Recent comments on applications from South Gippsland Shire Council, VIC

  1. In Fish Creek VIC on “Quarry & extractive...” at 150 Fish Creek Quarry Road Fish Creek VIC 3959:

    Jack Pearce commented

    Dear SGSC
    What does the proposed change to the quarry mean?

    Will it mean more noise? More dust?
    Different mining technique? Change to waste water? Rock crushing gear? Screening gear?

    I live 1 km away and the extractive process and noise and dust might be an issue.

    If it’s a simple answer just call or text. I don’t need a big formal report (unless it’s a helluva change in purpose.

    Kind regards
    Jack Pearce
    0429997882

    jackdivemaster@me.com

  2. In Korumburra VIC on “Amend Endorsed Plans” at 12 Gabriella Way Korumburra VIC 3950:

    PAMELA ALICE EYERS commented

    Good morning, I have received notification of an amendment at 12 Gabriella Way , Korumburra, but I am unable to see what the amendment is.
    Can you please advise as our property is 2 Carla Crescent, Korumburra and this decision may impact our area.
    Than you for you attention to this matter,
    Pamela Eyers

  3. In Fish Creek VIC on “Use of the land for motor...” at 242 Soldiers Road, Fish Creek, VIC, 3959:

    Mr & Mrs Cary commented

    We object due to the concerns of noisy air compressors noisy rattle guns and we are concerned with the impact to the environment due to engine and transmission oils ,and greases and extra petroleum products - especially being in a rural farming location - located next to dams,stock and water ways.
    We don’t choose to live in an area that is exposed to a mechanics workshop impacting on our rural lifestyle

  4. In Mirboo North VIC on “Use and develop land with...” at 36-38 Ridgway, Mirboo North, VIC, 3871:

    Phillip Quail commented

    I object to this application.

    Firstly a secondary service station in a small town is unneccesary, particularly so close to another service station.

    They are an eyesore to a cute small town with unhelpful illuminated fluorescent lights on at night.

    Furthermore I totally object to the plans indicated the removal of the large trees especially at the rear of the block, which are large healthy trees which provide environmental benefits, and IMPORTANTLY would provide a valuable screen for residents to block out the unsightly nature of the service station and particularly provide a screen at night to the fluorescent lighting.

    I’m contemplating buying a business BNB at 5 Brennan crt Mirboo North but a service station would destroy chances of this being successful
    Thank you

  5. In Toora North VIC on “Use and development of land...” at 100 Longstaffs Road, Toora North, VIC, 3962:

    Sarah Gilbertson commented

    It is interesting that the Shire has used the word "camping" - giving connotations that the entire property would be turned into a camping ground open to every tom dick and harry

    This is so not the case. I know the owners of this land, they spent 10 years looking for a suitable location that was both under utilised and not currently being farmed. The site will be used for Glamping, Conservation and for the production of native fruits and herbs. These are luxury appointed tents we are talking about (i stayed in one and it was magical) fully equipped for tourists wanting a quiet and peaceful retreat. They chose tents over cabins for their very low footprint - if they had requested cabins, would it simply be called accommodation??? At present there four tents in carefully landscaped areas to provide privacy and seclusion and allow guests to be at one with nature. The owner was quite strict on her leave no trace policy and went to great lengths to ensure very minimal works to be done on the property itself (road requirements for CFA is about it), There is full protection of current vegetation and an additional 10,000 trees being planted in 2018 - turning the retreat into a rainforest, diverse habitat for displaced wildlife that are not welcome on farming properties and providing additional economic stability to a small town. it was also how the property looked originally less than 200 years ago!
    so, is this still to be considered camping?? or has the council not woken up to this rapidly growing, sustainable eco sensitive industry yet?

  6. In Mirboo North VIC on “Use and development of...” at 880 Berrys Creek Road, Mirboo North, VIC, 3871:

    Vincenza rutjens and Doug Alexander commented

    I would like to object to the erection of this telecommunications tower due to it being close to schools and farmers street.
    My reason being that due to studies these tower emissions are radioactive and create serious health problems.

  7. In Fish Creek VIC on “Alterations to existing art...” at 15 Falls Road, Fish Creek, VIC, 3959:

    Jack commented

    Great news! I wish them every success!

  8. In Fish Creek VIC on “Use and develop of the land...” at 1085 Waratah Road, Fish Creek, VIC, 3959:

    Stacey commented

    I live at the house right now id love to see a kennel here lots of farms have dogs in the area be a great idea but for now what happens to me when this is being started I'm worryed my peace will be gone. Im the renter.

  9. In Leongatha VIC on “Use of the land for a...” at 65-75 Bair Street, Leongatha, VIC, 3953:

    PETER ANNISON commented

    I think it is a great idea,my only concern is the parking availability,congestion and the safety of the patrons at an intersection.If the area has the upgrade as promised and angle parking is introduced,I feel this would help the parking congestion.Perhaps a pedestrian crossing would be to an advantage.

  10. In Venus Bay VIC on “Development of land with 4...” at 55-57 Bradley Avenue, Venus Bay, VIC, 3956:

    Jennifer Munn commented

    I strongly object to this application. Venus Bay is a tranquil and peaceful rural place, a haven for wombats, kangaroos and echidnas. They need the reserves and the flora of the area to move about and survive, removal of trees and bush put these animals at risk. I cannot see the need for units in this area and in particular my street. Our property contains 1 Bradley Avenue and I cannot believe there is a proposal for units in my street. Venus Bay should remain a quiet seaside hamlet, that's why we bought in this area and not become over developed

  11. In Venus Bay VIC on “Development of land with 4...” at 55-57 Bradley Avenue, Venus Bay, VIC, 3956:

    Aislynn commented

    This is overdevelopment of the community there is NO need for 4 units on 2 blocks, VB is a RURAL location, not downtown Richmond. This will negatively affect the aesthetic feel to the area and impact the flora and fauna of the blocks and surrounding area.
    NOTE: Also there is NO attachment to the submission as there should be.

  12. In Venus Bay VIC on “Remove Reserve Status” at 3 Marine Parade, Venus Bay, VIC, 3956:

    Aislynn McCartney commented

    I would like to know the reason for this planning application, the last thing Venus Bay needs is more vacant blocks, there are hundreds already for sale and have been on the market for some time.. Rather than we, the concerned rate payers and land owners voicing reasons why this should NOT be done (and there are many), it is the Shires responsibility to come up with reasons why this should be done. What are the benefits to the flora and fauna, and the VB ratepayers and the surrounding environment. The best thing about VB is the open spaces and parks, and now you are reducing this, just for a few dollars, whoever came up with this idea obviously does not live in VB nor care about the town.

  13. In Venus Bay VIC on “Development of land with 4...” at 55-57 Bradley Avenue, Venus Bay, VIC, 3956:

    Lorraine Norden commented

    Venus Bay is an environmentally sensitive area and overdevelopment of blocks should not be permitted. Four units on two blocks is excessive and would require removal of too much native vegetation. Bradley Avenue abuts Cape Liptrap Coastal Park and forms part of a vegetation corridor for native fauna.

  14. In Venus Bay VIC on “Single Dwelling and...” at 4 Grogan Court, Venus Bay, VIC, 3956:

    Lorraine Norden commented

    This development is out of keeping with the environmentally sensitive low key residential estate. It has a huge footprint and requires massive vegetation removal from a fragile sand dune. This will destroy native fauna habitat to a far greater extent than necessary or desirable. The vegetation is what binds the sand and prevents erosion.

    The building is excessive in size and height, overwhelming surrounding blocks and should be required to minimize its visual impact by retention of as much native vegetation as possible. Additional native vegetation should not be permitted to be removed.

  15. In Venus Bay VIC on “Remove Reserve Status” at 3 Marine Parade, Venus Bay, VIC, 3956:

    Debbie Kraushofer commented

    How dare you. This is our park. What are your doing selling our park? And this park which was zoned PPRZ!

    You have a legal obligation to reinvest the income from a sale of public open space back into public recreation - it cannot go to general revenue, and you know it, so why sell our public park when you have no plan for how you intend to spend the income.

    This demonstrates your complete bloody-mindedness and disregard for the for the citizens of Venus Bay who have objected to this over and over and over again. You are supposed to be acting in our interest. I will be writing a complaint to the ombudsman today.

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts