Planning and Environment Act 1987

Advisory Committee Report South Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Sand Quarry

17 July 2020

Planning and Environment Act 1987 Advisory Committee Report pursuant to s151 of the Act Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Nyora Sand Quarry 17 July 2020

Trevor McCullough, Chair Trevor Blake, Member

South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Contents Page 1 Overview ...... 1 2 Introduction ...... 3 3 Site and planning context ...... 7 3.1 The subject land ...... 7 3.2 Planning policy framework (PPF) ...... 7 4 The issues ...... 9 4.1 Amenity and other issues raised in submission ...... 9 4.2 Referral responses ...... 15 4.3 Response to Committee directions ...... 18 5 Reasons and recommendation ...... 22

Appendix A Terms of Reference Appendix B Letter of referral Appendix C Consultation and parties Appendix D Document list Appendix E Committee preferred version of amended Planning Permit no. 2001/83/A

List of Tables Page Table 1 Planning permits applying to area of WA157 ...... 5 Table 2 Existing and proposed controls ...... 8

List of Figures Page Figure 1 Metro Quarry land holdings at Nyora ...... 4 Figure 2 Subject land ...... 7 Figure 3 Proposed bund referred to in Condition 25 ...... 14

South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Glossary and abbreviations

the Act Planning and Environment Act 1987 Council Council DEDJTR Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources DELWP Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning DJPR Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions (successor of DEDJTR) LPPF Local Planning Policy Framework MR Act Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 MQG Metro Quarry Group (Permit applicant) PPF Planning Policy Framework the Committee Nyora Sand Quarry Advisory Committee VCAT Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal VPP Planning Provisions

South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

1 Overview

(i) Referral summary

Referral summary Committee name Nyora Sand Quarry Advisory Committee Date of referral 11 May 2020 (see Appendix B) Members Trevor McCullough (Chair), Trevor Blake Description of referral Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A issued under the South Gippsland Planning Scheme for the land to be used and developed for an extractive industry and removal of native vegetation, in accordance with the endorsed plans. (VCAT P427/2020) Common name Nyora Sand Quarry Municipality South Gippsland Shire Responsible Authority South Gippsland Shire Council Subject land 80 and 120 Hookers Road, Nyora. Known as Lot 4 LP127417 and Lot 3 LP127417 Site inspection Not required Submissions One objection was received on behalf of Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber Consultation The application was notified to the adjoining landowners The application was referred to the following Authorities: • DELWP • Country Fire Authority • DELWP – Heritage Victoria • Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions • VicRoads. Parties Applicant: HWL Ebsworth Lawyers for Metro Quarry Group Applicant for review: DWF () for Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber Information relied upon A Directions Hearing was held on 3 June 2020. No hearings were conducted. The Committee has relied on written submissions only. See document list Appendix D. Date of this report 17 July 2020

Page 1 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

(ii) Findings The Committee finds: • Council has provided an appropriate response to the amenity and other issues raised in the initial objection and the ‘statement of grounds’ • The proposed changed planning permit conditions in the 20 February 2020 Notice of Decision are supported, along with the further changes to Conditions 18 and 19; new Condition 25 as agreed between the parties; and new Condition 30 as proposed by DJPR • Appropriate referrals of the application to amend the planning permit have occurred, having regard to the prior referral of the application to vary the work plan for Work Authority 157 under the Mineral Resources Act (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 (MR Act) • The proposal is consistent with the objective of Clause 14.03-1S and the purpose of Clause 52.09 for extractive industry in the South Gippsland Planning Scheme • While the proposal is exempt from the need for a planning permit for removal of native vegetation, in accordance with Clause 52.17-7 of the South Gippsland Planning Scheme, the proposed Condition 8 provides an appropriate alignment with the related conditions of the endorsed work plan variation • The proposed conditions for the amended permit provide a commensurate response to the relevant objectives, decision guidelines and other provisions of the South Gippsland Planning Scheme, having regard to the provisions and conditions of the endorsed work plan variation under the MR Act.

(iii) Recommendation The Committee recommends that the Minister for Planning recommend to the Governor in Council that South Gippsland Planning Scheme Planning Permit 2001/83/A be amended as shown in Appendix E of this report.

Page 2 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

2 Introduction

(i) The application The application seeks the approval to use land known as Lot 3 PS127417 located at 80 Hookers Road, Nyora, as part of an Extractive Industry and the removal of Native Vegetation from Lot 4 PS127417 at 120 Hookers Road, Nyora. Specifically, the application seeks to amend the permit by the: • Inclusion of Lot 3 PS127417, 80 Hookers Road Nyora to form part of the permit • Replacement of endorsed plans to include the additional area • Deletion of Condition 3 – Trust for Nature Requirement • Deletion of Condition 4 – fencing requirement as per Condition 3 • Amendment of Condition 8 – Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) requirements for Native vegetation removal • Amendment of Condition 17 – increase hours of operation for sand washing (6.00 am- 11.00pm to 24 hours) and increase the amount of sand washing per day from 4,000 tons to 10,000 tons (VCAT Condition P1653/2001).

(ii) Terms of Reference The Nyora Sand Quarry Advisory Committee (the Committee) was appointed by the Minister for Planning on 11 May 2020. The purpose of the Committee is set out in its Terms of Reference (Appendix A) to: … provide all parties to the current VCAT proceeding an opportunity to present submissions and evidence and to provide advice to the Minister for Planning on the planning merits of the proposed development, including whether an amended planning permit should be issued and, if so, the appropriate conditions for the permit. The Committee was provided with a letter of referral from the Minister for Planning dated 11 May 2020 (Appendix B) which noted that: … the proceeding raises a major issue of policy, and its determination may have a substantial effect on the achievement or development of planning objectives for the following reason: • The proceeding raises several important considerations in the Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework of the South Gippsland Planning Scheme in the balancing of extractive industry impacts and economic, environmental and amenity policies. The Minister gave notice, under Clause 58(2)(a) of Schedule 1 to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 of his decision to call in the proceeding and request that the proceeding be referred to the Governor in Council for determination. The Terms of Reference require the Committee to: • Provide all parties to the VCAT proceedings the opportunity to be heard • Prepare a report to the Minister for Planning including: - An assessment of all relevant matters relating to the application for review and any amended application material submitted to the Committee - An assessment of submissions to the Committee - A recommendation whether an amendment to the planning permit should be granted or refused, and the reasons for its recommendation

Page 3 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

- A draft amended planning permit including conditions from section 55 referral authorities (if relevant) - Any other relevant matters raised during the Committee hearing - A list of persons consulted or heard.

(iii) Background to the proposal The Nyora Sand Quarry is established (currently) over Lot 5 LP127417 and Lot 4 LP127417 and is proposed to extend into Lot 3 LP127417 (see Figure 1). The three lots are included within the one Work Authority WA157 under the MR Act for which the work plan is being varied. Figure 1 Metro Quarry land holdings at Nyora

The original permit approved "The land to be used and developed for an Extractive Industry and Removal of Native Vegetation". The planning permit allowed the development to occur on Lot 4 LP127417. The planning permit was granted on 23 July 2002. The permit allowed the development/use to start within two years of the date of the permit. The use has not ceased since commencement of works (no date provided). The quarry has been established over Lot 5 LP127417 and Lot 4 LP127417 under Work Authority WA157. There is a separate Work Authority within the Quarry’s operations located on the western side of Hookers Road being Lot 1 LP123356. The Quarry operator owns all land that has access to Hookers Road. The activities authorised under WA157 are also subject to several planning permits as shown in Table 1.

Page 4 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Table 1 Planning permits applying to area of WA157

Permit No. Description Required changes to permits

1998/1113 Development of land for No changes to the permit required – (also known as Extractive Industry solely deals with Lot 5 LP127417 TPA 1113)

TPA1657 Vehicular access to a RDZ1 No impact

2001/83 Use and development for Subject application – Lot 4 LP127417 is Extractive Industry and removal the land tied to the permit of native vegetation

2004/233 Native vegetation removal Applicable to Lot 4 LP127417 Condition 2.3B of the endorsed Work Plan Variation sets amended offset requirements

The application to amend Permit 2001/83/A was received by Council on 9 September 2019. Council determined the application under delegation and issued a Notice of Decision to Amend a Planning Permit on 20 February 2020. An application for review was submitted to VCAT on 16 March 2020 by representatives of Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber. The planning permit applicants requested the Minister to call in the VCAT proceeding on 17 April 2020.

(iv) Consultation Council advised that the application was notified to the adjoining landowners and one objection was received on behalf of Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber (adjoining property owner). The Committee wrote to all parties on 19 May 2020 advising of its’ appointment and the intention to hold a hearing to hear submissions from all parties. A Directions Hearing was held on 3 June 2020. The Committee requested the permit applicant and the applicant for review to meet to discuss the matters in dispute. On 29 June 2020 the parties advised that an agreement had been reached and provided the Committee with Minutes of Consent signed by the permit applicant, the applicant for review and South Gippsland Shire Council. The agreement included agreed amended planning permit conditions which addressed, among other things, agreed acoustic conditions. The agreement is discussed in section 4.1 of this report. The application was referred to relevant referral Authorities as discussed in section 4.2 of this report. In view of the agreement reached between the parties, the Committee determined that a Hearing and site visit were not required. The Committee nevertheless invited further written submission and received responses from: • Council (Part A submission – Document 40)

Page 5 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

• HWL Ebsworth on behalf of the permit applicant Metro Quarry Group (MQG) (Documents 33 to 39) and • DWL lawyers on behalf of the applicant for review (Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber) (Documents 29 and 30). Council also forwarded responses to further referrals (Documents 31 and 32). The Committee has relied upon these documents and earlier documents circulated as part of the permit amendment application process as listed in Appendix D.

Page 6 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

3 Site and planning context

3.1 The subject land

The land is located along Hookers Road, which is on the western point of the South Gippsland Shire Council approximately 1.1 kilometres from the boundary with Cardinia Shire. To the south of South Gippsland is the Council. To the south west of the site is the Lang Lang Golf Course. All land along Hookers Road is owned by MQG. To the north is Crown Land known as the Adams Creek Nature Conservation Reserve. Further north is the old railway land and another extractive industry site. Land to the east is small farming allotments predominantly used for rural residential purposes in which the objector’s property is located. Figure 2 Subject land

3.2 Planning policy framework (PPF)

(i) State policy The following sections of the PPF are relevant: Clause 14.03-1S: Resource Exploration and Extraction The objective of Clause 14.03-1S is to encourage exploration and extraction of natural resources in accordance with acceptable environmental standards. The permit applicant submitted that the proposal meets and furthers the objective of this clause as it seeks to facilitate further sand extraction at the Nyora Quarry in accordance with the applicable environmental standards such as the Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria Guidelines (EPA Publication 1411) and the applicable native vegetation requirements.

Page 7 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

The permit applicant further submitted that the proposal is consistent with the MR Act and seeks to align the planning permit with the Work Plan for WA157. Clause 52.09: Extractive Industry and Extractive Industry Interest Areas The purposes of this Clause are to ensure that: • the use and development of land for extractive industry does not adversely affect the environment or amenity of the area during or after excavation • excavated areas can be appropriately rehabilitated • stone resources are protected from inappropriate use and development. This clause applies to the Proposal as the Proposal seeks to utilise Lot 3 on Lot Plan 127417 for extractive industries. The permit applicant addressed the Decision Guidelines of Clause 52.09 in detail and that is discussed in section 4.3 of this report. Clause 52.17-7: Native Vegetation The purpose of Clause 52.17 is to ensure that there is no net loss of biodiversity as a result of the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation. The applicability of this clause is discussed in section 4.2 of this report. Clause 66.02-8: Use and Development Referrals Clause 66.02 sets out the use and development referrals in the Scheme. Clause 66.02-8 applies to extractive industries and sets out the relevant referral requirements. Referrals are discussed in section 4.2 of this report.

(ii) Joint Ministerial Statement Extractive Resources The subject site is listed in the Joint Ministerial Statement (August 2018) as a ‘Hot list’ quarry to be given priority planning “with the goal of halving current approval times”.

(iii) Zones and overlays

Table 2 Existing and proposed controls Existing controls Proposed controls

Bushfire Management No change Overlay (BMO)

Farming Zone (FZ) No change

Page 8 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

4 The issues

The Committee’s Terms of Reference require the Committee to provide an assessment of all relevant matters relating to the application for review and any amended application material submitted to the Committee and an assessment of submissions to the Committee. The issues to be addressed are: • Amenity and other issues raised in the submission (and the agreed position between the permit applicant, the applicant for review and Council) • Referral responses • Response to Committee directions.

4.1 Amenity and other issues raised in submission The issues are: • How has Council responded to issues raised in the submission? • What is the agreed position between the permit applicant and the applicant for review?

(i) Council response Issues raised in initial submission The Council officer delegate report summarised the issues raised in the objector’s initial submission as follows: • Increased noise pollution • The effect of weather conditions on the noise source • The removal of the vegetation on the site will increase the amount of noise pollution • Request a noise barrier between the objector's property and the eastern edge of the quarry • Increase in dust emissions • Impact on fauna • Property valuation and view to Westernport Bay. The Committee believes that it is important to record Council’s response to the issues raised because Council’s response was reflected in the permit conditions in its Notice of Decision issued on 20 February 2020. Council response to initial submission Council responded as follows: Sand Washing Facility VCAT imposed the condition for the limited hours of operation for the sand washing facility as there was a perceived impact on the amenity of the surrounding area. The current hours of operation for the sand washing facility are 6:00 am-11:00 pm and are proposed to be 24 hours. The submitted noise report was undertaken from the adjoining property to the east (not the objector see Photo 1 for the location) The requirement of the planning permit application is to ascertain material determent and ensure that that the amenity is not placed under further detriment. The noise report submitted with the application does not adequate address how the proposed changes will affect the noise levels with the proposed expansion and the vegetation removal. Further

Page 9 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020 testing and changes to the permit will be required as a new permit condition is the amendment is approved. A new condition should be included on any amendment issued: "Within 3 months of works occurring on Lot 3 PS127417 a noise report must be submitted to demonstrate that operations on the land do not exceed the Background Noise Level of 36dBa. If the site does not comply with the noise requirement measures to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be undertaken to ensure compliance with the 36dBa requirement." The additional Noise Report will inform Council if the removal of the Vegetation from the centre of the site impacts the amenity of the land to the east. Additionally, the Sand Washing Facility is mobile and the noise reports have been undertaken with a fixed point. It would be recommended that if the amendment is supported that the washing facility be fixed to the location as shown as "Processing Plant" on the submitted Work Plan. A new condition would be required which limits the location of the Sand Washing Facility: "The sand washing facility must not be moved from its current location {Processing Plant) without further approval of the Responsible Authority". Vegetation removal The vegetation that is being removed as part of the subject application is the Southern buffer vegetation and a remnant patch (see Photo 1). The vegetation between the quarry and the objector's property will remain, this vegetation is part of a Crown Land Reserve. As part of the work plan the applicant is providing a vegetation buffer between the quarry and the neighbouring property to the east (not the objector's property). At the widest point the vegetation will be approximately 390m and at the narrowest section approximately 130m (see Photo 2). New buffer planting at a proposed width of 20m will run along the southern and eastern boundary of "Lot 3" which is being introduced into the Work Plan. A condition on any amended permit should include timing for the planting on the eastern corner of the site prior the works commencing on Lot 3. While this will not completely mitigate the issues raised by the objector it will set realistic timeframes for the buffer to be established. The proposed wording should state: "Prior to the commencement of works on Lot 3 PS127417 planting of the south eastern vegetation buffer must be undertaken. Planting along the common boundary with 123 Raftis Road Nyora must include mature trees and under storey vegetation to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority." The vegetation located between the objector's property and the quarry will remain as this vegetation lies on Crown Land. The proposed vegetation for removal is located in the centre of the quarry see Photo 1. A Trust for Nature covenant was required with the original Planning Permit. However, the agreement was not entered into as per the planning permit requirements. The question now is keeping the vegetation patch viable with the surrounding land being mined. The sand resource that lies under the patch of vegetation is highly valued. Clause 14.03-1S encourages the exploration and extraction of natural resources with acceptable environmental standards. These standards are being applied through the Work Plan and the Rehabilitation Plan. Other Points of objection Impact on flora and fauna, property values and blocked views: • Impacts on Flora and Fauna have been considered under the work plan. There is a significant amount of vegetation that surrounds the quarry that the fauna can be relocated to. As part of the requirements of DELWP there must be a detailed assessment of the vegetation within the patch and seed colleting to ensure the flora in the area can be re-established through the rehabilitation plan. • Unsubstantiated claims of loss of property values are not a planning consideration and are subjective.

Page 10 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

• The land is not within a Significant Views area, there are no planning provisions on the land that protect the view. When looking at aerial photography there are no direct views from the objectors dwelling into the existing quarry or Lot 3 which the quarry is extending into. Issues raised in the statement of grounds The statement of grounds submitted to VCAT with the Application for Review cover additional concerns which are not addressed within the Council officer delegate report: a. The proposed amendment to the planning permit will result in unreasonably off-site amenity impacts. b. The proposed expansion of the quarry is contrary to the purpose and decision guidelines of the Farming Zone. c. The proposed amendment will give rise to unreasonable amenity outcomes and constitutes an overdevelopment of the land. d. The amendments are contrary to the proper and orderly planning of the area. e. The proposed amendment is not consistent with policy guidance in the PPF and LPPF in respect to the use and development of land in the Farming Zone. f. The Council has sought to include conditions on the permit, including a requirement that the proposal be designed to ensure it does not exceed an acoustic output of 36 dBA. g. It is unclear if these requirements can be met by the proposal and if so whether compliance with this condition warrants further changes, which would otherwise trigger the need for planning permission for further works. Council response to issues in the statement of grounds a) Unreasonable off-site amenity impacts In response to the offsite amenity impacts Council has required additional vegetation requirements within the proposed buffer area located between along that common boundary of the quarry and the residents to the east. Additionally, clarification for annual noise reports and additional noise reports following the removal of vegetation that currently control some noise now have been required. The amenity issues raised in the initial submission related to noise in addition to impacts on native fauna in the area. The removal of the vegetation was assessed under the provisions of the work plan variation that was subject to a VCAT appeal prior to the endorsement of the Work Plan under the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990. Council is satisfied that suitable mitigation can be achieved, without further permit changes, if there is an increase in noise levels as a result in the removal of vegetation. This is further discussed at point 53. b) Decision Guidelines of the Farming Zone The use is considered appropriate and is compatible with the adjoining land uses subject to the conditions within the existing permit and the applicable Work Authority. The expansion of the use into Lot 3 is considered appropriate. The expansion allows for the extraction of a resource that is supported by both the PPF and the LPPF as an identified sand resource area. The extent of the extractive industry operations area in accordance with the requirements of Clause 52.09 for Extractive Industry and Extractive Industry Interest Areas which the application was assessed against. The Decision Guidelines of Clause 52.09 for Extractive Industry and Extractive Industry Interest Areas are applicable in this application. The provisions of the WA157 addressed the requirements for Native Vegetation removal that had direct impact on existing conditions within Permit 2001/83 these matters were addressed in the Officer’s Delegations report. Groundwater and water quality were addressed under the consideration of the WA157 through referrals undertaken as part of the Work Plan variation.

Page 11 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020 c) Unreasonable amenity outcomes and overdevelopment of the site The impacts of the operation both within the work authority area and on the surrounding area will be monitored to measure their compliance with the applicable standards. Requirements for compliance are covered within the Work Authority and the Proposed amended Permit. The extent of the operations is controlled via the requirements of Clause 52.09 and the Work Authority. These require that the natural condition of land within 20 metres of the boundary of the land not to be altered. In the subject application the common boundary of to the east of the subject site (the operators own the land to the south) will also form a screening vegetation buffer area in excess of the 20 metre requirement. The 20 metre requirement is complied with along the common boundary to the south and to the west along Hookers Road. The proposed extent of the extraction area is considered appropriate and in line with the identified areas of the sand resource and the appropriate buffer areas apply. The land is also subject to redevelopment once the extraction of the resource is completed. d) Proper and orderly planning The proposal is to extend the sand extraction operation into Lot 3 127417 that is currently being conducted on Lots 4 and 5 and treat the three lots as one single operation this is important in when making provision for buffers and screening. The current operation is being screened by the abutting crown land to the west, north and east of the existing operations. Additionally, the vegetation that forms part of the boundary between Lots 3 and 4 is currently acting as a screen to the operations in which the proposal includes the removal this vegetation. The existing requirements for buffers and bund walls form part of the WA157 for the operations on Lots 4 and 5 and will continue onto Lot 3. As part of the consent orders sent on the 29 June 2020 the increase to the height of the bund wall on the eastern side of Lot 3 and the vegetating of this are will reduce the impact of the extended extraction area. The expansion of the operation into land that is within contiguous ownership is considered proper and orderly planning. The application allows for the consideration of the Work Authority that currently applies. Additionally, the land has been identified as an important sand resource in the area and is amongst other land holdings and mining operations. This part of Nyora is also highlighted in the “Extractive Resources in Victoria Demand and Supply Study, 2015- 2050” undertaken by the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions and now forms part of the Strategic Extractive Resource Areas Pilot Project. e) PPF and LPPF The application is consistent with State Planning Policy Framework (PPF) in particular Clause 14.03-1S for Resource exploration and extraction. The submitted plans clearly indicate an appropriate buffer area set to protect the amenity of the surrounding area. Additional permit changes proposed within the Notice of Decision to Amend include additional planting requirements for the protection of amenity. The Clause further states that these resources need to be protected to allow for extraction. The Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) at Clause 21.05-6 Objective 1 for Extractive industry promotes sand extraction, quarry and mining activities that do not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. The endorsement of WA157 has considered the environmental impacts of the proposal. Clause 21.05-5 highlights that the “South Gippsland Shire is well placed to strengthen and build upon existing resources … in relation to extractive industry”. The application to amend the permit to allow the natural expansion of the extractive industry in the abutting land is clearly supported by both the PPF and LPPF.

Page 12 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

f) Acoustic output As part of the application documents the Applicant submitted a report undertaken by Statewide Air and Noise dated 17 April 2019. The report stated that the plant noise emissions from the nearest residence at 1.6km was 34dB(A), conducted at 140 Raftis Road, Nyora. The applicable night time level is 36dBa, in accordance with the details provided within the report. The condition introduced by Council was to ensure that the Noise level will not be increased as a result of the vegetation proposed to be removed as part of the application. Council also clarified condition 18 for the undertaking on an annual noise testing to ensure ongoing compliance with the new condition. There were no conditions within the permit that set a level or industry standard of what the acceptable level will be. Council is agreeable to the condition to be amended to levels in accordance with the Environment Protection Authority Victoria Publication 1411 “Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria”. The condition is currently based on the Night (10.00pm to 7.00am) level which the sand washing facility is seeking to operate in as part of the amendment. g) Further changes Once WA157 is approved any minor variation that may be required to ensure compliance with the noise requirements may be able to be undertaken under Secondary Consent from Council. Provision for this type of minor alteration is in accordance with Section 2.5 of “Preparation of Work Plans and Work Plan Variations”. The document highlights that provided that there are “No new risks, and existing risks are categorised as low or medium” a work plan vitiation is not required. This provision can allow for minor plan changes to ensure compliance with the permit conditions under the tests when assessing a Secondary Consent.

(ii) Agreed position The Committee requested the permit applicant and the applicant for review meet to discuss the matters in dispute. On 29 June 2020 the parties advised that an agreement had been reached and provided the Committee with a copy of the agreement in the form of a ‘Minutes of Consent Order’ signed by the permit applicant, the applicant for review and South Gippsland Shire Council, which included proposed amended planning permit conditions. The Minutes of Consent Order stated as follows: 1. Proceeding No. P427/2020 is resolved by consent. 2. The Parties consent to the Advisory Committee making the following recommendation to the Minister for Planning: a. that Planning Permit 2001/83 be amended to include Lot 3 on Lot Plan 127417; and b. that the Responsible Authority is directed to issue Planning Permit 2001/83/A in accordance with the planning permit conditions at Attachment 1 of these Minutes of Consent Order for land at Lots 3 and 4 on Lot Plan 127417. 3. The hearing listed for 16 July 2020 is vacated. 4. No order as to costs. Consent Orders are legal documents issued by VCAT to confirm an agreement between the parties. A final consent order would ordinarily end a matter in VCAT without the need for VCAT to make a decision about the merits of the case. In this case Committee’s Terms of Reference require the Committee to provide an assessment of all relevant matters relating to the application for review and any amended application material submitted to the Committee and an assessment of submissions to the Committee, regardless of the legal status of the Consent Orders.

Page 13 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

(iii) Proposed changes to permit conditions to reflect agreement The agreement between the parties adopted the proposed permit conditions in the 20 February 2020 Notice of Decision as a starting point and proposed the following further changes to address the applicant for review’s concerns: • Changes to Condition 18 to more precisely define noise monitoring and refer to affected dwellings. • Update Conditions 18 and 19 to refer to current applicable noise standards. • New Condition 25 to require the building of an earth bund on the south-east corner of the site to address noise and visual amenity impacts to adjoining properties. Condition 25 refers to a design drawing for the proposed bund. This is shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 Proposed bund referred to in Condition 25

The proposed permit conditions attached to the Minutes of Consent Order are reproduced as Appendix E to this report. The conditions include a number of other changes in response to referral authorities as discussed in section 4.2 of this report.

(iv) Discussion The Committee notes Council’s response to the initial objection and the statement of grounds. Council’s response to each issue is reasonable and the Committee supports the proposed amended permit conditions set out in the 20 February 2020 Notice of Decision. In particular, the Committee supports Council’s reasons for supporting the 24 hour operation of the sand washing facility subject to the addition of the condition that: “The sand washing facility must not be moved from its current location {Processing Plant) without further approval of the Responsible Authority.”

Page 14 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

The Committee notes that the conditions have been further amended as shown in Appendix E to reflect the agreement between the parties. The Committee commends the parties for working to reach agreement on the amenity issues. The proposed approach to more specific noise monitoring as referred to in Conditions 18 and 19 is supported. The Committee is not in a position to comment on how the proposed bund (Condition 25) will contribute to ameliorating noise and amenity issues but trusts that the parties have done their own work on the positioning and design of the bund to achieve the best outcome.

(v) Findings The Committee finds: • Council has provided an appropriate response to the amenity and other issues raised in the initial objection and the ‘statement of grounds’ • The proposed changed planning permit conditions in the 20 February 2020 Notice of Decision are generally supported, subject to the further comments of the Committee in the following sections of this report • Amended Conditions 18 and 19 (noise monitoring) as agreed between the parties are supported • New Condition 25 (requirement to build bund) as agreed between the parties is supported.

4.2 Referral responses The issue is: • What responses have been received from referral authorities and how have these been addressed in permit conditions?

(i) Referral responses Prior referral and endorsement of work plan variation The proposed expansion of the Nyora Sand Quarry is subject to approval of both a variation to the current work plan under the MR Act and an amendment of the existing Planning Permit 2001/83 under the South Gippsland Planning Scheme. These two approval regimes each recognise the scope and process for the other, with the planning permit process – including requirements for referrals – being modified in light of the work plan process. The first stage of approval of the work plan variation has already occurred with its statutory endorsement under Part 6B of the MR Act. It was endorsed by the delegate for the Secretary for the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources (DEDJTR) on 20 June 2018, following its referral to DELWP. Final approval of the work plan variation cannot occur until the required planning consent is granted. The response of a referral authority to a work plan or variation under section 77TE of the MR Act has a mandatory effect (equivalent to that of a determining referral authority). The conditions set by DELWP were therefore required to be adopted for the endorsement decision. This decision on the work plan variation was, however, subject to review by VCAT at the request of the permit applicant, Metro Quarry Group (MQG). A compulsory conference of the parties, comprising MQG, Council, DELWP and DEDJTR, held on 17 December 2018 reached agreement.

Page 15 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

The resulting VCAT Order P1243/2018 directed that the conditions of endorsement of the work plan variation relating to slope stability and native vegetation be amended. An amended endorsement under section 77TD of the MR Act was granted by the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions (DJPR, successor of DEDJTR) on 11 February 2019. Referral of application to amend planning permit MQG subsequently submitted its application to amend the existing Planning Permit 2001/83/A. This application was accompanied, as required under Clause 52.09-2 of the South Gippsland Planning Scheme, by the endorsed work plan variation and associated conditions. Council referred the permit application to DELWP and to the Country Fire Authority in accordance with its reading of the referral provisions of the Planning Scheme and section 55 of the Act. Council relied on clauses 66.02-2 and 66.03 of the Planning Scheme for these referrals. These clauses designate DELWP and the Country Fire Authority as recommending referral authorities. In addition, Council notified VicRoads in accordance with section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. DELWP, the Country Fire Authority and VicRoads all had no objection to the amendment of the planning permit as proposed. The Country Fire Authority noted that the required work plan would address fire risks. DELWP in its response of 9 January 2020 recommended replacing the redundant Condition 3 in the permit - providing for a Trust for Nature Covenant - with a condition corresponding to Condition 2.1(b) of the endorsed work plan variation as directed by VCAT. DELWP also recommended changing Condition 9 of Planning Permit 2001/83/A in relation to specific rehabilitation requirements. DELWP noted that it did not have a previous opportunity (as part of the referral of the work plan variation) to consider the rehabilitation plan component. Clauses 52.09-3 and 66 of the Planning Scheme provide that an application to use or develop land for extractive industry must be referred to referral authorities specified under clause 66 unless a copy of a work plan or variation accompanying the application was given to the referral authority under section 77TE of the MR Act. This exemption applied to DELWP, to which the work plan variation had been referred. As the permit application had not been referred in accordance with clause 66.02-8 to the Secretary for the Department administering the MR Act or the Secretary for the Department administering the Heritage Act 1995, the Committee directed Council to do so. The Committee’s understanding is that the exemption from referrals under clause 52.09-3 of the Planning Scheme did not apply in these cases1. Council made these two referrals as directed. Heritage Victoria, responding to the referral relating to the Heritage Act, did not object to the application. The delegate of DJPR responsible for planning referrals responded that DJPR did not object to the grant of a permit subject to the following condition: The extractive industry hereby approved by this planning permit must not commence until: (a) an Approved Work Plan is issued pursuant to Section 77G of the Mineral Resources Sustainable Development Act (‘the Act’) 1990; (b) and a Work Authority is issued pursuant to 77I of the Act.

1 Planning Practice Note 89 Extractive Industry and Resources (February 2020) states “All applications must be referred to the Secretary to the Department administering the MR Act (who is a determining referral authority)” (page 6).

Page 16 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Council also again referred the application to DELWP in June 2020, under clause 66.02-8. Other than Heritage Victoria’s response, no further response from DELWP was received.

(ii) Proposed permit conditions Following DELWP’s referral response of 9 January 2020, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (on behalf of MQG) wrote to Council on 16 January 2020, noting that the application to expand the quarry proposes to offset the native vegetation loss, rather than undertaking revegetation as contemplated by the original planning permit. HWL Ebsworth noted that Conditions 2.1 to 2.7 of the endorsed work plan variation require a Baseline Report and Offset Report for the native vegetation removal to be submitted to DELWP for its approval (which has been granted). It recommended that Condition 8 of the permit be amended to read: The loss of native vegetation to be offset in accordance with the Baseline Report and Nyora Quarry Offset Report which has been approved by DELWP on 24 July 2019. HWL Ebsworth also advised Council that it was not able to amend Condition 9 of the permit relating to rehabilitation plan, as the applicant had not sought to do so. HWL Ebsworth noted that the rehabilitation plan had received statutory endorsement under the MR Act. It stated that referral of this plan to DELWP at this stage of the permit process is not required. The proposed conditions of the permit as agreed by the parties to the current process on 29 June 2020 include the amended Condition 8 as well as the condition (number 30) specified by DJPR in its referral response.

(iii) Discussion As the removal of native vegetation and offset requirements will be regulated through the approval of the work plan variation under the MR Act, the exemption under clause 52.17-7 from the need for a planning permit for this aspect of the quarry expansion applies. Conditions 2.1 to 2.7 of the statutory endorsement of the work plan variation provide a comprehensive response to the proposed removal of native vegetation. It is anticipated that these conditions will be confirmed in the decision whether to approve the work plan variation, which can follow the planning permit decision. The modified Condition 8 is supported as providing alignment between the conditions for the work plan variation and this aspect of the planning approval for the quarry. The parties to the current process have agreed to this condition.

(iv) Findings The Committee finds: • Appropriate referrals of the application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A have now occurred, having regard to the prior referral of the application to vary the work plan for Work Authority 157 under the MR Act • Condition 8 as agreed by the parties to this process should be applied • Condition 9 should not be amended as detailed requirements for the rehabilitation plan should be confirmed through the final approval decision on the work plan variation under the MR Act • DJPR’s requirement for a condition specifying the need for an approved work plan variation and work authority by must be incorporated in the amended permit.

Page 17 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

4.3 Response to Committee directions The Committee sought further information regarding the coordination of the planning permit with the requirements of the work plan. The Committee issued Direction 12A on 11 June 2020: 12A The parties are invited to provide submissions on the coordination of preferred conditions for the amended planning permit with provisions and conditions of the Work Plan variation (as endorsed by DJPR in February 2019) for Work Authority 157 under the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990. The Committee would find it helpful if these submissions: a) Take account of relevant provisions in the Victoria Planning Provisions (including clauses 14.03-1S, 52.09, 52.17-7 and 66.02-8); b) Address appropriate conditions for the amended planning permit, considering the provisions and conditions of the endorsed Work Plan variation, in relation to: i. native vegetation ii. operational activities iii. environmental performance standards (including applicable standards under the Environment Protection Act 1970) iv. rehabilitation after extractive activities. The issue is: • How have the parties responded to this direction and should any further changes be made to the permit conditions as a result?

(i) Council and Metro Quarry Group responses Council response Council’s response to Direction 12A was incorporated in its Part A Submission to the Committee (Document 40). This response observed that granting of the amended permit is consistent with the objective of Clause 14.03-1S of the Planning Scheme, which is to encourage the extraction of natural resources in accordance with acceptable environmental standards. It emphasised the role of the proposed permit conditions in managing the effects of the expanded area of extractive industry on sensitive uses to the east of the site, consistent with Clause 14.03-1S. Council noted that the Decision Guidelines in Clause 52.09-4 for applications to use and develop land for extractive industry require the consideration of impacts on flora and fauna, and that the proposed conditions will address these impacts. At the same time, Council highlighted that removal of native vegetation was addressed as part of the Work Plan variation process. It noted that Council was involved in this process and that current conflicting conditions in the planning permit will be removed through the permit amendment. Following the recent referral of the application to amend the permit to DJPR in accordance with clause 66.02-8, a modified condition was inserted to require an approved work plan and work authority under the MR Act before extractive industry can commence. Condition 24 is to be amended to provide for a period of five years (rather than the current two years) for extractive industry to commence, consistent with Clause 52.09-5. Council also noted that operational activities are controlled through conditions applying to WA157. In reviewing the conditions of the permit relating to amenity impacts as part of the permit amendment process, Council was satisfied that there is no conflict with requirements

Page 18 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020 under WA157. Further, Council submitted that the amenity-related permit conditions agreed to on 29 June 2020 can be realistically implemented by the operator MQG while meeting the concerns of both Council and the objector. Applicable environmental standards are already applied under the Work Authority. Finally, Council did not propose to include rehabilitation requirements in the amended permit, as this aspect is addressed under WA157 (primarily through the work plan) and enforced by the Earth Resources Regulation Division of DJPR. MQG response HWL Ebsworth has responded to Direction 12A on behalf of MQG. It submitted in relation to Direction 12A(a) that: • The proposal will further the objective of Clause 14.03-1S by facilitating further sand extraction at Nyora quarry in accordance with applicable environmental standards, including those for noise and native vegetation removal, while also avoiding planning permit conditions that are inconsistent with requirements under the MR Act • The proposed planning permit conditions will appropriately manage any off-site amenity impacts, especially with respect to noise affecting nearby dwellings • The proposal has addressed the Decision Guidelines at Clause 52.09-4, including by: - appropriately managing impacts on flora and fauna - not having an impact on known Aboriginal places, while the proposed condition 23 as well as the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 address the “unlikely instance that Aboriginal artefacts are found” - not affecting the surrounding natural and cultural landscape including the Adams Creek Nature Conservation Reserve as the extraction activity will move further south and away from this Reserve towards - not resulting in detrimental offsite amenity impacts, on the basis that suitable permit conditions for noise and amenity (including dust and traffic) will apply - provisions and conditions of the work plan variation to Work Authority 157 address key matters including ground instability hazards related to the Nyora Heath Hill Fault, groundwater protection and management measures, surface drainage and stormwater quality, and rehabilitation of the site • The proposed planning permit conditions are consistent with sub-clauses 52.09-5 and 52.09-6, in relation to the permit duration, buffer and parking requirements. Direction 12A(b) sought the parties’ views on appropriate conditions for the amended planning permit, considering the provisions and conditions of the endorsed work plan variation. As a preliminary comment, HWL Ebsworth noted that the proposed Condition 29 provides: The use and development must at all times be in accordance with any work plan approved under the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990.2 Further, HWL Ebsworth submitted that:

2 This condition is recommended by Planning Practice Note 89 Extractive Industry and Resources (February 2020), which states: Since a statutorily endorsed work plan will reflect the considered assessment of the proposed works by both ERR [Earth Resources Regulation] and relevant referral authorities, it should provide a substantial basis for regulating the use and development. Further, the final, approved work plan will take account of any requirements of a planning permit. The responsible authority might therefore include the following condition on the permit to both streamline and reinforce the alignment of requirements under the two Acts.

Page 19 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

• Condition 2 to the work plan variation for WA157 deals comprehensively with native vegetation removal, including required offsets. This was resolved following the appeal by the applicant to VCAT in relation to the condition as set by DELWP • The Committee can be satisfied that given DELWP's detailed involvement in the settling of the native vegetation conditions of the Work Plan Variation to WA157 there is no need for further conditions in the Amended Permit • The conditions applying under WA157 (through the work plan variation) address relevant aspects of operational activities to manage possible effects • The endorsed work plan conditions do not need to be replicated in the Amended Permit and the planning permit is primarily restricted to matters concerning noise amenity, external traffic and some matters relating to vegetation • Whereas the controls under WA157 primarily relate to physical aspects of the operation of the plant, the amended permit deals more with human exposure to aspects of the environment • The work plan variation includes elements that are not expressly invoked by applicable conditions, including a Surface Water Management Plan that incorporates vegetation screening along the eastern boundary of Lot 3, consistent with proposed Condition 27 of the amended permit. A detailed rehabilitation plan and a community engagement plan, which form part of the work plan, have been endorsed under the MR Act • Accountability for rehabilitation is provided under the MR Act, including through the rehabilitation bond under that Act. While the proposed permit amendment does not expressly deal with rehabilitation, Condition 29 provides that use and development must be in accordance with the approved work plan.

(ii) Discussion Overall, there is a strong alignment between the responses of Council and MQG (through HWL Ebsworth) to Direction 12A. They agreed that: • The proposal is consistent with the objective of Clause 14.03-1S in the South Gippsland Planning Scheme • The proposal addresses the issues identified in the Decision Guidelines for extractive industry under Clause 52.09-4 • The proposed conditions for the Amended Permit provide a commensurate response to the relevant objectives and decision guidelines, having regard to the provisions and conditions of the endorsed work plan variation. The Committee notes that although responses by Council and HWL Ebsworth did not explicitly address the Decision Guidelines in Clause 65 (which are referenced in Clause 52.09-4), the relevant matters have been adequately addressed. The same applies to relevant provisions of the Farming Zone under Clause 35.07. There are a few aspects of applicable statutory requirements that the Committee wishes to clarify as follows. HWL Ebsworth stated that the exemption under sub-clause 52.17-7 of the Planning Scheme from a planning permit to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation to the minimum extent necessary to enable the carrying out of extractive industry does not apply in this instance (emphasis added). The reasoning for this conclusion is not clear, as the submission notes that “[i]n this instance, the

Page 20 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020 proposed removal of native vegetation is in accordance with the Work Plan Variation to WA157 and the specific conditions required by DELWP”, as directed by VCAT. While Council did not explicitly address the exemption under sub-clause 52.17-7, it acknowledged that vegetation removal was considered as part of the work plan variation process. The Committee concluded in section 4.2 that the exemption does apply in this instance. HWL Ebsworth considered that sub-clause 52.09-3 provided an exemption from the need to refer the application to amend the planning permit to DELWP and DJPR. As discussed in section 4.2, the Committee formed a different view in relation to DJPR. Finally, HWL Ebsworth suggested in its response to Direction 12A that: … this Advisory Committee is as a result of the Respondent seeking to amend the Planning Permit to comply with the conditions and requirements in the Work Plan Variation to WA157 pursuant to the MR Act which relate to slope stability and native vegetation. (emphasis added) Putting aside the reference to the origin of this Committee, this comment misstates the relationship between the applicable requirements under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the MR Act. These two statutory regimes operate independently (although they also interact). Amendment of the planning permit is required to facilitate the use and development in accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987, not to “comply with the conditions and requirements in the Work Plan Variation” under the MR Act. Similar statements in the permit application documentation were not accurate. At this point the work plan variation has not? been endorsed by DJPR. Once the planning permit has been amended, DJPR will consider approval of the work plan variation. Some matters may then require consideration in relation to the Work Authority 157, including the rehabilitation bond.

(iii) Findings The Committee finds: • Both Council and MQG provided appropriate and useful responses to the Committee’s Direction 12A. • The proposal is consistent with the objective of Clause 14.03-1S and the purpose of Clause 52.09 for extractive industry in the South Gippsland Planning Scheme. • While the proposal is exempt from the need for a planning permit for removal of native vegetation, the proposed Condition 8 provides an appropriate alignment with the related conditions of the endorsed work plan variation. • More generally, the proposed conditions for the amended permit provide a commensurate response to the relevant objectives, decision guidelines and other provisions of the South Gippsland Planning Scheme, having regard to the provisions and conditions of the endorsed work plan variation under the MR Act. • No further changes to the proposed conditions for the amended permit are warranted.

Page 21 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

5 Reasons and recommendation

In preparing this report on the Permit Application 2001/83/A, which has been called-in by the Minister for Planning, the Committee has considered the matters specified in section 60 of the Act for decision-making on a permit application, including: • the salient aspects of the South Gippsland Planning Scheme bearing on the proposed expansion of the Nyora Sand Quarry • the comments and requirements of relevant referral authorities (acknowledging the prior referrals that occurred under the MR Act) • the agreement that has been reached between the permit applicant, the sole objector and Council (as the original responsible authority) to address the potential for the proposal to cause significant impacts on residential amenity • the potential for significant impacts on flora and fauna, slope stability, groundwater, surface drainage and visual amenity have been addressed through the provisions of the endorsed work plan variation and associated conditions under the MR Act • the proposal will not significantly affect nearby agriculture or public land • the consistency of the proposal with the objectives of planning in Victoria under section 4(1) of the Act, including to facilitate development consistent with the objectives in section 4(1)(a) to (e) while also balancing the present and future interests of Victorians for economic, social and environmental well-being. The Committee agrees that the conditions adopted by Council in the Notice of Decision dated 20 February 2020 appropriately respond to amenity and other issues raised in submissions and responds to the requirements of referral authorities. The Committee is satisfied that Council has appropriately considered the application in accordance with the assessment criteria set out in section 60 of the Act. The further changes made to permit conditions as a result of the agreement between the parties documented in the Consent Order Minutes dated 29 June 2020 are supported. These changes include a response to further referrals. The Committee accepts the proposed amendments to South Gippsland Planning Scheme Planning Permit 2001/83/A as agreed between the parties, including the proposed planning permit conditions attached to the Consent Order Minutes (Appendix E). The Committee has made no further changes to the Consent Order version as agreed by parties. The Committee recommends that the Minister recommend to the Governor in Council that South Gippsland Planning Scheme Planning Permit 2001/83/A be amended as shown in Appendix E of this report.

Page 22 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Appendix A Terms of Reference

Page 23 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 24 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 25 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 26 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 27 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 28 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Appendix B Letter of referral

Page 29 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Appendix C Consultation and parties

No. Submitter 1 HWL Ebsworth Lawyers on behalf of Metro Quarry Group (Permit Applicant) 2 DWF (Australia) for Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber (Applicant for review) 3 South Gippsland Shire Council 4 DELWP 5 Country Fire Authority (referral authority) 6 DELWP – Heritage Victoria (referral authority) 7 Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions (referral authority) 8 VicRoads (referral authority)

Page 30 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Appendix D Document list

No. Date Description Presented by Documents from VCAT proceeding 1 04/09/19 Amended Permit Application documentation Applicant • Cover letter • Application form • Planning Report and attachments • Mortgage Documentation 2 04/10/19 Updated Permit Application Applicant • Updated application form • Planning Report 3 24/10/19 Additional information Applicant • Work Authority 157 Variation Conditions 20/6/2018 • Post VCAT Work Authority 157 Variation Conditions 11/2/2019 • Site closure and Rehabilitation Plan • Work Authority Community Engagement Plan • Planning Permits 2004/223, 2001/83 and 1998/1113 • DELWP – Post VCAT – agreement that conditions 2.1, 2.3A and 2.5 (WA157) have been satisfied • DEDJTR – Statutory Endorsement of Work Plan variation • Rehabilitation Plan Version 5 Feb 2018 • Surface Water Management Plan 4 20/10/19 Additional Information supplied (2) Applicant • Air Quality Impact Assessment • Cultural Heritage Assessment 5 29/10/19 Additional Information supplied (3) Applicant • Traffic Impact 6 15/11/19 Referrals and Advertising Various • South Gippsland Shire Council – Environment Department • South Gippsland Shire Council – Engineering Department • DELWP • VicRoads • Applicant notified advertising undertaken by Council

Page 31 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

No. Date Description Presented by 7 “ Documents placed on advertising and sent to authorities Council 8 18/11/19 Affected properties Council • List of properties notified including properties located in Bass Coast 9 29/11/19 Further Information Request from DELWP DELWP 10 02/12/19 Letter of objection McPherson Kelly for Matthew Huber and Thundaa Pty Ltd 11 09/12/19 Further Information Response Applicant • Response letter • Rehabilitation plan version 5 February 2018 • Rehabilitation Plan (Fig 4) • DELWP letter re WA157 (130618) 12 10/12/19 Referral Response Various • Section 52 response to DoT (221119) • Section 55 response to DELWP (090120) • Internal engineering response (201219) 13 16/01/20 Legal Advice HWL Ebsworth • Response from HWL Ebsworth Lawyers Re Lawyers DELWP letter 14 17/01/20 Referral to the CFA Council • Referral letter to the CFA Regional Office • Referral to CFA Dangerous Goods Team • Section 55 response from CFA (070220) 15 11/02/20 Discussion re Amendment Conditions Various • Email to Applicant in relation to Council’s proposed changes to the permit • Email from the Applicant in response to the proposed change (140220) 16 18/02/20 Delegation Report Council 17 20/02/20 Notice of Decision Council • Email to Objector • VCAT Notice 18 11/05/20 VCAT Documents Various • VCAT Letter • VCAT Initiating Order • Statement of Grounds

Page 32 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

No. Date Description Presented by Advisory Committee Documents 19 11/05/20 Terms of Reference Minister for Planning 20 19/05/20 Directions Hearing Notification Letter Mr McCullough, Chair 21 25/05/20 Correspondence attaching Documents 1-18 Council 22 29/05/20 Correspondence requesting adjournment Ms Towson, DWL lawyers for Thundaa Pty Ltd and Matthew Huber 23 “ Correspondence enclosing background documents Ms Markis, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers 24 01/06/20 Correspondence in response to adjournment request “ 25 03/06/20 Index list of background documents “ 26 05/06/20 Committee Directions and Timetable Mr McCullough, Chair 27 11/06/20 Committee further Directions “ 28 19/06/20 Committee update on hearing arrangements Ms Harwood, PPV 29 29/06/20 Filing letter – minutes of consent Ms Towson 30 “ Minutes of consent (signed by Thundaa Pty and Matthew “ Huber) 31 “ DJPR referral response Ms Begg, Council 32 “ Heritage Victoria referral response “ 33 “ Filing letter– consent position Mr Bartley, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers 34 “ Minutes of Consent (signed by Council and HWLE) “ 35 “ Notice of Decision to Amend Permit with track changes “ by HWLE 36 “ CAC Nyora Proposed Bund Plan “ 37 30/06/20 Filing letter - Response to Direction 12A “ 38 “ Response to Direction 12A “ 39 “ Site Rehabilitation Plan Revision 1 (281117) “ 40 02/07/20 Council Part A submission Ms Begg 41 “ Committee correspondence closing the hearing Mr McCullough

Page 33 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Appendix E Committee preferred version of amended Planning Permit no. 2001/83/A

Track changes shown are changes made to the 20 February 2020 Notice of Decision version. The Committee has made no further changes to the version attached to the Minutes of Consent Order version.

Page 34 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 35 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 36 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 37 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 38 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 39 of 40 South Gippsland Planning Scheme Application to amend Planning Permit 2001/83/A Advisory Committee Report  17 July 2020

Page 40 of 40