Kitty Miller Bay residents Linda Cuttriss, Greg Newell, John Field and Kate Field with Michelle Maes (Phillip Island Conservation Society) welcomed the decision to refuse the development. By Catherine Watson
A PROPOSED $8 million ‘eco-tourist resort’ at Kitty Miller Bay has been emphatically rejected by Bass Coast Shire Council.
Councillors unanimously rejected the application.
But while residents and conservationists celebrated the refusal, potential tourist developers would have been confused by the result.
The application was the first major development submitted under the new Bass Coast Unlocking Rural Tourism (BURT) Strategy, adopted in March, which encourages large-scale tourist ventures in the farming zone and designated Special Use Zones at Newhaven, Ventnor and Kitty Miller Bay.
The development proposal explicitly referred to the BURT strategy, noting the resort would capture new tourism activities and markets – in this case parties of Chinese tourists – as Bass Coast tourism recovers from the Covid pandemic.
A PROPOSED $8 million ‘eco-tourist resort’ at Kitty Miller Bay has been emphatically rejected by Bass Coast Shire Council.
Councillors unanimously rejected the application.
But while residents and conservationists celebrated the refusal, potential tourist developers would have been confused by the result.
The application was the first major development submitted under the new Bass Coast Unlocking Rural Tourism (BURT) Strategy, adopted in March, which encourages large-scale tourist ventures in the farming zone and designated Special Use Zones at Newhaven, Ventnor and Kitty Miller Bay.
The development proposal explicitly referred to the BURT strategy, noting the resort would capture new tourism activities and markets – in this case parties of Chinese tourists – as Bass Coast tourism recovers from the Covid pandemic.
The $8 million proposal for the vacant 36-hectare site at 115 Kitty Millers Bay Road, on the corner of Back Beach Road, proposed a mix of units, houses, cabins and elevated tents for up to 96 guests, plus an information centre, restaurant and swimming pool.
It was marketed as an eco-retreat incorporating boardwalks and viewing platforms extending out into man-made wetlands on the site, which would be rehabilitated and re-vegetated as part of the development.
The application attracted 167 objections, most based on the impact on landscape, environment, wildlife and the character of the quiet rural area.
The proposal was referred to Phillip Island Nature Parks, which raised concerns about the risk of contamination of Swan Lake, a noted bird reserve close to the Penguin Parade, if hypersaline water and silt was accidentally released from artificial wetlands on the site.
Phillip Island Conservation Society objected to over-development of land zoned for farming while the National Trust expressed concerns about large banks of artificial lighting disorientating short-tailed shearwaters in their annual migration.
The 46-page council officers’ report found the proposed resort failed by almost every measure: its location outside a tourism area, potential for flooding, loss of agricultural land and risk to the environmental values of the site and broader surrounds.
“On balance, the tourism and economic benefits of this proposal do not outweigh the negative impacts on the community such as the loss and fragmentation of agricultural land, the impacts on valued environmental assets and the need to maintain rural buffers between identified settlements.”
Phillip Island Conservation Society president Jeff Nottle welcomed the comprehensive and thorough planning officer's report and the councillors' decision but said it should lead to a review of the BURT strategy.
“It is in direct contrast to the councillors’ March 23 decision to rush through the strategy without appropriate consultation, ahead of the DAL recommendations, VCAT orders and prior to the now commenced Destination Management Plan for the Island.”
It was marketed as an eco-retreat incorporating boardwalks and viewing platforms extending out into man-made wetlands on the site, which would be rehabilitated and re-vegetated as part of the development.
The application attracted 167 objections, most based on the impact on landscape, environment, wildlife and the character of the quiet rural area.
The proposal was referred to Phillip Island Nature Parks, which raised concerns about the risk of contamination of Swan Lake, a noted bird reserve close to the Penguin Parade, if hypersaline water and silt was accidentally released from artificial wetlands on the site.
Phillip Island Conservation Society objected to over-development of land zoned for farming while the National Trust expressed concerns about large banks of artificial lighting disorientating short-tailed shearwaters in their annual migration.
The 46-page council officers’ report found the proposed resort failed by almost every measure: its location outside a tourism area, potential for flooding, loss of agricultural land and risk to the environmental values of the site and broader surrounds.
“On balance, the tourism and economic benefits of this proposal do not outweigh the negative impacts on the community such as the loss and fragmentation of agricultural land, the impacts on valued environmental assets and the need to maintain rural buffers between identified settlements.”
Phillip Island Conservation Society president Jeff Nottle welcomed the comprehensive and thorough planning officer's report and the councillors' decision but said it should lead to a review of the BURT strategy.
“It is in direct contrast to the councillors’ March 23 decision to rush through the strategy without appropriate consultation, ahead of the DAL recommendations, VCAT orders and prior to the now commenced Destination Management Plan for the Island.”
"You can’t call this an eco-tourism retreat when you’ve destroying the environment to create it. To allow this type of development in this area just for the sake of development would be environmental vandalism." |
Cr David Rooks said other activities could be considered in the farming zone “but this doesn’t come close to meeting the needs or desires of the community, the environment and a number of governing bodies.
“There’s a bigger discussion to have around applications such as these … The Bass Coast Distinctive Areas and Landscapes, although it’s unfinished, signals the wish to stop further expansion of urban development into the landscape. The community sentiment supports this view. If we’re saying let’s keep the urban boundaries as they are, so we can enjoy the beauty and space of the land, why would we allow over-sized and inappropriate commercial developments on that same land?”
He said the Unlocking Rural Tourism Strategy was an attempt to deal with the issue.
“However, there are indications that the answer is clear. Recent VCAT decisions – both refusals around the caravan park at Forrest Caves and the Vietnam Vets application at Newhaven – suggest the State Government recognises the value of agricultural land, the environmental sensitivity of the land and are against imposing huge developments that take away the amenity and landscape character.
“The community seems to agree. This proposal led to 167 objections, a huge response of the small township of Ventnor. If we intend to keep the rural character and amenity of Phillip Island, recognise its environmental values, it’s appropriate this type of application must be refused.”
“There’s a bigger discussion to have around applications such as these … The Bass Coast Distinctive Areas and Landscapes, although it’s unfinished, signals the wish to stop further expansion of urban development into the landscape. The community sentiment supports this view. If we’re saying let’s keep the urban boundaries as they are, so we can enjoy the beauty and space of the land, why would we allow over-sized and inappropriate commercial developments on that same land?”
He said the Unlocking Rural Tourism Strategy was an attempt to deal with the issue.
“However, there are indications that the answer is clear. Recent VCAT decisions – both refusals around the caravan park at Forrest Caves and the Vietnam Vets application at Newhaven – suggest the State Government recognises the value of agricultural land, the environmental sensitivity of the land and are against imposing huge developments that take away the amenity and landscape character.
“The community seems to agree. This proposal led to 167 objections, a huge response of the small township of Ventnor. If we intend to keep the rural character and amenity of Phillip Island, recognise its environmental values, it’s appropriate this type of application must be refused.”