THE City of Greater Bendigo council has refused a request for a change in the siting of a footpath on Simpsons Road in Eaglehawk.<\/p>\n
A petition signed by 16 people asking that a footpath proposed for the northern side of the road, between Hill Street and Majors Road, be built instead of the southern side as a continuation of the existing footpath was presented at Monday night\u2019s regular meeting.<\/p>\n
But councillors voted to stick with the existing plan, which was approved in the city\u2019s budget for this year.<\/p>\n
An officer\u2019s report said work had already begun on the project but had been stopped until the petition was dealt with.<\/p>\n
It had not been presented to councillors but had been handled at an operational level during design work and petitioners consulted, the report said.<\/p>\n
It said a footpath in that section of Simpsons Road was considered a priority and officers believed its location on the northern side was preferable.<\/p>\n
Petitioners argued that 46 properties on the northern side of Simpsons Road would be affected by the work, with some having to have trees removed and lawns and garden beds destroyed.<\/p>\n
But there were only five properties on the southern side, they said, none of which had nature strips, trees or garden beds.<\/p>\n
Design work on a footpath, costed at about $420,000, began in 2022 and letters were sent to surrounding properties. It was then that a petition was submitted.<\/p>\n
The report said several residents had expressed support for the northen option.<\/p>\n
Cr Julie Sloan moved a recommended motion that the petitioners be told the city would be staying with the northern side project, and that work resume.<\/p>\n
Cr Sloan said the northern side was a better option and the footpath was of the \u201chighest priority.”<\/p>\n
Cr Margaret O\u2019Rourke, who seconded the motion, said these issues were \u201cnever easy\u201d but agreed that the best choice was the recommended one.<\/p>\n
Farm house knocked back<\/strong><\/p>\n In a split vote, councillors refused to grant a permit for a house on land in Voddens Road, Sebastian.<\/p>\n Cr Sloan moved an officer\u2019s recommendation that an application for a house \u2013 on land zoned for farming \u2013 be turned down.<\/p>\n She said the application had already been refused once, in May last year, which resulted in Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal consideration of the matter.<\/p>\n The tribunal sent the matter back to the city when the applicant indicated they would change the proposal by removing a vehicle storage component for an earthmoving business.<\/p>\n But officers recommended the application again be refused because it was not consistent with the farming zone and a house was not needed on the land to support agricultural use.<\/p>\n It would also cause more fragmentation of land in the zone, officers said.<\/p>\n Cr Sloan said the proposal did not indicate the land would be used for agriculture but rather as a rural residential property, adding that the application did not demonstrate that a dwelling was needed for genuine agricultural use of the site.<\/p>\n Cr Greg Penna said he had been \u201con the fence\u201d about whether to support the application because the land was of poor agricultural quality and there was little chance of it being made productive for that purpose.<\/p>\n He said a feared loss of agricultural land if the application was approved was \u201can over-estimation.”<\/p>\n Cr Vaughan Williams agreed with Cr Penna, arguing that the proposal did satisfy some elements of planning strategies and frameworks.<\/p>\n It would be surrounded by several existing houses and would not have a significant impact on the area\u2019s character, he said.<\/p>\n Cr Williams said there was a strong case for an approval.<\/p>\n Cr O\u2019Rourke said she differed with Cr Williams in that the application did not in fact fulfil farming zone requirements and there was \u201cno overwhelming need\u201d for a house there.<\/p>\n Crs Penna and Williams voted against the refusal, Crs O\u2019Rourke, Sloan, Matthew Evans and Jennifer Alden voted in favour.<\/p>\n Green light for sheep farm<\/strong><\/p>\n Plans for a small sheep farm in Lockwood South have gained council support.<\/p>\n The site, on Bendigo-Maldon Road, is vacant and the applicant wants to set up the farm with a house and an outbuilding.<\/p>\n Councillors knocked back a similar proposal in 2022 because it was inconsistent with farming zone requirements and would further fragment the land. Officers recommended they do so again.<\/p>\n But Cr Alden said she supported granting a permit because fragmentation of land in the area had already happened, and she moved that way.<\/p>\n The area was \u201cnotorious\u201d for the number of houses allowed to be built on farming zone land in the past and the use of discretion in approving similar development had been \u201cgenerously applied\u201d, she said.<\/p>\n Cr Alden said the application did not differ significantly to the original, but consultants now supported it more than they previously did.<\/p>\n \u201cI agree with the applicant\u2019s position that there is no reasonable potential for the fragmented land parcel to be re-aggregated in the future for large-scale agriculture,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Cr Williams agreed, saying that a lack of objections indicated the proposal was acceptable to neighbours and would not have a negative impact.<\/p>\n The proposal included a plan to improve agricultural productivity and represented a proactive approach to land management, he said.<\/p>\n Cr Sloan voted against granting a permit.<\/p>\n Smaller industrial lots refused<\/strong><\/p>\n The council has blocked a move to reduce the size of allotments in a staged subdivision of industrial land in Victa Road, East Bendigo.<\/p>\n A permit granted in 2011 to subdivide the land has been amended on several occasions \u2013 in 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2023, with two more by secondary consent this year \u2013 and the latest application is to subdivide two larger lots into smaller ones for a total of 44 lots in the Invicta Estate.<\/p>\n A recommendation to deny the application was carried unanimously.<\/p>\n Cr O\u2019Rourke said the amendments had reduced lot sizes \u201cquite significantly,” and the latest application would further diminish the number of large industrial lots available in Bendigo.<\/p>\n Cr Penna agreed, saying the city needed more large industrial lots rather than more smaller ones.<\/p>\n Cr Sloan was also in support of a refusal. The council needed to be mindful of how it catered for businesses that wanted to grow and expand, she said.<\/p>\n Landscape review out for comment<\/strong><\/p>\n A draft Big Hill and Mandurang Valley Landscape Review is going on public exhibition.<\/p>\n The review builds on previous landscape assessment work carried out for a planning scheme amendment.<\/p>\n An independent panel did not support initial plans because of concerns about proposed overlay boundaries, but the draft has been reconfigured to take those concerns into account.<\/p>\n It covers an area from Harcourt North in the south up to parts of Strathdale in the north and across to Ravenswood and Lockwood South in the west.<\/p>\n Mayor Cr Andrea Metcalf said the draft report included a comprehensive visual analysis and assessment to understand the visual exposure and value of significant landscape features in Big Hill and the Mandurang Valley.<\/p>\n \u201cThe draft report finds that the Big Hill ridgeline, the upper slopes and the Big Hill Granitic Uplands areas are the most highly valued landscape features of a regional significance level that are visually prominent from key frequented viewing corridors and viewpoints,\u201d Cr Metcalf said.<\/p>\n \u201cThe report recommends a Significant Landscape Overlay be applied over these areas.\u201d<\/p>\n Cr Metcalf said an overlay was not considered justified for the Mandurang Valley area due to lower levels of visual significance and exposure.<\/p>\n People can comment on the draft report and its recommendations on the city\u2019s Let\u2019s Talk platform until Tuesday 13 August.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" THE City of Greater Bendigo council has refused a request for a change in the siting of a footpath on Simpsons Road in Eaglehawk. A petition signed by 16 people asking that a footpath proposed for the northern side of the road, between Hill Street and Majors Road, be built instead of the southern side […]<\/p>\n