is zoned Industrial Zone 1 (IN1Z) and will be developed in accordance with the permitted uses for IN1Z in the Hepburn Shire Council Planning Scheme.

All of the above activities will involve the removal of topsoil and would therefore have some potential to harm Aboriginal cultural heritage if it was found to exist within the Study Area. A summary of typical trench widths and depths of excavation of each construction activity is provided below:

Activity Width of Trench (m) Depth Range (m) Drainage 0.9 – 3.0 1.0 – 4.0 Sewer reticulation 0.9 – 2.0 1.0 – 5.0 Water reticulation 0.3 – 1.0 0.8 – 1.0 Electricity 0.3 – 1.0 0.6 – 0.9 Telecommunications 0.3 – 1.0 0.3 – 0.6 Gas 0.3 – 1.0 0.6 – 0.9 Foundations N/A 0.5 – 2.0

1987 ACT

Figure 1: Development Plan

2.1 Location and Physical Description of the Property 1987 The extent of the Study Area covered by this due diligenceACT cultural heritage assessment is shown in Map 3. SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT The Study Area is located in GDA94PLANNING MGA Zone 54. The Study Area is located within the Township of Daylesford, which lies approximately available100km north west of the Melbourne PLANNING made CBD (see Map 1). HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder The Study Area is locatedThis at, and issole comprised of,and the property known1987 as 33-35 East Street, the Act Daylesford and is approximatelyfor 950m2 in area. process The Study Area is bounded to the north considerationplanning by Mink Street, to the east itsby vacanta industrialEnvironment land, to the southused by an existing concrete of & be factory and to the west by Eastpart Street. The property is locatednot 270m north-east of Smiths Creek at its closest point. Planning may the must which The Study Area is located within an establisheddocumentpurpose industrial copyright. area and is currently vacant land The any (see Map 3, Plates 1-8). The Study forArea comprisesany of generally flat, levelled ground with break unnatural dips and hollows on the ground surface (see Map 3, Plates 1-8).

The Study Area is sparsely grassed with red-brown clay loams visible on the ground surface; ground surface visibility throughout the Study Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%.

There are underground services located within the road reserves of East Street and Mink Street as well as in the Study Area (see Section 3.2 Land Use History).

The Study Area is elevated above the industrial properties located to the north and south; however, is at the same elevation as East Street located to the west, and the vacant industrial land located to the east. A stratigraphic section is exposed on the southern boundary of the Study Area as a result of the excavation of a site cut to facilitate the construction of the existing concrete factory to the south.

An informal track runs east-west through the Study Area from East Street, located to the west of the Study Area, to the vacant industrial land located to the east of the Study Area. The informal track is raised above the natural ground surface and was formed by laying large rocks on the ground surface to permit delivery vehicles to access the property(ies) in winter (as the red-brown clay loams are prone to water retention).

A more detailed description of the existing conditions of the Study Area is provided in Section 4.0 Results of the Site Inspection.

1987 ACT

Map 3: Study Area Location Map – Aerial

3.0 Report on the Results of the Desktop Assessment 1987 This section contains the results of the desktop assessment.ACT

SCHEME 3.1 Methodology for Desktop AssessmentENVIRONMENT & PLANNING available The aim of thePLANNING desktop assessment was tomade produce an archaeological site prediction model, which wouldHEPBURN assist in the designis of theof fieldwork,enablingas the interpretation of the fieldwork results, the assessmentdocument ofpurpose cultural significancereviewunder and the design of the This sole and 1987 management recommendations.the The desktop assessmentprocess involvedAct a review of: for considerationplanning • Standard ethnographicits sourcesa to Environment identify the likely used traditional owners and a of & be review of any writtenpart and oral local history regardingnot Aboriginal people in the Planning must may geographic area; the which

documentpurpose copyright. • Environmental resourcesThe available any to Aboriginal people within the region of the for any Study Area; break

• The site registry at Aboriginal Victoria (AV) and previous archaeological studies, to identify any previously registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) either within or surrounding the Study Area and the results of previous - archaeological assessments; and

• The land-use history of the Study Area, particularly evidence for the extent and nature of past land disturbance.

• The landforms or geomorphology of the Study Area and identification and determination of the geographic region of which the Study Area forms a part that is relevant to the Aboriginal cultural heritage that may be present in the Study Area.

This information was used to produce an archaeological site prediction model (Section 3.3). The site prediction model assists in determining the type of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) which may potentially occur within the Study Area, the possible contents of these sites, the possible past use of the landscape by Aboriginal people and the likely extent of ground disturbance to Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs). The information provided by the site prediction model is used constructively in designing the survey strategy, by, for example, allowing the field team to target areas which have a high probability of containing Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs). No obstacles were encountered during the preparation of this desktop assessment.

3.2 Results of Desktop Assessment

1987 Search of the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage RegisterACT

The Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR)SCHEME on-line database maintained by Aboriginal Victoria (AV) was & searched ENVIRONMENT to identify any previously registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) PLANNING within the Study available Area and surrounding geographic PLANNING made region, as well as theHEPBURN results of previous is archaeological of enabling assessments.as The Register was accessed on the 2nd February 2019. There has been no previous archaeological documentpurpose reviewunder assessment of the StudyThis Area. Theresole are no previouslyand registered1987 ACHPs within the Study the Act Area, nor are there any ACHPsfor located within 200mprocess of the Study Area. The nearest ACHPs are Hepburn Reservoir LDAD (7723consideration-0306planning-1-4 [VAHR] ), located 1.8 km to the north. The its a Environment used Daylesford and District Historicalof Society& Inc. Aboriginal be Object Collection (7723-0297 part not [VAHR]) is also located within Planningthe geographic region.must may the which The Geographic Region documentpurpose copyright. The any for any The geographic region in which the Studybreak Area is located is defined for the purposes of this due diligence cultural heritage assessment as a 3km radius surrounding the Study Area. This area has been identified as the geographic region for the purposes of this due diligence cultural heritage assessment as it is considered to be of relevance to predicting the nature, extent and significance of any Aboriginal cultural heritage located in the Study Area. Specifically, the geographic region as defined samples a variety of landforms, environmental determinants and resources that likely influenced Aboriginal occupation of, and near to, the Study Area. The Study Area is characterised by the foothills of the Great Dividing Range. The geographic region as defined can be considered a microcosm of the Goldfields Region, significant geographic/geological features including sheet flow basalt and the Castlemaine Formation and a diversity of Ecological Vegetation Communities (EVCs). Therefore, the geographic region as defined can provide information as to the resources available to Aboriginal People in the geographic region and by extension the occupation of the geographic region by Aboriginal People.

Registered Aboriginal Places in the Geographic Region

The Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR) held at Aboriginal Victoria (AV) was searched to identify any previously registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) within the Study Area and surrounding geographic region, as well as the results of previous archaeological assessments. The Register was accessed on the 2nd February 2019.

The Study Area has not been subject to previous archaeological assessment and no Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) are located on the Study Area, however a small number of Aboriginal Places have been recorded in the surrounding geographic region.

Although there are five (5) registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) 1987 components within the geographic region, only fourACT ( 4) remain if Object Collections (secondary sites where artefacts are stored but not in situ) are not considered. None of the registered ACHPs located in the geographic rSCHEMEegion are located within the Study Area. The majority of the site types& ENVIRONMENTrepresented in the geographic region (Table 1) are Low PLANNING Density Artefact Distributions (LDAD’s) (n =4). The LDAD’savailable are located approximately 1.8 PLANNING made km to the north of theHEPBURN Study Area in assois ciationof with enabling theas waterway s Bund Creek and Stoney Creek. documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act The LDAD’s located approximatelyfor 1.8 km to theprocess north of the Study Area - Hepburn Reservoir LDAD (7723-0306-1-4consideration [VAHR]),planning are low density surface and sub-surface artefact its a Environment used scatters consisting of tachylte. Withof such& a small number ofbe ACHPs having been registered part not in the geographic region it is difficultPlanning to form conclusionsmust regardingmay the pattern of ACHP distribution other than tothe state that all of the ACHPs inwhich the geographic region are located in association with the waterways Bunddocument Creekpurpose and Stoneycopyright. Creek. The any for any break Site Type Frequency (No) Low Density Artefact Deposit 4 Object Collection 1

Table 1: Site types in the region of the Study Area

The distribution of registered places in the geographic region should be seen as reflecting:

• Past levels of assessment; • The destruction of the goldmining era; • Urban development; and • Ground visibility conditions rather than an accurate indication of Aboriginal occupation of the geographic region.

Previous Works in the Geographic Region Relevant to the Study Area

A number of previous cultural heritage investigations have been undertaken within the region. A summary of these works offers a basis on which to form a site prediction model for the current Study Area by providing an indication of the most sensitive landforms and soils in the region. The information garnered from past studies also assists in focusing the methodology for the standard and complex assessments. Overall the studies suggest that rises overlooking creeks and the presence of silty and alluvial soils comprise the areas which are most sensitive to the presence of ACHPs. The studies which are most relevant to the Study Area are outlined and summarised below.

For the purposes of the following discussion only archaeological investigations within 3km of the current Study Area are considered as these are located on similar landforms subject 1987 to disturbance during the gold rush; as well as samplingACT several watercourses and other natural environments that would have been conducive to past Aboriginal occupation. There have been numerous archaeological surveysSCHEME in the surrounding region, although none have specifically incorporated& ENVIRONMENT the Study Area. PLANNING available PLANNING made Pre Aboriginal HeritageHEPBURN Act 2006 – is of enablingas

documentpurpose reviewunder Kaplan (1998) conductedThis a surveysole for a proposedand telecommunications1987 transmission the Act station site at Mannings Hill,for Daylesford, at a disturbedprocess location. No Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places were identifiedconsideration duringplanning the survey and it was considered unlikely that any its a Environment used would be present due to theof ground& disturbance to be which the study area had part not demonstrably been subject. Planning must may the which Cockbill & Clark (2000) completed andocument assessmentpurpose at copyright.the location of three mineral springs The any in the Hepburn Regional Park. Largefor scale groundany disturbance had previously occurred in the area in the form of mining and landbreak had been cleared and ripped. No Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places were identified during the survey and it was considered that there was low potential for the location of sites.

Chamberlain and Nicholls (2004) surveyed land surrounding the Lake Daylesford dam and did not locate any Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places. This was potentially due to substantial modification of the land.

Nicholls (2005) undertook a desktop assessment for a proposed fitness, wellbeing and accommodation centre, just east of the township of Daylesford. It was noted that the study area had potential to contain Aboriginal cultural heritage in the form of stone artefact scatters and scarred trees especially due to its close proximity to Wallaby Creek (Nicholls 2005: 18). A subsequent field assessment (Nicholls & Chamberlain 2005) on the same property did not identify any Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places during the survey. This was attributed to a number of factors that had resulted in severe ground disturbances within the property including the construction of a lake, buildings, shedding, animal enclosures and toilet block, the clearance of native vegetation, levelling and the introduction of fill to the site and access from heavy machinery.

Post Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (CHMPs) –

In 2007 Veres undertook a CHMP (10072) for land located at 7 West Street, Daylesford. This land is located to the north of the current Activity Area, on the east side of West Street. Veres did not identify any Aboriginal cultural heritage in the Activity Area and concluded that there was little chance of any occurring because of the extent of prior ground disturbance. Veres did not include an assessment of non-Aboriginal (historic) cultural heritage in the management plan.

In 2008 Clark, V., Smith, L. and J. Mialanes undertook a CHMP (10264) for the proposed 1987 realignment of existing Crown Allotments and subdivisionACT of land into 4 lots at 6 West Street, Daylesford. The desktop assessment found that there were no previously recorded Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places withinSCHEME a 5km radius of the Activity Area. No Aboriginal cultural heritage was& ENVIRONMENT identified during the field inspection for the standard PLANNING assessment and it was found that there was littleavailable to no likelihood that any exist. This PLANNING made conclusion is based uponHEPBURN the extent of prioris groundof enabling disturbanceas in parts of the activity area and the steepness of the existing slope in the remainder of the area. documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act Day (2008a) undertook afor CHMP (10352) at theprocess site of a proposed youth park in the township of Daylesford. The desktopconsideration planningassessment suggested that the land-use history of its a Environment used the Activity Area had resulted inof significant & ground disturbance.be The results of the field part not survey confirmed this assessmentPlanning as bedrock wasmust shown to maybe exposed on the ground surface. No Aboriginal culturalthe heritage was located duringwhich the assessment for this CHMP. Significant ground disturbance due todocument intensivepurpose goldcopyright. mining activities and the clearing of The any land was noted. for any break Day (2008b) undertook a CHMP (10143) at the site of a proposed residential subdivision at 39 King Street, Daylesford. A review of site history suggested that the Activity Area had been subject to soil stripping for sluicing works during the 19th C and by adjacent road alignment works. The Activity Area is highly disturbed and a program of surface inspection and subsoil testing (via auger holes) revealed no Aboriginal sites or artefacts across the subject block.

In 2016 Young et al. undertook a CHMP (13943) for the proposed construction of a permanent raw water pump station and associated infrastructure at the Hepburn Reservoir to supply the Daylesford Water Treatment Plan (WTP). The results of the desktop assessment showed artefact scatters are the most likely site types to be found; sub-surface artefact scatters may be identified in both a disturbed and undisturbed context; however, given the shallow soils in the region are more likely to be located in a disturbed context; there is some, albeit low, potential for other site types i.e. scarred trees, earth feature etc. to occur in the Activity Area and previous archaeological assessments have indicated that Aboriginal archaeological sites within the Goldfields region are likely to be located on high ground with good vantage points within walking distance to a waterway. One Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Place - Blampied-Daylesford LDAD1 (7723-xxxx [VAHR]) - was identified within the Activity Area during the standard assessment. This Aboriginal Place is comprised of three tachylyte stone artefacts located in a 10x10m area on a discrete rise near to the northern end of the Activity Area. The discrete rise on which the three tachylte stone artefacts are located has views overlooking the Hepburn Reservoir and therefore would once have had views overlooking Spring Creek. Aboriginal cultural material was identified during the complex assessment in an undisturbed context at a depth of between 50-80mm (1 stone artefact) in TP1 in the light brown loam (5Y 4/4) and was added to the registration of the ACHP Blampied-Daylesford

LDAD1 (7723-xxxx [VAHR]). The excavation of Test Pit 1 and the section exposed at the location of a concrete water tank showed that the natural soil profile of the landform is a 1987 light brown loam (5Y 4/4) overlying a dense yellowACT clay slate (5Y 8/10). The results of sub-surface testing showed that the natural soil profile was not present across much of the Activity Area due to prior ground disturbance.SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING In 2016 Young et al. undertook a CHMP (14024) foravailable the proposed residential subdivision PLANNING made and construction of unitsHEPBURN at the property locatedis atof 25 enabling King Street,as Daylesford. The results of the desktop assessment showed that artefact scatters are the most likely site types to documentpurpose reviewunder be found within the ActivityThis A rea;sole sub- surface andartefact scatters1987 may be identified in both the Act a disturbed and undisturbedfor context; however, processgiven the shallow soils in the region are more likely to be located in a considerationdisturbedplanning context; there is some, albeit low, potential for its a Environment used other site types i.e. scarred trees,of earth& feature etc. to occurbe in the Activity Area; and part not previous archaeological assessmentsPlanning have indicatedmust that Aboriginalmay archaeological sites within the Goldfields regionthe are likely to be located onwhich high ground with good vantage points within walking distance to document a waterway.purpose Nocopyright. Aboriginal cultural heritage was The any identified in the Activity Area duringfor the standardany assessment; however, one area of potential archaeological sensitivity – abreak rise overlooking an ephemeral waterway was identified. No Aboriginal cultural heritage was identified in the Activity Area during the complex assessment. Conclusive evidence of ground disturbance was noted in TP1 – copper pipe? and quartz pebbles and rubble; STP2 and STP3 – levelled mullock heap; and STP8 – glass, ceramic and metal mixed throughout and the absence of topsoil. It is considered likely that much of the ground disturbance noted during the complex assessment can be explained as having been caused by i) erosion resulting from the unnamed ephemeral waterway gold mining; ii) gold mining; iii) subsequent levelling works; and iv) agricultural/pastoral practices. The potentially artefact bearing deposits in the Activity Area – dark brown loam (5Y 3/5) topsoils – were found to be very thin in most parts of the Activity Area and absent in others and are likely disturbed in all instances; therefore, the archaeological potential of the Activity Area was considered to be low.

Previous studies undertaken show alluvial sediments in the area have been highly disturbed in many cases, however there is the potential for intact deposits to be present underlying this reworked alluvium with modern material. Testing targeting landforms relating to waterways has been undertaken in most cases, while some studies undertook blanket grids over Study Areas. Studies have shown that while the soil profiles are generally shallow, there in the possibility for intact deposits to be present.

Conclusions and Synthesis of Previous Archaeological Work

Local cultural heritage investigations illustrate that the most likely site types to be found in the geographic region are artefact scatters. Most of these have been of low density and have been identified in disturbed contexts both on the surface and in subsurface deposits. All of the ACHPs located in the geographic region are in association with waterways. The range of projects that have been conducted in the region include pipelines and residential

subdivision and approaches have combined surface surveys with hand-based subsurface testing programs which have been useful in producing results. 1987 ACT Historical and ethno-historical accounts in the geographic region SCHEME No specific oral history has& been ENVIRONMENT provided in relation to the Study Area from the PLANNING Traditional Owners. available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas The Kulin documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act Prior to European occupatforion, the central portionprocess of what is now the State of Victoria was occupied by Aboriginal peopleconsideration who planning shared a common language and political, social, its a Environment used religious and economic affiliations,of and& who identified themselvesbe as Kulin, the label part not meaning ‘man’ in the dialect spokenPlanning in the Melbournemust region may(Blake 1991:31) The area of land occupied by the Kulinthe people extended as far northwhich as present day Echuca, west as the Richardson River, Mt Avoca, Fierydocument Creekpurpose and Mtcopyright. Emu Creek, south to the Victorian The any coastline and east to the Tarwin Riverfor and Wilsonsany Promontory (Blake 1991:30; Clark 1990). break

Within the Kulin, a number of different but related dialects or wurrung (= lips, speech, mouth) were spoken. Generally speaking, different dialect groups among the Kulin were delineated by association with a specific area of country. Thus Taungurong was a Kulin dialect spoken north of the Great Dividing Range and west to the Campaspe River (Blake 1991: 31). Woiworung was one of the Kulin dialects spoken in the Melbourne region, within the area drained by the Yarra River and its tributaries (Blake 1991: 45), Bunurong was a dialect spoken along the coast from the Werribee River to Wilsons Promontory and in the country that took in rivers to the east of Melbourne, which drained from the highlands to the coast, Wadawurrung was a dialect spoken west of the Werribee River to Fiery Creek and Painkallac Creek (Blake 1991: 47) and the Dja Wurrung language area incorporated land from Creswick to just south of Charlton and west from Richardson River and Mount Avoca, east to Castlemaine and Bendigo (Brough Smyth 1878). Amongst the Kulin political, social and economic relationships were shaped by affiliation with the main unit of social organisation (the clan) and affiliation with one of two groups linked with creation ancestors. A clan was usually formed from a number of related families (a lineal descent group), which claimed guardianship over a particular tract of land (Howitt 1904: 41, Cotter 2001). Kulin clans supposedly traced descent through the male line (patrilineal descent), although this is disputed by some contemporary descendants of traditional owners.

The Kulin were also divided into two groups (described as moieties by western anthropologists) linked with creation ancestors. These groups were Waa (crow (Australian Raven) and Bunjil (the eaglehawk) (Barwick 1984: 105). Affiliation of an individual with either Waa or Bunjil, was determined at birth by the group/moiety affiliation of the father and the father’s clan (Barwick 1984:105; Clark 1990).

Marriage 1987 ACT In traditional Kulin law, moiety and clan affiliation determined marriage. Individuals were required to marry outside their clan and to a personSCHEME belonging to the opposite moiety. Thus an individual who belonged& ENVIRONMENT to the Waa descent group could only marry a person PLANNING from another clan and from the Bunjil descent group.available Marriages were often arranged at PLANNING made large ceremonies involvingHEPBURN clans from a numberis ofof different enablingas geographical locations.

documentpurpose reviewunder Marriage had an extremelyThis important sole influence and on social and economic1987 relationships, and the Act individuals could acquire considerablefor status andprocess economic power through marriage ties, particularly by men who couldconsideration afford planningto support more than one wife. Access to the land its a Environment used and resources of another clan wasof most& often gained bybe a kin relationship formed by part not marriage (Barwick 1984: 106),Planning although geographicalmust proximitymay of birt h or descent could also form grounds for access.the Marriage also imposed whicha mutual obligation of each clan to provide access to some or all of thedocument resourcepurposes of another,copyright. so that reciprocal sharing of The any resources was fundamental to landfor management any (Barwick 1984: 106). break Traditional Owners of the Activity Area

The Activity Area is located on Dja Wurrung Country, the boundaries of which are defined by topographic features such as the Great Dividing Range to the south and the Richardson River and Mt Avoca to the west.

Traditional Indigenous owners of the Activity Area have been identified in Clark (1990) as the Munal gundidj clan, who were part of a group of clans speaking the Dja Dja Wurrung dialect. Following Clark (1990:164), Monul gundidj literally means ‘men of dust’. The status of this clan is considered uncertain. Otherwise, the nearest clan to Daylesford would have been the Tureet balug located at Mt Moorookyle, Kooroocheang and Smeaton Hilll. The name of the clan originates from a local hill Tue-rite located S.E. of Clunes and near Creswick. Dixon (cited in Clark) suggests there is a commonality between the Dja Dja Wurrung language and Djabwurrung, Barababaraba, Daungwurrung and Wada wurrung (Smyth 1878).

Clark has noted some 16 clans forming part of the Dja Dja Wurrung language group (Clark 1990: 153). There were thought to have been somewhere between 900 and 1800 individuals at the time of European contact forming the Dja Dja Wurrung (Clark 1990: 150).

The Munal gundidj clan were located predominantly around the Daylesford area, however, Stanbridge, a correspondant from Smyth at ‘Wombat’ identified the During balug as the clan frequenting the area (cited in Clark 1990: 164). There are no other historic references to this clan. Both the moiety and clan head of the Munal gundidj are unknown (Smyth 1878). It has been stated however that of the 16 Dja Dja Wurrung clans, Munangabum,

clan head of the Liarga balug was considered head over most of the Dja Dja Wurrung people in 1842 (Clark 1990: 140). 1987 ACT Social Organisation SCHEME In traditional Aboriginal society& ENVIRONMENT the most common day to day group was the foraging PLANNING band, composed generally of one or two families,available plus visit ors. The clan was the land PLANNING made owning unit in traditionalHEPBURN society and wasis also theof group enabling withas which the individual would first identify herself or himself. All members of a clan spoke the same language and documentpurpose reviewunder identified with a particularThis area ofsole land or estate,and which they 1987regarded as their own. In the Act traditional Aboriginal societyfor a number of clansprocess who spoke the same language and had adjacent estates made up of aconsideration larger planninggroup was usually referred to as a tribe. The tribal its a Environment used territory was the total area of theof clan’s es& tates (Barwick 1984:be 106). part not Planning must may Resources the which documentpurpose copyright. The any The Dja Dja Wurrung followed a semifor- sedentaryany hunter -gatherer lifestyle. Resource-rich watercourses and swamps, containing abreak diversity of fish, shellfish, birds and other plant or animal foods formed a particular focus for regular occupation. Foods that were seasonally abundant would have been important as they allowed for the coalescing of large numbers of people during which social obligations could be met.

Aboriginal behaviour patterns within the geographic region during the mid-nineteenth century indicates that occupation in the region was undertaken on a seasonal basis, characterised by temporary encampments shifting between resource-rich zones at different times of the year. Large campsites were often placed close to rivers and creeks. Such camps were generally occupied by smaller family groups for a few days, or longer in resource-rich areas. Camps were shifted regularly to take advantage of foods as they came into season (Veres 2007).

Post Contact

In 1839 the Aboriginal Protectorate Scheme was introduced in Victoria. Four Assistant Protectors were appointed under a Chief Protector, George Augustus Robinson. The role of the protectorates was to provide food, shelter and medical supplies, record cultural and population information and to indoctrinate Aboriginal peoples in to the western European cultural and economic systems. Aboriginal reserves and stations were established across Victoria and Aboriginal peoples were encouraged to move to them (Clark 1990: 311-329). The Protectorate was largely unsuccessful and was disbanded in 1849.

In 1841 E.S. Parker of Mount Franklin undertook a census of the Djadja wurrung and counted approximately 282 individuals (Clark 1990: 150). By the 1850s there were some 142 members of the Dja Dja Wurrung recorded (Clark 1990:145). The Mount Franklin

Protectorate Station was established at Franklinford by Assistant Protector of Aborigines, Edward Parker in 1840. The station included 41,073 acres of pastoral land, which was 1987 occupied by up to 130 of the local Indigenous community.ACT Many people did not stay at the protectorate however, due to low food supplies, death and illness. The Protectorate failed and was closed in 1864 and all remaining AboriginesSCHEME were relocated to Corranderrk Station (Caldere and Goff 1991:& ENVIRONMENT 142). PLANNING available PLANNING made The gold rush sparkedHEPBURN and many farm handsis desertedof enabling stationsas to flee to the gold fields. Many local Indigenous people obtained employment at stations and undertook tasks such documentpurpose reviewunder as lambing, sheep washing,This shepherding, sole sheepand dipping and stripping1987 bark. Many fell ill the Act to disease, (particularly venerealfor and respiratory)process there was a poor standard of nutrition, low fertility rates and deaths resultingconsiderationplanning from alcohol during this time (Clark 1990: 147). By its a Environment used 1863 the Dja Dja Wurrung populationof was& 31 adults and 7 childrenbe (Clark 1990: 148). part not Planning must may The Central Board for the theProtection of the Aborigineswhich was founded in 1860 to provide an administrative structure to manage documentAboriginalpurpose people copyright. in Victoria. Under their direction a The any series of missions and governmentfor stations wereany set up throughout Victoria where Aboriginal people could live (DPCD, OAAVbreak Website accessed 14/3/15).

The Dja Dja Wurrung culture is a living culture and is today represented by the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation (DDWCAC).

Landforms and Geomorphology of the Study Area

The Study Area is located on the geomorphological unit ‘Eruption points and volcanic plains (Creswick, Ballarat plains, Mt. Franklin, Mt. Blackwood, Metcalfe) (ACHRIS, accessed 15/2/2019).

The Study Area is located on the geological formation ‘Newer Volcanics’ (GeoVic Interactive Map, accessed 21/02/2019).

The area of cultural heritage sensitivity as defined by the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 in which the Study Area is located is R.37 ‘Volcanic cones of western Victoria’.

Topographically, the Study Area is characterized by generally flat, levelled ground with unnatural dips and hollows on the ground surface. The Study Area is elevated above the industrial properties located to the north and south; however, is at the same elevation as East Street located to the west, and the vacant industrial land located to the east.

Resources Available to Aboriginal People within the Study Area

Prior to European settlement, the Study Area and surrounding land would have offered a number of resources such as plants and animals that could have been utilised by the traditional Indigenous owner.

Climate 1987 ACT At 616 metres above sea level, Daylesford has a cool, wet climate. Summer (January– February) temperatures range from 10 to 37 °C (50SCHEME to 99 °F), while July temperatures are cold, ranging from about & 1– ENVIRONMENT2 °C (34–36 °F) to 9 °C (48 °F). Annual precipitation, PLANNING occasionally falling as snow, averages abou t 870 mmavailable (34 in) but has ranged from 445 mm PLANNING made (17.5 in) to over 1,350HEPBURN mm (53 in) per yearis (Bureau of ofenabling Meteorology,as accessed 15/02/15).

documentpurpose reviewunder Water Sources This sole and 1987 the Act for process The Study Area is located near considerationto, a numberplanning of named and unnamed waterways including its a Environment used Smiths Creek, Newton Creek, Sailorsof Creek,& Blind Creek, Doctorsbe Gully and Bund Creek. part not Additionally, there are a large Planningnumber of small ephemeralmust waterwaysmay located near to the Study Area that are unnathemed or are located at a distancewhich greater than 200m from the Study Area. documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Description of Existing and Pre-Contactbreak Vegetation

The Study Area lies within the pre-1750 Ecological Vegetation Community (EVC) Herb-rich foothill forest (EVC 23).

This EVC occurs on both fertile soils derived from basalt and the less fertile soils derived from Ordovician shales and sandstones. Altitude is usually 600-900m above sea level and annual rainfall generally between 800-1000mm per annum.

The overstorey is a medium to tall open forest dominated by Messmate (Eucalyptus obliqua) with Manna Gum (Eucalyptus viminalis), Narrow-leaf Peppermint (Eucalyptus radiata) and Mountain Gum (Eucalyptus dalrympleana) also common. Understorey trees, including Blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon) and Cherry Ballart (Exocarpus cupressiformis) may also be present.

The understorey is dominated by a diverse ground layer of forbs and grasses, with a sparse to non-existent shrub layer. Silver Wattle (Acacia dealbata) is often the only shrub present, although Narrow-leaf Wattle (Acacia mucronata) and Prickly Currant-bush (Coprosma quadriﬁda) may also occur.

Common native herbs include Ivy-leaf Violet (Viola hederacea), Bidgee-widgee (Aceana novae-zealandiae), Kidney-weed (Dicondra repens), Hairy Pennywort (Hydrocotyle hirta), Prickly Starwort (Stellaria pungens), Small Poranthera (Poranthera microphylla), Mountain Clematis (Clematic aristata) and Spiny-headed Mat-rush (Lomandra longifolia spp. longifolia).

Common grasses include Common Tussock-grass (Poa labillardierei), Weeping Grass (Microlaena stipoides) and Forest Wire-grass (Tetrarrhena juncea). Austral Bracken 1987 (Pteridium esculentum) is also very common and mayACT often dominate on highly disturbed sites. SCHEME Herb-rich Foothill Forest is classiﬁed& ENVIRONMENT as being as being depleted, due to this EVC being PLANNING cleared from much of its' former range. The mainavailable threats to this EVC include logging, PLANNING made ﬁrewood harvesting,HEPBURN fuel reduction burningis andof weedenabling invasionas (Wombat Forestcare Website, Accessed 21/02/2019). documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act The existing vegetation offor the Activity Area bearsprocess no resemblance to the description of the above vegetation communityconsideration. planning its a Environment used of & be part not There are a number of plant speciesPlanning that wouldmust have been presentmay in, and near to, the Study Area that were likelythe to have been utilised by Indigenouswhich people such as; Austral bracken (Pteridium esculentum), Chocolatedocumentpurpose Lily (Arthropodiumcopyright. strictum), Bulbine Lily The any (Bulbine bulbosa), Black antherfor Flax -lily (Dianellaany revoluta), Blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon), Manna Gum (Eucalyptusbreak viminalis), Cherry Ballart (Exocarpos cupressiformis). Many of these species were staple foods, where the roots or tubers were prepared and eaten, used for medicinal purposes, basket weaving or for the manufacture of weapons.

Wattles were important sources of gum, used for food, technological items and some medicines (Zola & Gott, 1996: 51). The gum of the black wattle was dissolved in water to make a sweet drink or was eaten on its own. It was also used as a treatment for indigestion. The bark of the paper-bark trees was utilized as a blanket for wrapping up babies while the timber of the trees were used in making spears, clubs and digging sticks (Zola & Gott 1996: 63). Burls were also cut out of eucalypts for use as bowls. The brittle bark of the messmate trees was powdered and used as tinder in fire making while the coarse and stringy inner bark was made into bags and fishing nets (Zola & Gott 1996: 60). The bark of the blackwood was employed in the treatment of arthritis and the timber was used to manufacture spear-throwers, shields and clubs (Zola & Gott 1990: 53). Aboriginal ‘scarred trees’ are the result of bark being cut from the tree for these and other purposes.

Silver wattle may have been employed by local Aboriginal peoples in the production of stone axe handles, its gum used as a food source or ‘mixed with ash to make a waterproof paste, used for fixing holes in bark water vessels’ (Zola and Gott, 1996: 38). Tussock grasses may have been used to make baskets and mats, and the tubers of water-ribbons had the potential to provide a valuable food source for local inhabitants (Zola and Gott, 1996: 58, 12). River red gums potentially provided Aboriginal inhabitants with bark for a variety of uses including the building of shelters and canoes, and its gum was also employed for medicinal purposes (Zola and Gott, 1992: 14 and 55). The red gum was popular amongst European settlers as well, who used it primarily for construction (Zola and Gott, 1996: 14).

Water plants including cumbungi (Typha spp.) and water ribbons (Triglochin) would also 1987 have been gathered from these creeks. The roots andACT tubers of lilies would have been collected and roasted and would have provided a staple food. The fruits of plants such as the native raspberry and the common apple-berrySCHEME provided a common and sweet food source (Zola & Gott 1996: 49-&50). ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available PLANNING made Information on FaunaHEPBURN of the Study Area is of enablingas

documentpurpose reviewunder A number of animals wouldThis have solebeen presentand within the Acti1987vity Area and are likely to the Act have been hunted by traditionalfor owners. Theseprocess include the Eastern Grey Kangaroo (Macropus giganteus), Commonconsideration Brushtailplanning Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula), Common its a Environment used Ringtail Possum (Pseudocherinusof peregrinus& ), Short Beakedbe Echidna (Tachyglossus part not aculeatus) and the Wombat (PlanningVomatus Ursinus).must Birds, bird eggmays and reptiles may have also been utilised. the which documentpurpose copyright. The any The Wombat Forestcare Websitefor provides aany detailed list of all birds, amphibians, mammals, invertebrates and reptiles presebreaknt in the Wombat State Forest that can be used as an analogue for the Daylesford region (Wombat Forestcare Website, Accessed 15/02/2019).

Stone Resources

No stone resources and outcrops suitable for the manufacture of stone tools are found within the Study Area. The geology within the region of the Study Area is relevant when considering the availability of stone material suitable for manufacture of tools and may influence aspects of Aboriginal occupation.

The Study Area does not contain any naturally occurring outcrops of stone material and would therefore be an unlikely location where raw stone materials were once extracted, quarried or collected for the manufacture of stone implements by pre-contact Aboriginal people. This indicates that any Aboriginal archaeological stone artefacts located within the Study Area will be comprised entirely of imported stone.

Land Use History

First contact with Aboriginal People in the Daylesford region occurred during Major Mitchell’s expedition of 1839 (Darwin 1999a: 2). Captain James Hepburn was driving cattle through this region in 1839, and by 1842 the land was transformed for sheep and cattle grazing (Darwin 1999a: 2).

In 1851 John Egan discovered gold in Wombat Creek and formed a small group of prospectors who established a camp along the banks of the creek (Darwin 1999b: 1).

‘Daylesford was Victoria’s most diversified and long lived gold field’ (Maddicks 1951, 8), and was mined extensively from 1855 to the 1940s (Bannear 1999, 1.1, 2). 1987 The initial focus of the Daylesford goldfields wasACT shallow alluvial mining (Maddicks 1951: 10), which was prominent from the earlySCHEME 1850s through to 1865 (Bannear 1999: 4.2, 6). After 1865 there& ENVIRONMENT was a decline in the number of alluvial and tunnelling miners in Daylesford (Maddicks 1951:PLANNING 46), and theavailable lack of water available for mining led to the closurePLANNING of many mines (Daylesfordmade Mining Division Historical Notes: 36, HEPBURN is enablingas n.d.http://www.heritage.vic.gov.au/pages/pdfs/Daylesfordhistory.pdf,of accessed review 30/11/15). By 1911 alluvial miningdocument in purposethe Daylesford districtunder had ‘practically ceased to This sole and 1987 exist’ (Daylesford the Mini ng Division HActistorical Notes: 60, for process n.d.http://www.heritage.vic.gov.au/pages/pdfs/Daylesfordhistory.pdf,consideration accessed its a planning 30/11/15), and many miners acquiredof land& thatEnvironment allowed them toused combine shallow alluvial part be mining and farming (Bannear 1999: 4.2, 6). not Planning must may the which Quartz reef mining also prospered in the Hepburn/Daylesford Mining Division. The documentpurpose copyright. first reef to be worked was theThe Mauritius any Open Cut Reef in Kidd’s Gully, opened in for any 1854. break The township of Daylesford was laid out in an eighty chain square in June 1854 by Government Surveyor Fraser and given the name “Wombat”, after Wombat Flat (Maddicks 1951, 7). The name was changed to ‘Daylesford’ in 1855 (Maddicks 1951: 7: Darwin 1999b: 2). The first land sale was held on 17th October 1854 (Maddicks 1951: 7; Darwin 1999b: 1), and permanent houses had been erected in Daylesford by the end of the year (Darwin 1999b: 2).

The Australian Handbook (1903) described Daylesford as:

Daylesford's economy was assisted by the proximity of Hepburn Springs which had a mineral water baths as well as a spa bottling plant. The closure of Daylesford's last mine, Ajax, in 1923, coincided with the growth in car ownership, which offered an alternative to holidays by rail transport. The withdrawal of mining families' female staff also coincided with a gradual decline of spa centre patronage. The town, however, continued as a district centre, and its school of mines (1891) expanded to become a technical school (1914) and technical high school (1945) (Victorian Places Website, accessed 21/02/2019). There were also non-auriferous industries, as described in the Australian blue book, 1946:

The late 1970s coincided with renewed interest in spa waters. By then, however, guest houses had declined from 22 (1932) to 14 (1951) to nil. In 1977 the Department of Minerals and Energy surveyed spa water sources with recommended take-offs for preservation of supply, and a proposed royalty for harvesting. The Hepburn Bath House was restored with State Government assistance in 1984 (Victorian Places Website, accessed 21/02/2019). Daylesford has flourished as a tourist destination with in recent years with Melburnians in particular drawn to the region for the spas, Goldfields architecture and natural beauty.

Specific Land Use History

An aerial photograph from 1946 shows that at this time the Study Area was being used for pastoral/agricultural purposes and was vacant land (see Figure 2). The residential area located on the western side of, and to the west of, East Street was, by this time established; however, very little of the industrial area in which the Study Area is located had been established.

Figure 2: 1946 Aerial Photograph

An aerial photograph from 2016 shows that at this time the Study Area had been part of a 12 lot industrial subdivision; however, had not been developed. The large concrete factory located to the south of the Study Area had yet to be constructed. A track is shown as running through the Study Area from East Street to the industrial land located to the east of the Study Area. The Study Area at this time had dense grass coverage.

Figure 3: 2016 Aerial Photograph

Prior to the 12 lot industrial subdivision the Study Area was part of the Daylesford Timber Yard (James Iles, pers. comm. 25/01/2019).

During the site inspection John Young had a long conversation with John Comelli, an earthmover who was working across the road, in relation to the land-use history of the Study Area.

John Comelli advised the following:

o the land was originally part of the Daylesford Timber Yard; o when he excavated the foundations for the large concrete factory to the south of the Study Area he found timber logs at a depth of 1m+; o Brian Williams (a local earthmover) advised him that he had scraped the topsoil off the ground surface and laid rock down to create a hardstand for the Daylesford Timber Yard; o His father did the industrial subdivision and the road to service the lots (Mink Street), had to be excavated to a greater depth than standard to remove the timber logs buried in the soil; o A stormwater pipeline runs through the Study Area;

o When he excavated the foundations for the large concrete factory to the south, and for a factory across the road (which he was doing at the time of 1987 the site inspection) he found fill, overlyingACT rock, overlying clay; o He found a McCains wrapper at a depth of 1.5m whilst excavating the foundations for the factory acrossSCHEME the road; o The lot on which& ENVIRONMENTthe factory across the road is being constructed was once PLANNING also part of the Daylesford Timber Yardavailable and was part of the same industrial PLANNING made subdivisionHEPBURN as the Stud y Area.is of enablingas

documentpurpose reviewunder A geotechnical assessmentThis undertaken sole of theand property on whi1987ch the foundations for a the Act factory were being excavatedfor at the time of the processsite inspection showed fill overlying silty clay, overlying clay. The commentsconsideration fromplanning the geologist (Andrew Redman) were that the its a Environment used silty clay overlying clay were typicalof of area’s& geology. be part not Planning must may The Study Area is located withinthe an established industrialwhich area and is currently vacant land (see Map 3, Plates 1-8). The Study Areadocument comprisespurpose ofcopyright. generally flat, levelled ground with The any unnatural dips and hollows on the groundfor surfaceany (see Map 3, Plates 1-8). break 3.3 Conclusions of Desktop Assessment

A review of the environmental data relevant to human settlement and the ethnographic and archaeological data relevant to the local area has indicated that:

• There are no registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) located in the Study Area;

• There has been no previous archaeological assessment of the Study Area;

• The majority of the site types represented in the geographic region (Table 1) are Low Density Artefact Distributions (LDAD’s) (n=4) although there is also one Object Collection;

• The LDAD’s are located approximately 1.8 km to the north of the Study Area in association with the waterways Bund Creek and Stoney Creek.

• Previous archaeological assessments in the region have indicated that Aboriginal archaeological sites within the region are likely to be located on high ground adjacent to creeks and rivers;

• The Study Area is located on Dja Dja Wurrung Country;

• The Study Area is located on the geomorphological unit ‘Eruption points and volcanic plains (Creswick, Ballarat plains, Mt. Franklin, Mt. Blackwood, Metcalfe);

• The Study Area is located on the geological formation ‘Newer Volcanics’;

1987 • There would have been a range of plant, animalACT and mineral resources available for Aboriginal people living in, or in the region of, the Study Area; SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT • The existing vegetation of PLANNINGthe Study Area bears no resemblance to 1750 EVC - Herb-rich foothill forest (EVC 23); available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas • The Study Area has been subject to ground disturbancereview as a result of its previous documentpurpose and under use as a timber yardThis and assole part of an industrial subdivision1987; however, the extent the process Act to which the Stufordy Area has been subject to ground disturbance must be considerationplanning established by a siteits inspection. a Environment used of & be part not A site prediction model is intendedPlanning to be used as a guideline tomay designing the field survey the must and as an indication of the types of archaeological siteswhich which may occur in a given area. documentpurpose copyright. The site prediction model is testedThe againstany the results of the field survey. for any Prior to European settlement, the Studybreak Area and surrounding land would have offered a number of resources such as plants and animals that could have been utilised by traditional Aboriginal owners.

In spite of this evidence however, there is a low probability that Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) will occur within the Study Area. This is because:

4) The Study Area has been subject to ground disturbance as a result of its previous use as a timber yard and as part of an industrial subdivision;

5) The Study Area is located on the geological formation ‘Newer Volcanics’ which tends to be characterised by shallow soils and therefore any Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) are likely to have been disturbed or destroyed by its use as a timber yard and as part of an industrial subdivision;

However:

6) the extent to which the Study Area has been subject to ground disturbance must be established by a site inspection.

4.0 Report on the Results of the Site Inspection 1987 This section contains the results of the Site Inspection.ACT

SCHEME Aims of the Site Inspection ENVIRONMENT & PLANNING available The aims of thePLANNING site inspection were to: made HEPBURN is of enablingas • Document the extent documentof significantpurpose ground disturbancereviewunder , if any, in the Study Area; This sole and 1987 • Identify any areas of potentialthe archaeologicalprocess sensitivity Act ; • Establish the potentialfor for the Study Area to contain Aboriginal cultural heritage; its considerationplanning and of a Environment used & be • Determine the requirement,part or not, for a Culturalnot Heritage Management Plan Planning must may (CHMP) for the Studythe Area. which

documentpurpose copyright. Site Inspection Methodology The any for any break A brief site inspection of the Study Area was undertaken by Heritage Advisor John Young on 30th January, 2019.

Owing to the small size of the Study Area and the dense grass and vegetation coverage observed upon arrival the decision was made to survey the Study Area on an opportunistic basis rather than walking linear transects.

Focus was concentrated on areas of high ground surface visibility. Areas of potential archaeological sensitivity/deposits (PAS and PAD) and significant ground disturbance were recorded. Ground surface visibility and surface exposure was recorded in order to determine the effective ground survey coverage.

Site Inspection Limitations

The site inspection was limited in its effectiveness by fill deposits overlying the natural ground surface.

Results of Site Inspection

The Study Area is located at, and is comprised of, the property known as 33-35 East Street, Daylesford and is approximately 950m2 in area. The Study Area is bounded to the north by Mink Street, to the east by vacant industrial land, to the south by an existing concrete factory and to the west by East Street. The property is located 270m north-east of Smiths Creek at its closest point.

The Study Area is located within an established industrial area and is currently vacant land 1987 (see Map 3, Plates 1-8). The Study Area comprises ofACT generally flat, levelled ground with unnatural dips and hollows on the ground surface (see Map 3, Plates 1-8). SCHEME Disturbance to the ground surface& ENVIRONMENT of the Study Area was noted in the form of: PLANNING available PLANNING made • unnatural topographyHEPBURN characterised is by dipsof andenabling hollowas s ; • elevation above the properties to the north and south (but at the same level as documentpurpose reviewunder those to the eastThis and west)sole; and 1987 the Act • construction of stormwaterfor pipeline; process considerationplanning • construction of trackits that runsa westEnvironment-east through Studyused Area (see Figure 3, Plate of & be 6); and part not • underground service inPlanning the road reserve mustof both East Streetmay and Mink Street. the which

documentpurpose copyright. Additionally, a deep cut withThe an exposanyed stratigraphic section was noted along the for any southern boundary of the Study Area.break The deep cut had been excavated for the construction of the concrete factory located to the south of the Study Area (see Plates 3 and 7). The stratigraphic section exposed showed deep volcanic clay loams; however, it was unable to be determined on the basis of the exposed stratigraphic section as to whether the Study Area had been subject to ground disturbance.

At the time of the site inspection John Comelli was excavating foundations for the construction of a factory across the road. The lot on which the foundations were being excavated had also been a part of the Daylesford Timber Yard and a part of the same industrial subdivision as the Study Area. The excavations for the foundations were inspected and photographed and showed fill, overlying rock, overlying clay.

The Study Area is sparsely grassed with red-brown clay loams visible on the ground surface; ground surface visibility throughout the Study Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%.

No remnant native vegetation remains in the Study Area.

Land Disturbance

The desktop assessment documented evidence of ground disturbance in the Study Area as including:

o use as Daylesford Timber Yard including the scraping off of the topsoil and the laying of rock as a hardstand; and o development of an industrial subdivision.

1987 A geotechnical assessment undertaken of the propACTerty on which the foundations for a factory were being excavated at the time of the site inspection showed fill overlying silty clay, overlying clay. The comments from the geologistSCHEME (Andrew Redman) were that the silty clay overlying clay were typical& ENVIRONMENT of area’s geolog y. PLANNING available PLANNING made Evidence of ground disturbanceHEPBURN observable is duringof the enabling site inspectionas was as follows:

documentpurpose reviewunder • unnatural topographyThis characterisedsole by anddips and hollows1987; the Act • elevation above thefor properties to the northprocess and south (but at the same level as those to the east and wesconsiderationt); planning its a Environment used • construction of stormwaterof pipeline;& be part not • construction of track thatPlanning runs west -eastmust through Studymay Area (see Figure 3); and • underground servicethe in the road reserve of bothwhich East Street and Mink Street. documentpurpose copyright. The any During the site inspection John Youngfor had a any long conversation with John Comelli, an earthmover who was working across thebreak road, in relation to the land-use history of the Study Area.

John Comelli advised the following:

• the land was originally part of the Daylesford Timber Yard; • when he excavated the foundations for the large concrete factory to the south of the Study Area he found timber logs at a depth of 1m+; • Brian Williams (a local earthmover) advised him that he had scraped the topsoil off the ground surface and laid rock down to create a hardstand for the Daylesford Timber Yard; • His father did the industrial subdivision and the road to service the lots (Mink Street), had to be excavated to a greater depth than standard to remove the timber logs buried in the soil; • A stormwater pipeline runs through the Study Area; • When he excavated the foundations for the large concrete factory to the south, and for a factory across the road (which he was doing at the time of the site inspection) he found fill, overlying rock, overlying clay. ; • He found a McCains wrapper at a depth of 1.5m whilst excavating the foundations for the factory across the road; • The lot on which the factory across the road is being constructed was once also part of the Daylesford Timber Yard and was part of the same industrial subdivision as the Study Area.

Ground Surface Visibility and Effective Survey Coverage

Effective coverage is quantified to account for ground surface visibility and exposure limitations to survey coverage and gives a good estimate of the actual proportion of the 1987 Study Area investigated. ACT

Ground surface visibility is a measure of factorsSCHEME which may obscure archaeological materials and can be defined& as ENVIRONMENT how much of the surface is visible and what other factors PLANNING (such as vegetation, gravels or leaf litter) may limitavailable the de tection of archaeological PLANNING made materials (Burke andHEPBURN Smith 2004). The higheris theof lenablingevel of asground surface visibility, the more likely it is that Aboriginal cultural material can be identified; therefore a good level documentpurpose reviewunder of ground surface visibilityThis enables sole a better representationand of places1987 than areas where the the Act ground surface is obscuredfor (Ellender and Weaverprocess 1994). considerationplanning its a Environment used Ellender and Weaver (1994) attemptedof to& quantify ground surfacebe visibility for a 1m² area: part not Planning must may • 0-5%: Unable to seethe soil; which • 5-10%: Occasional glimpse ofdocument soil; purpose copyright. The any • 10-20%: Occasional patch offor bare ground;any • 20-50%: Frequent patches of barebreak ground; • 50-70%: About half the ground bare; • 75-100%: More than half the ground bare; ploughed fields.

The Study Area is sparsely grassed with red-brown clay loams visible on the ground surface; ground surface visibility throughout the Study Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%.

Area of Potential Archaeological Sensitivity

No areas of potential archaeological sensitivity were identified in the Study Area during the site inspection.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Identified

No Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) were identified within the Study Area during the site inspection (this includes artefact scatters, scarred trees or rock shelters). No caves, rock shelters, or cave entrances were noted within the Study Area. The absence of any evidence for Aboriginal cultural heritage in the Study Area is likely due to the fill overlying the natural ground surface and the ground disturbance to which the Study Area has been subject.

Conclusions of the Site Inspection

A summary of the results of the site inspection, in consideration of the results of the desktop assessment has indicated that:

• A brief site inspection of the Study Area was undertaken by Heritage Advisor John th Young on 30 January, 2019; 1987 ACT • The site inspection was limited in its effectiveness by fill deposits overlying the natural ground surface; SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING • Evidence of ground disturbance observableavailable during the site inspection was as PLANNING made follows: HEPBURN is of enablingas review documentpurpose and under o unnatural topographyThis charactsoleerised by dips and hollows;1987 the process Act o elevation above thefor properties to the north and south (but at the same level as considerationplanning those to the east andits west); a Environment used of & be o construction of stormwaterpart pipeline; not o construction of track thatPlanning runs west -eastmust through Studymay Area (see Figure 3); and the which o underground service in the road reserve of both East Street and Mink Street. documentpurpose copyright. The any for any • No remnant native vegetation remainsbreak in the Study Area;

• The Study Area is sparsely grassed with red-brown clay loams visible on the ground surface; ground surface visibility throughout the Study Area was generally good and was estimated at 50-70%;

• No areas of potential archaeological sensitivity were identified in the Study Area during the site inspection;

• No Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places (ACHPs) were identified within the Study Area during the site inspection; and

• It is considered unlikely that Aboriginal cultural heritage will be located in the Study Area.

as the Study Area is elevated above both Mink Street and the property to the south. 1987 ACT An inspection of the exposed stratigraphic section on the southern boundary of the Study Area did not show a clear transition between fillSCHEME and natur al soils and neither did the foundations that had been excavated& ENVIRONMENT across the road and were subject inspection (see PLANNING Plates 7-8). The results of the geotechnical assessmentavailable state that the silty clays underling PLANNING made the fill deposits andHEPBURN overlying clays areis typicalof ofenabling the area’sas geology; however, no comment is made as to whether these deposits are truncated or have been subject to documentpurpose reviewunder disturbance. That said,This there wassole no prior grassand la yer, humic soil,1987 or ‘topsoils’ visible in the Act the sections with the stratigraphicfor section preseprocessnting as a homogenous red-brown silty clay. This supports John Comelliconsideration’s assertionplanning that the topsoil had been scraped off the its a Environment used natural ground surface to lay a rockof hardstand& for the Daylesfordbe Timber Yard. part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break

Plate 1: 1987 View of ACT Study Area facing south SCHEME from Mink & ENVIRONMENT Street. (J. PLANNING available PLANNING made Young HEPBURN is of enablingas 30/01/2018) documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Plate 2: break View of Study Area facing northwest from southeaster n corner of Study Area (J. Young 30/01/2018)

Plate 3: 1987 View of ACT Study Area facing west SCHEME showing & ENVIRONMENT deep cut PLANNING available PLANNING made along HEPBURN is of enablingas southern documentpurpose reviewunder boundary of This sole and 1987 the Act Study Area for process (J. Young considerationplanning its a Environment used 30/01/2018) of & be part not Planning may the must which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any break Plate 4: View of Study Area facing north from southern boundary of Study Area (J. Young 30/01/2018)

Plate 5: 1987 View of ACT exposed ground SCHEME surface in & ENVIRONMENT the Study PLANNING available PLANNING made Area (J. HEPBURN is of enablingas Young documentpurpose reviewunder 30/01/2018) This sole and 1987 the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be part not Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Plate 6: break View of track running west to east across the Study Area (J. Young 30/01/2018)

Plate 7: 1987 View of ACT exposed stratigraphi SCHEME c section & ENVIRONMENT along the PLANNING available PLANNING made southern HEPBURN is of enablingas boundary of documentpurpose reviewunder the Study This sole and 1987 the Act Area facing for process east (J. considerationplanning its a Environment used Young of & be part not 30/01/2018) Planning must may the which documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Plate 8: break View of open foundation excavations on property across the road showing fill, overlying silty clay, overlying rock (J. Young 30/01/2018) Table 2: Study Area: Photos of the Existing Conditions.

5.0 Recommendations 1987 A Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) isACT required under Section 47 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 if any high impact activity is planned in a statutory area of SCHEME cultural heritage sensitivity. ENVIRONMENT & PLANNING available A mandatory CHMP is required as the following conditions have been triggered under the PLANNING made enabling Aboriginal Heritage AmendmentHEPBURN Regulations is 2018of (Division as1, R.7); documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 a) all or part of the Study Areathe for the activityprocess is within Act an area of cultural heritage sensitivity and; for considerationplanning b) all or part of the activity itsis a higha impact Environmentactivity used of & be part not Planning must may The Study Area is locatedthe within a statutory area which of cultural heritage sensitivity in accordance with R.37 ‘Volcanic cones of western Victoria’ – the volcanic cones of western documentpurpose copyright. Victoria are areas of cultural heritageThe sensitivity.any for any break The proposed activity is a high impact activity in accordance with R.46 ‘Buildings and works for specified uses’ - the construction of a building or the construction or carrying out of works on land is a high impact activity if the construction of the building or the construction or carrying out of the works— a) would result in significant ground disturbance; and b) is for, or associated with, the use of the land for any one or more of the following purposes— (xxix) a warehouse

Bibliography 1987 ACT Websites SCHEME www.land.vic.gov.au (Planning& SchemesENVIRONMENT Online) www.dse.vic.gov.au (DepartmentPLANNING of Sustainability available and Environment – Interactive Biodiversity Maps)PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas www.dpi.vic.gov.au (Department of Primary Industries –GeoVic Online Maps) documentpurpose reviewunder www.heritage.gov.au/ahpi/indThis ex.htmlsole (Australianand Heritage Places1987 Inventory) the Act http://www.wombatforestcare.org.au/index.phpfor process?page=Valley_Grassy_Forest https://www.victorianplaces.com.au/consideration (Victorian Places) its a planning of & Environment used part be Published Works not Planning must may the which Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 break

Aboriginal Affairs Victoria 2007a Guide to Preparing Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessments.

Barwick, D.E. 1984 ‘Mapping the Past: an Atlas of Victorian Clans 1835-1904. Part 1.’ Aboriginal History: 1-2.

Bride, T.F., 1983. Letters from Victorian Pioneers, Lloyd O’Neil Pty. Ltd., Melbourne.

Gott, B. 2005 Aboriginal fire management in south-eastern Australia: aims and frequency. Journal of Biogeography 32:1203–1208.

Head, L. 1988 Holocene vegetation, fire and environmental history of the Discovery Bay region, south- western Victoria. Australian Journal of Ecology 13: 21–49.

Howitt, A.W. 1904 The Native Tribes of South-East Australia. McMillan, London.

Howitt, A.W. & L. Fison 1900 ‘The Aborigines of Victoria;’ in W.B. Spencer (ed) Handbook of Melbourne. Ford: Melbourne pp.45-55.

LCC 1991

The Melbourne Area District 2. Land Conservation Council: Melbourne.

1987 McBride, T.F. 1898 ACT Letters from Victorian Pioneers. Reprinted in1983 by Lloyd. (O’Neil Pty Ltd., South Yarra, Melbourne) pp. 89–90 (Robert Jamieson 9 AugustSCHEME 1853. pp. 89–90). & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING Menkhorst, P.W. (ed.) 1995. available PLANNING made Mammals of Victoria.HEPBURN (Oxford University Press,is Melbourne)of enabling as

documentpurpose reviewunder Miller, J.B., K.W. James Thisand P.M.A. sole Maggiore 1993and 1987 the Act Tables of Composition of Australianfor Aboriginal Fooprocessds. Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra. considerationplanning its a Environment used Mooney, S.D., Radford, K.L. & Hancock,of G& 2001 be part not Clues to the ‘burning question’:Planning pre-European must fire in the Sydneymay coastal region from sedimentary charcoal andthe palynology. Ecological Managementwhich and Restoration 2: 203– 212. documentpurpose copyright. The any for any Munsell Soil Colour Chart 1995 break

Plomley, N.J.B. 1987 Weep In Silence. Blubber Head Press: Hobart.

Spreadborough, R. & H.Anderson. 1983. Victorian Squatters. Red Rooster Press, Ascot Vale.

Sullivan, H. 1981 An Archaeological Survey of the Mornington Peninsula, Victoria. Ministry for Conservation, Victoria.

Appendix 1: Glossary

1987 A ACT Angular fragment: A piece of stone that is blockySCHEME or angular, not flake-like. & ENVIRONMENT Archaeology: The study of the remainsPLANNING of past human available activity. PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas Area of Archaeological Sensitivity: A part of the landscape that contains demonstrated documentpurpose reviewunder occurrences of cultural material.This Thesole precise leveland of sensitivity will1987 depend on the density the Act and significance of the material.for process consideration its a planning Artefact scatter: A surface scatterof of cultural& Environment material. Aboriginal used artefact scatters are part be defined as being the occurrence of five or more items notof cultural material within an area Planning must may of about 100m2 (Aboriginalthe Affairs Victoria 1993). Artefactwhich scatters are often the only physical remains of places where pedocumentople havepurpose livedcopyright. camped, prepared and eaten meals The any and worked. for any break B BP: Before Present. The present is defined as 1950.

Backed blade (geometric microlith): Backing is the process by which one or more margins contain consistent retouch opposite to the sharp working edge. A backed blade is a blade flake that has been abruptly retouched along one or more margins opposite the sharp working edge. Backed pieces include backed blades and geometric microliths. Backed blades are a feature of the Australian Small Tool Tradition dating from between 5,000 and 1,000 years ago in southern Australia (Mulvaney 1975).

Blade: A stone flake that is at least twice as long as it is wide.

Burial: Usually a sub-surface pit containing human remains and sometimes associated artefacts.

C Core: A stone piece from which a flake has been removed by percussion (striking it) or by pressure. It is identified by the presence of flake scars showing the negative attributes of flakes, from where flakes have been removed.

E Ethnography: The scientific description of living cultures. 1987 ACT

Exposure: Refers to the degree to which the sub-SCHEMEsurface of the land can be observed. This may be influenced by natural& processesENVIRONMENT such as wind erosion or the character of the native vegetation, and by land usePLANNING practices, such asavailable ploughing or grading. It is generally expressed in termsPLANNING of the percentage of the madesub-surface visible for an observer on foot. HEPBURN is of enablingas

documentpurpose reviewunder This sole and 1987 F the Act for process Flake: A stone piece removed from a core by percussion (striking it) or by pressure. It is its considerationplanning identified by the presence of a strikingof a platformEnvironment and bulb of percussion,used not usually found & be on a naturally shattered stone.part not Planning must may the which Formal tool: An artefact that has been shaped by flaking, including retouch, or grinding to documentpurpose copyright. The any a predetermined form for use as a tool.for Formal anytools include scrapers, backed pieces and axes. break

G GDA94 or Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994: A system of latitudes and longitudes, or east and north coordinates, centred at the centre of the earth's mass. GDA94 is compatible with modern positioning techniques such as the Global Positioning System (GPS). It supersedes older coordinate systems (AGD66, AGD84). GDA94 is based on a global framework, the IERS Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF), but is fixed to a number of reference points in Australia. GDA94 is the Victorian Government Standard and spatial coordinates for excavations, transects and places in CHMP documents.

H Hearth: an organic sub-surface feature; it indicates a place where Aboriginal people cooked food. The remains of a hearth are usually identifiable by the presence of charcoal and sometimes clay balls (like brick fragments) and hearth stones. Remains of burnt bone or shell are sometimes preserved within a hearth.

Holocene, recent or postglacial period: The time from the end of the Pleistocene Ice Age (c. 10,300 BP) to the present day.

I In situ: A description of any cultural material that lies undisturbed1987 in its original point of ACT deposition. SCHEME & ENVIRONMENT PLANNING available L PLANNING made HEPBURN is enablingas Land System: Description for an area of land basedof on an assessment of a series of review environmental characteristicsdocument includingpurpose geology, geomorphology,under climate, soils and This sole and 1987 vegetation the Act for process considerationplanning its a Environment used of & be M part not Planning must may Midden: Shell middens varythe widely in size compositionwhich and complexity. Deposits vary in complexity, they range from being homogenous to finely stratified deposits. Material documentpurpose copyright. which may be found in middensThe includes any different shell species, stone artefacts, hearths for any and animal bones. break

Q Quarry (stone/ochre source): A place where stone or ochre is exposed and has been extracted by Aboriginal people. The rock types most commonly quarried for artefact manufacture in Victoria include silcrete, quartz, quartzite, chert and fine-grained volcanics such as greenstone.

Quartz: A mineral composed of silica with an irregular fracture pattern. Quartz used in artefact manufacture is generally semi-translucent, although it varies from milky white to glassy. Glassy quartz can be used for conchoidal flaking, but poorer quality material is more commonly used for block fracturing techniques. Quartz can be derived from waterworn pebble, crystalline or vein.

P Pleistocene: The dates for the beginning and end of the Pleistocene generally correspond with the last Ice Age. That is from 3.5 to 1.3 million years ago. The period ends with the gradual retreat of the ice sheets, which reached their present conditions around 10,300 BP.

Pre-contact: Before contact with non-Aboriginal people.

Post-contact: After contact with non-Aboriginal people.

Raw material: Organic or inorganic matter that has not been processed by people.

1987 Registered Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Places: TheseACT are Aboriginal sites registered on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR). SCHEME Regolith: The mantle of unconsolidated& ENVIRONMENT soil/sediments/weathered rock materials forming PLANNING the surface of the land that rests upon the bedrock.available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas documentpurpose reviewunder S This sole and 1987 the Act Scarred trees: Aboriginal derivedfor scars are distinctprocess from naturally occurring scars by their oval or symmetrical shape andconsideration occasionalplanning presence of steel, or more rarely, stone axe its a Environment used marks on the scar's surface. Otherof types &of scarring includebe toeholds cut in the trunks or part not branches of trees for climbingPlanning purposes and removalmust of bark mayto indicate the presence of burials in the area. Generally,the scars occur on River redwhich gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) or grey box (E. microcarpa) trees. Riverdocument red purposegums arecopyright. usually found along the margins of The any rivers, creeks and swamps with greyfor box on nearany and far floodplains. Size and shape of the scar depended on the use for whichbreak the bark was intended. For example, bark was used for a variety of dishes and containers, shields, canoes and construction of huts.

Significance: The importance of a heritage place or place for aesthetic, historic, scientific or social values for past, present or future generations.

Silcrete: Soil, clay or sand sediments that have silicified under basalt through groundwater percolation. It ranges in texture from very fine grained to coarse grained. At one extreme it is cryptocrystalline with very few clasts. It generally has characteristic yellow streaks of titanium oxide that occur within a grey and less commonly reddish background. Used for flaked stone artefacts.

Spit: Refers to an arbitrarily defined strata of soil removed during excavation.

Stratification: The way in which soil forms in layers.

Stratified deposit: Material that has been laid down, over time, in distinguishable layers.

Stratigraphy: The study of soil stratification (layers) and deposition.

Stone Artefact: A piece of stone that has been formed by Aboriginal people to be used as a tool or is a by-product of Aboriginal stone tool manufacturing activities. Stone artefacts can be flaked such as points and scrapers or ground such as axes and grinding stones.

T Tool: A stone flake that has undergone secondary flaking or retouch.

Transect: A fixed path along which one excavates or records archaeological remains. 1987 ACT V SCHEME Victorian Aboriginal Heritage &Register ENVIRONMENT: A list of all registered Aboriginal cultural heritage places (Aboriginal Places) in Victoria.PLANNING available PLANNING made HEPBURN is of enablingas Visibility: Refers to the degree to which the surface of the ground can be observed. This documentpurpose reviewunder may be influenced by naturalThis processessole suchand as wind erosion1987 or the character of the the Act native vegetation, and byfor land use practices, suchprocess as ploughing or grading. It is generally expressed in terms of the percentagconsiderationeplanning of the ground surface visible for an observer on its a Environment used foot. of & be part not Planning may the must REFERENCES which documentpurpose copyright. The any Aboriginal Affairs Victoria 1997 Guidelinesfor for Conductingany and Reporting upon Archaeological Surveys in Victoria. AAV, Melbourne. break

Mulvaney, DJ 1975 The Prehistory of Australia. Harmondsworth, Penguin.

Holdaway, S & N Stern 2004 A Record in Stone: the Study of Australia’s Flaked Stone Artefacts. Museum Victoria and Aboriginal Studies Press, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Canberra.