Shire to ask VCAT to rule on helicopter exemptions

A PLANING permit for a Freshwater Creek helicopter landing site now in the hands of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) will be supported by the Surf Coast Shire.

However, the shire will also ask VCAT to make a determination on the scope of the exemptions allowed in the shire’s planning scheme for helicopters involved in emergency service operations or agricultural activity, and whether a permit was required to operate a helicopter contracting business for those two uses.

The original planning application for 420 Coombes Road was submitted in October and drew 48 objections on a range of issues, including that the helicopters would be used for commercial purposes, the number and frequency of movements, noise, breach of privacy, safety issues and disturbance to the environment.

The shire’s deferral of its decision in April led the applicant to ask VCAT in May to review the council’s failure to make a determination within statutory time frames.

At their meeting on Tuesday, councillors accepted the officers’ recommendation to approve the application, with conditions including that the site must not be used more than three days per week and no more than once a day, the site must not be used for commercial charter including scenic joy flights, no refuelling of helicopters or storage of helicopter fuel without approval, and no use of the garage for the storage of helicopters without a permit.

Several councillors said there was confusion about the limits of the exemptions for helicopter use, and VCAT’s determination would be helpful.

“What is the use for ‘agriculture’? It’s just too broad,” Cr Carol McGregor said.

Cr Heather Wellington, who has been highly critical of the officers’ interpretation of the shire’s planning scheme, abstained from the debate and the vote on the issue “to avoid allegations of bias”.

Explaining her decision, she said she had personally applied for certification that she would not need a planning permit on her property to hypothetically operate a contracting business for agricultural or emergency services, which took her to “the point where I have become a player in the proceedings”.

Permit applicants Tim and Kirsty Metcalf said they were confident of a good outcome at VCAT in September, but declined to make further comment.