THE Bass Coast Shire Council and the State’s Department of Transport and Planning are in furious agreement about the need to protect San Remo’s “exceptional” coastal vistas.

This is especially so in the vicinity of the George Bass Coastal Walk and the Punch Bowl Road Lookout.

In fact, as the department said in its closing submission to the Distinctive Areas and Landscapes (DAL) Advisory Committee on Thursday, April 27, the George Bass Lookout will become “a really major tourism attraction for the shire”.

But how well has the shire performed so far in protecting our significant landscapes from development or in directing and controlling residential growth along the coast?

If you like the way residential development has been allowed to take place on the approach to San Remo, you might say “great”.

If not, you might not want to leave the further expansion of San Remo, east towards Punch Bowl Road and those “state significant” views entirely up to the shire and the developers.

In its closing submission to the DAL advisory committee, the department said aspects of the developers’ submissions should be completely rejected and that there should be no development below the ridgeline, or all the way to Punch Bowl Road and that the limited residential growth that is allowed must be achieved in a balanced way.

“We say the landscape values of the Anderson Peninsula are really significant. We acknowledge San Remo’s role as a town that can potentially handle some growth and take some pressure off Phillip Island. It’s a necessary balancing exercise, to balance that role in growth and the really significant landscape values of the land both to the north and the south of the ridge line,” said legal counsel for the department Julie Forsyth SC.

“We say that the landscape values to the south are incontrovertible. With respect to the landscape values to the north, there's been different views about how significant the views are along Phillip Island Road, looking inland as opposed to looking out to the water.

“We say there seems to be general agreement by most experts that views to the water are important.”

Ms Forsyth described, for example, the views of Western Port as you come up Punch Bowl Road from the direction of the George Bass Walk as a reason why the town should not be allowed to develop all the way out to Punch Bowl Road.

“If you are coming away from the George Bass Coastal Walk Lookout and you are coming up Punch Bowl Road and you go over the crest and then you have those extensive views out across the land and into the water, we say they are important views, they are important values, they're important in the context of Punch Bowl Road being an access to the George Bass Lookout which is a really major tourism attraction for the shire.

“And there really does need to be protection of those views, but if the land can be developed in such a way that those views, both from Punch Bowl Road and Phillip Island Road are protected, for example, if development can occur in this bowl and you can look out over, and still see the water, and not have it too interrupted by development, then there's potential there for a little bit more expansion but it would need to be very carefully done, and for that reason there's acknowledgement that work could be done to really interrogate that issue in detail.

“But we say that there should be no doubt in the committee's mind that the PSB (Protected Settlement Boundary) should not extend south of the ridge line, and it should not extend all the way to Punch Bowl Road.”

Ms Forsyth went on to say that criticism of the Claire Scott Planning assessment of the State and Regional Significance of the coastal land east of San Remo, by would-be developers, should be rejected by the committee.

And she asked the committee to give attention to the responses to that criticism when making its recommendations about where the final boundary of the township of San Remo, east of the town, should be located and how an appropriate balance between the demand for residential expansion and the protection of significant landscapes between Potters Hill Road and Punch Bowl Road could be achieved.

What the council said

From the council’s point of view, San Remo is one of the shire’s ‘Contested Townships’ that isn’t ready to be locked away under a Protected Settlement Boundary (PSB).

While the council is prepared to concede that some of its ‘lower order settlements’ can have PSBs “despite the absence of current macro data for the municipality as a whole”, the shire said in its final submission that it was “premature” to introduce PSBs for the following towns until “further detailed studies at a granular level” could be undertaken:

• Cowes and Silverleaves;
• San Remo;
• Grantville;
• Inverloch;
• Cape Paterson; and
• Newhaven.

The settlements where council said no one took issue with the proposed Protected Settlement Boundaries are: Bass, Corinella, Harmers Haven, Jan Jerrup, Kilcunda, Pioneer Bay/The Gurdies, Rhyll, Tenby Point and Wimbledon Heights.

These can be expected to be transferred to PSBs immediately the DAL process has been completed and the advisory committee hands down its recommendations.

For various reasons, council would like to see more work with respect to Coronet Bay, Dalyston, Smith's Beach, Sunset Strip, Sunderland Bay and Ventnor.

Council does, however, accept that no further expansion is required at Coronet Bay, Dalyston and Ventnor (needs boundary definition work) but seems to leave open the prospect of some sort of growth at Smiths Beach.

For Smith's Beach, council “acknowledges that there is value in providing a green break, acknowledges that the land ought not be subject to an urban style development; and needs to ensure that settlement boundaries relate to biodiversity values”.

But, it was council’s submission to the DAL advisory committee that San Remo still needs a lot of planning work, using the department’s own assessment to support its case.

“In relation to San Remo, the Minister has noted in response to Council's submission that:

“DTP (the department) remains generally supportive of the proposed PSB for San Remo exhibited in the draft SPP and supports undertaking further technical assessment of landscape values prior to the PSB being finalised. Further work with respect to infrastructure delivery and servicing is noted, however, this detailed investigation would be most appropriately led by Council.

“DTP will continue to work collaboratively with Council. DTP is supportive of Council leading a structure planning or precinct planning activity for San Remo, given this is beyond the remit of the SPP. Strategies and Objectives outlined within the SPP may be used to inform a future structure plan.

“The community's vision for the township must also be considered, in addition to movement and land supply needs, and the Bunurong cultural heritage values present in area DTP is open to further discussion with Council and the BLCAC. However, please note that engagement with Traditional Owners regarding land management decisions and significant policy decisions is at the discretion of Council officers.”

In summary, the shire said: “In Council's respectful submission, the Minister's proposed approach for San Remo is inadequate. Council is strongly of the view that the PSB for San Remo should be deferred in a similar manner as with Wonthaggi and Inverloch.”

In the assessment of Claire Scott Planning: “There is limited and conditional potential for San Remo to extend further eastwards with manageable landscape impacts.”

In the “Distinctive Areas and Landscapes Bass Coast Landscape Assessment Review”, Ms Scott describes the San Remo coastal hinterland as “exemplary”.

“The coastal scenery and landscape features visible from the Punchbowl Rocks Beach viewing location, within a landscape of state significance, is considered exemplary within the state context.

“Iconic? The views available include recognisable landforms such as Cape Woolamai, together with all the elements of ‘classic’ Victorian south coast scenery, including stunning sea cliffs and headlands, sandy beaches and the wild waves of Bass Strait. It is considered iconic within the state context.

“Scarce? The views along this stretch of coast that are possible from the George Bass Coastal Walk are typified by those available from the assessed viewing location. The views differ in their compositional structure and qualities from others in the Declared Area, being at the unique intersection where the Strzeleckis hit the ocean. The views are considered scarce within the state context. Visual significance rating: Exceptional. Overall significance rating: State significance.”

Where the development of hundreds of 350 metre high wind turbines, as close as 10km off Bass Coast fits into this scenario is anyone's guess.