A Proud Community Growing Together
CONSULTATION NOTES
Western plains north green wedge management plan stakeholder/landowner/occupier meetings
Held on Monday 5 and Wednesday 7 may 2014
Page 1 of 08
INTRODUCTION
A number of workshops were held, including one key stakeholder workshop and numerous landowner/occupier workshops, each of which focused on particular Precincts of the Western Plains North Green Wedge (of which there are 8) identified within the draft Management Plan.
These workshops were held in the afternoon and evening of Monday 5 May and Wednesday 7 May 2014 in the Melton Community Hall, 232 High Street Melton.
Hansen Partnership, planning consultants preparing the Management Plan ran these sessions. Numerous Council staff were also in attendance. These sessions were well attended by stakeholders and landowners, 68 parties signed their names on attendance sheets.
COMMENTS FROM ATTENDEES
Comments identified on butcher’s paper in sessions and other issues raised in each session have been outlined in the below document. These comments, in addition to key issues raised in formal submissions have been reviewed and considered for the final Western Plains North Green Wedge document, which is expected to be considered by Council in the second half of 2014.
Stakeholder Consultation Session
Key stakeholders were invited to attend a consultation session which introduced the Draft Management Plan and key Strategies and Actions contained within. A facilitator led discussion was then held where attendees provided feedback and voiced any concerns they had with the document. These concerns were documented by the project team and summarised in notes below:
Monday 5 May 2pm – 3.30pm
• Query regarding the location of Melbourne Airport Environs Overlay. Where is the airport environs overlay? Thought it extended further north than shown on the plan.
• Suggested that might not be sensible to put agriculture under flight paths because of birds.
• Query as to why 30 hectares identified as minimum for future subdivision?
• Pension planning, tax planning and Centrelink considerations come into effect when minimum lot size applies.
• What are the niche agricultural opportunities that we say will exist? Everyone says they are there, but no one has specified what they are and how to make them work.
• Class B water. 50km of pipeline when Western Water had contracts requiring 30% of water allocation, now current allocation using 50% of available water. If more people use water, then Western Water can provide water at a lesser price.
• There may have been some struggle to supply water during the peak of summer, however Western Water have capacity to provide more water than what’s currently supplied. Currently 50% usage on primary and secondary schools, vineyards etc.
• Query if it is possible to put a levy on people who generate the waste water ie in Sunbury and other growth areas, which can subsidise people who want to use the water for agricultural uses (at a cheaper rate). Western Water is currently reviewing their rates, but cannot guarantee what the outcome will be.
• Western Water has gone out with a proposal to agricultural users. They want to work with customers and find any alternative funding opportunities, the types of land uses recycled water will be appropriate for, and to understand the barriers which stop people using recycled water.
• A lot of investment is required to change broad acre farming practices into niche agricultural pursuits.
• Farmers are struggling to get permits to burn off crops and cannot aerial spray – these are significant inhibitors to agriculture.
• Rates are too high – even if landowners comply with Environmental Enhancement Policy (EEP).
• There is concern about public access along creeks. Risk management, security and fire management all concerns.
• Holden Road (south) through precinct 4 is not a bitumen road, it is a gravel road.
• Council and other bodies don’t maintain creek corridors and do not restrict public access now. Opening up creek corridors are expected to further encourage uses such as trail bikes and other uses which cause issues.
• May need guidelines for interface between potential public corridors and private land to manage potential conflicts.
• The green wedge is a State Government initiative. Therefore shouldn’t we be putting in a recommendation that State Government fund some of the initiatives? Council should be lobbying for more money from State Government.
Landowner/occupier consultation sessions
The below notes have been taken from comments made on butchers paper in each landowner/occupier session. As identified previously, sessions were held in the afternoon and evening of Monday 5 and Wednesday 7 May. Each session focused on particular precincts.
The format of the sessions included a presentation by Council’s consultants which introduced the draft Plan and key strategies and actions within. Each group was then split into precincts, where a member of the project team facilitated a discussion about the strategies and actions relevant to that particular precinct. More generalised discussions were also held to determine if there were any concerns with the content of the draft Plan. Comments were documented on butchers paper and summarised below:
Precinct 1
Monday 5 May 4.30 - 6pm
• Issues with revegetating areas – particularly along creeklines (Melbourne Water planting) as kangaroos are damaging the plants. Needs improved management.
• Concerns about the acquisition of land for public walking tracks. (Note: it was explained that this is an aspiration only and Council will not seek to acquire private land as such. The process for transitioning relevant areas to public land will require initial feasibility studies to look at management issues and security of these areas. Should findings indicate that management of these areas are appropriate the arrangement for making these areas publically accessible may be the result of subdivision applications, leasing or some form of gifting. If feasibility work indicates this is an appropriate aspiration, gaining public access to creek areas would only occur when landowners are willing. This is not compulsory.)
• Require focus on kangaroo management in general.
• What is niche farming? Whilst recycled water assists in niche farming, various questions were raised about what can actually be grown with this water (which is currently Class B) to create steady return.
• Fragmentation of land to can result in poor land management outcomes.
Wednesday 7 May 7pm - 8.30pm
• Requests for more information regarding weed types, and how to manage them.
• There is support for the use of indigenous species and for information on which ones are suitable.
• Land erosion is an issue in this Precinct particularly along creek areas. (Large areas of Shale within this area which are particularly weak, causing this).
• Illegal hunters causing fence damage and leave bullets on properties.
• Needs to be weed management within urban areas to decrease the spread of weeds into green wedge land, particularly on the interface.
• B & B’s supported within this precinct.
• Ongoing issues with the Wildfire Management Overlay (WMO) and associated restrictions.
• General support for the strategies and actions identified within this Precinct, retaining the existing character is important.
• Roads in the area are dangerous, particularly an issue for fires.
• Support for bike routes from Melton to Gisborne.
Precinct 2
Monday 5 May 4.30 - 6pm
• Is there an opportunity to re-align ward boundaries with green wedge boundaries?
• Lot sizes should be changed to more manageable sizes – discussions proposed a range of minimum lot sizes including:
o 15 ha
o 2-30 ha
o 5-10ha – similar to South Gisborne.
• Need to balance protecting the values of the Western Plains North Green Wedge with allowing more manageable lot sizes.
• There is a big challenge in balancing the size of lots, with maintenance costs and resourcing.
• Support averaging of lots being removed (ie. Removal of lot size formula within Green Wedge Zone (N= A/20 producing one large and one or more smaller secondary lots) to a more standardised approach (producing one standard size of lots eg 30 hectares).
Wednesday 7 May 7pm - 8.30pm
• 5 ha lot size preferred.
• Is there an opportunity for lifestyle size lots, rather than those to be used for agricultural pursuits.
• Environmental Enhancement Policy needs to be more pro-active early on when people move to the areas.
• Macedon Ranges Shire Council area has 4 ha lots and this has achieved a good land management outcome.
Precinct 3
Monday 5 May 4.30 - 6pm
• Melton Hwy area should have smaller lot sizes as this area is high constrained and not viable for farming.
• Cost of water big issue – Recycled Water Business Plan should be a priority as it is a mechanism to get people to use water, reducing overall cost.
• Diggers Rest – Urban boundary will have a hard edge, need buffers and a variety of lot sizes stepping down (smaller near urban interface, bigger to rural areas).
• Walking tracks – where is the funding coming from?
Wednesday 7 May 7pm - 8.30pm
• If subdivision controls change, will people be required to subdivide?
• Will rates change if 30 ha.
• Supportive of the community reference group but need clear process and terms of reference in place to make sure representative of the landowners.
• What is the purpose of recycled water business plan? Who will it benefit?
• There are still issues with what you can grow due to the land, even if there is access to water.
• Protecting the landscape and creeks is a good outcome, need to look into public access within this Precinct.
• Opportunities for employment within this area – would be interested to know what they could be?
• Want a quiet life, lifestyle of choice – hence opportunities for rural living should be considered.
• Is 30ha minimum lot sizes going far enough?
• Some subdivision would be good for the area.
• The lack of water is a barrier to farming the area, and recycled water including infrastructure is very expensive.
• Geology needs to be looked at, in conjunction with availability of recycled water.
• Salinity affects bore water.
• Opportunities for tourism accommodation within this precinct.
• Getting mains water supply would be beneficial.
Precinct 4
Monday 5 May 4.30 - 6pm
• Subdivision sizes debated with a number of views between attendees.
• When is the road coming? (Outer Metropolitan Ring). Note: long term – State Government has not committed to when they will build.
• What is the timeframe for the preparation of the recycled water business plan?
• Agree that broad acre farming is no longer viable for this area.
Wednesday 7 May 7pm - 8.30pm
No attendees
Precinct 5
Monday 5 May 7pm – 8.30pm
• 12 ha to apply to all of Precinct 5, provides no assistance/ opportunity to the landowners with less than 12ha.
• Timing around Rural Residential Supply and Demand Analysis?
• History surrounding the Green Wedge A Zone?
• Request for Precinct 5 to be split in two with Toolern Creek the divider.
• Township Strategy and recent planning history sets a precedent for future growth?
• Illegal use of motor bikes along Toolern Creek is a concern.
• Further work should be done on Precinct 5 to reduce to low density lots and rezone to Low Density Residential Zone – this could be done as part of investigation for Supply and Demand Analysis.
• Significant encroachment from residential uses to the south, need lots sizes to decrease to form a buffer from rural uses within Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).
• What is a good example of land management techniques?
• What can be planted to combat weeds?
• Significant issues with weed spread from adjoining properties, smaller allotments would alleviate weed issues.
Wednesday 7 May 4.30pm – 6pm
• Why not have a range of lots instead of blanket rule?
• Look at treating the east-west area of Little Blind Creek, similar to creeks in Precinct 6 and 7.
• What is the justification and rationale for 12 ha and what uses are envisaged?
• Recycled water is not available when needed (supply issues) and the quality of water is not very good.
• Should allow increased subdivision provision in ‘interface’ areas.
• Who will police the walking tracks and where will the funding come from and what is the mechanism for creating the linear corridors? Should it be in Management Plan as a long term priority?
• What happens with the Township Strategy?
• Review of UGB – what happens?
• Requests for Council support for inclusion of Precinct 5 into UGB.
• Comments on this Precinct being a ‘20 minute neighbourhood’ (Note: refers to Metropolitan Planning Strategy Plan Melbourne).
• Request for clarification on dry stone walls driving trail, what does this mean?
• Why is Harkness Road allowed to subdivide to between 2-5 ha?
• Who makes the decisions on the UGB? Doesn’t appear to be logical.
• Clarification on what is meant by the proposed ‘greening’ of Melton Highway.
• Melton Highway upgrade? Concerns the green wedge area will impact on timing of this upgrade, if not available for development?
• 1-2 acres (0.4 – 0.8 hectares) could be an attractive proposition within this area ie. Low Density Residential Zone (LDRZ)
• Provide transition out of urban areas.
Precinct 6
Monday 5 May 7pm – 8.30pm
• Impact of subdivision by others on rates, some want to subdivide and some don’t.
• Impact of the proximity of UGB and urban areas to the Green Wedge. Issues with bitumen/dirt roads, servicing infrastructure, waterways and wildlife. How will the increasing population impact on these issues?
• Concern about churches and other places of worship in rural areas given traffic and potential noise issues.
Wednesday 7 May 4.30pm – 6pm
• Harkness Road - currently has 2ha subdivision – 1ha may be better. Comments indicated easier to manage and more affordable.
• Some lots within this Precinct are already 1ha.
• The time frame for preparation of the Development Plan is important.