Panel Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CORANGAMITE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C3 PANEL REPORT JULY 2006 CORANGAMITE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C3 PANEL REPORT ELIZABETH JACKA, CHAIR HELEN MARTIN, MEMBER JULY 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 1 2. WHAT IS PROPOSED? ............................................................................................. 3 2.1 CORANGAMITE PLANNING SCHEME – HERITAGE OVERLAY ..................... 3 2.2 THE AMENDMENT.................................................................................................. 3 3. STRATEGIC CONTEXT........................................................................................... 5 3.1 STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK .............................................................. 5 3.1.1 LEGISLATED PRINCIPLES ............................................................................... 5 3.1.2 SPPF.................................................................................................................... 5 3.1.3 LPPF.................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.4 HERITAGE GUIDELINES & PLANNING PRACTICE NOTE........................... 8 3.1.5 CAMPERDOWN HERITAGE STUDY .............................................................. 11 3.2 STATUTORY PLANNING FRAMEWORK........................................................... 12 3.2.1 HERITAGE OVERLAY...................................................................................... 12 3.2.2 SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPE OVERLAY .......................................................... 12 4. ISSUES ....................................................................................................................... 13 4.1 NATURE OF SUBMISSIONS................................................................................. 13 4.2 ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY THE PANEL ................................................................. 13 5. MAPPING OF HERITAGE ITEMS ON RURAL LAND HOLDINGS .............. 14 5.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................... 14 5.2 SUBMISSIONS........................................................................................................ 16 5.2.1 HO41 – EDDINGTON HOMESTEAD .............................................................. 16 5.2.2 HO56 – GALA HOMESTEAD........................................................................... 16 5.2.3 HO104 AND HO118 – TALINDERT HOMESTEAD AND HOLM OAK .......... 17 5.2.4 HO65 AND HO129 – TITANGA HORSE TROUGH AND HOMESTEAD ....... 17 5.2.5 HO22 AND HO86 – CRAIGBURN HOMESTEAD AND OLD TIMBOON BURIAL SITE/SIEVWRIGHT GRAVE................................... 18 5.3 DISCUSSION........................................................................................................... 18 5.3.1 PLACES ON THE VICTORIAN HERITAGE REGISTER ................................. 21 5.3.2 THE EXTENT AND ACCURACY OF THE MAPPING..................................... 21 6. MAPPING OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ....................................................... 26 6.1 LAKE TIMBOON SETTLEMENT HISTORIC SITE (HO72) ................................ 26 6.2 DISCUSSION........................................................................................................... 26 7. MAPPING OF PRECINCTS.................................................................................... 30 7.1 PRECINCTS IN THE CAMPERDOWN HERITAGE STUDY............................... 30 7.2 MANIFOLD STREET CONSERVATION PRECINCT.......................................... 30 7.3 MOUNT LEURA CONSERVATION PRECINCT.................................................. 32 7.4 ST PAUL’S ANGLICAN CHURCH COMPLEX.................................................... 33 8. OTHER MAPPING ISSUES.................................................................................... 35 8.1 MAPPING HERITAGE PLACES IN TOWNSHIPS ............................................... 35 8.1.1 STONE BAKEHOUSE, LISMORE (HO114)..................................................... 35 8.1.2 TEAPOT COTTAGE, CAMPERDOWN (HO157)............................................. 36 8.2 ADDITIONAL MAPPING CORRECTIONS .......................................................... 36 8.3 AMENDMENT MAPPING APPROACH ............................................................... 37 CORANGAMITE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C3 PANEL REPORT: JULY 2006 9. PROPOSED NEW HERITAGE PLACES.............................................................. 38 9.1 ‘GLENORA’, 8 WARE STREET, CAMPERDOWN (HO201)............................... 38 9.2 INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL PLACES IN THE HERITAGE OVERLAY ....... 38 10. CORRECTIONS TO THE SCHEDULE ................................................................ 39 11. CHANGES TO THE MSS AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY......................... 41 12. PRIVACY AND OTHER MATTERS ..................................................................... 42 12.1 IMPACT OF THE OVERLAY ON PRIVACY ...................................................... 42 12.2 FUTURE WORK.................................................................................................... 42 13. CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................ 44 14. RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................... 45 APPENDICES A. THE PANEL PROCESS THE PANEL HEARINGS, DIRECTIONS AND INSPECTIONS SUBMISSIONS B. STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES CORANGAMITE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C3 PANEL REPORT: JULY 2006 Page 1 1. SUMMARY Amendment C3 to the Corangamite Planning Scheme proposes changes to the Heritage Overlay, plus related amendments to the MSS, Clause 22.02-5 (which relates to Natural & Cultural Heritage), and to Significant Landscape Overlay - Schedule 1 (Volcanic Landscape Area) and Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2 (Botanic Gardens). The Amendment seeks to implement recommendations of the Camperdown Heritage Study by including some 61 heritage places in Camperdown in the Overlay. The Amendment also seeks to show on the Planning Scheme maps a large number of places currently listed in the Heritage Overlay Schedule, but which are not mapped at present. A number of corrections are also proposed to the Overlay Schedule and maps. The proposed changes to the MSS and Clause 22.02-5 comprise insertion of objectives, strategies and implementation measures relating to cultural heritage in the MSS, and conservation policies and decision guidelines based on recommendations of the Camperdown Heritage Study in Clause 22.02-5. Eleven submissions were received in relation to the Amendment and only two related to inclusion of new places in the Schedule. Seven of the remaining submissions related to places that are currently listed in the Schedule and are either not mapped or are incorrectly mapped, and five of these related to rural properties. The main issue with the Amendment related to mapping heritage items on rural properties. The exhibited Amendment mapped the entire extent of properties included in the Overlay Schedule, which in many cases involved very large pastoral properties. Application of the Overlay to the full extent of these rural properties raised concerns about the impact of the overlay on farming operations by adding costs, delays and uncertainty in relation to normal farm management activities. Following exhibition of the Amendment, and in response to submissions the Council adopted a different approach to mapping heritage items on rural land holdings. Revised maps were provided to the Panel hearing that limited the Heritage Overlay on these properties to an indicative area enclosing the homestead or other listed heritage item, and a limited curtilage. These revised maps had been circulated to the property owners prior to the Panel hearing and only one landowner had made comment – expressing support for the revised mapping approach. In general, the Panel accepts the Council’s revised approach to mapping heritage places on rural properties. The Panel considers that the Council has taken a practical approach to what is likely to be a very complex, and potentially time consuming and costly mapping exercise. However, the Panel notes that whilst the VPP Practice Note on Applying the Heritage Overlay does suggest that mapping on large holdings can be confined to the heritage item and immediate surrounds, it does also suggest that: The wording to describe the Heritage Place in the schedule should be specific to identify the area covered by the overlay control. The Panel therefore considers that the indicative mapping should be accompanied by a detailed description of the heritage items included in the schedule, once this information is available. CORANGAMITE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C3 PANEL REPORT: JULY 2006 Page 2 The Panel notes that the Shire of Corangamite contains some of the most significant heritage places in the State. In particular, the Shire forms part of Victoria’s Western District and contains important evidence of the early settlement of Victoria and remnants of the large pastoral runs and grand houses of the squatters. The remnants of Koori occupation, the volcanic landscapes and the endangered grasslands in the Shire are also culturally significant. There has been no Shire-wide heritage study and whilst the Camperdown Heritage Study provides an excellent start to recording the heritage assets of the