1. Schedule 1 of RCZ reiterates the above purposes with the additional purposes:

To ensure that the existing forest mosaic is protected and that any development does not compromise native vegetation, but provides for its enhancement.

To ensure that land use within water supply catchments, most particularly proclaimed catchments, will not compromise water quality.

To protect the unique flora, fauna and landscapes that are fundamental to the character and biodiversity of the area from inappropriate land use and development.

To protect the conservation and landscape values of adjoining public land.

To ensure that the character and landscape values of the area are protected.

To achieve sustainable agricultural practice.

1. The site is also located within the ESO. The purposes of the ESO are:

To implement the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework.

To identify areas where the development of land may be affected by environmental constraints.

To ensure that development is compatible with identified environmental values.

1. Schedule 4 of the ESO has the following statement of environmental significance:

The cumulative impacts of development in a declared special water supply catchment has the potential to gradually diminish the quality and quantity of water in the catchment. Diminished water quality also increases the risk to human health and the health of all communities that rely on water from the catchment.

The protection, restoration and enhancement of all waterways within the catchment is an essential component in ensuring the continued availability of water quantity and quality, while also protecting and restoring the health of the natural resources and environmental systems within the catchment.

Development of land in the catchment must:

• Support the long-term protection of the natural resources and environmental systems.
• Encourage the implementation of measures to minimise detrimental impacts on the quality and quantity of water within the catchment while avoiding an increase in bushfire risk.

To ensure development protects, restores and enhances natural resources and environmental systems and minimises detrimental impacts on the quality and quantity of water in the catchment.

1. Under clause 02.04 and 14.02-1L of the scheme, the site is located within the northern catchment. Relevant strategies include:

Restrict development and growth in the Eppalock designated water supply catchment area.

Promote the development of reticulated sewerage systems for towns within the Special Water Supply Catchments.

Protect water quality in the catchments by discouraging development on un-sewered land parcels.

Discourage land use and development in Special Water Supply Catchments and elevated areas that has the potential to reduce water quality.

Ensure the design of effluent disposal systems is suitable to the soil type and topography of the site.

Encourage retention or creation of larger lots where there are drainage lines, waterways and steep slopes.

1. The scheme contains various other State and local policy strategies relating to biodiversity, river and riparian corridors, bushfire, protection and sustainable agricultural land, catchment management and water quality that are relevant to the site and the application. For brevity these strategies are not repeated, but have all been considered in the determination of the proceeding.
2. I find that the proposed small second dwelling and associated works will not result in an unacceptable impact on the environment for the following reasons.

1. The proposal does not necessitate any vegetation removal which is a positive aspect of the proposal and consistent with various planning policies that seeks to 'protect' natural environment and natural processes, biodiversity, and landscape values. Whilst this weighs in favour of the proposal, I must be satisfied that the proposal will produce acceptable outcomes in relation to a wide range of matters underpinned by the scheme.
2. The plans nominate native local vegetation planting to the north-west, west and south-west of the small second dwelling. A proposed planting schedule is attached to the submission of the respondent, but this is provided as a 'suggested guide' and there is no information regarding the quantity of planting to be provided in the nominated areas for planting. The respondent reiterates that she is content to work with council to achieve a suitable landscaping outcome for the proposal.
3. Council has imposed a condition on the NOD that requires landscaping works to be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed plans and thereafter maintained. However, it is not clear to me what landscaping is expected or will be provided.
4. During the hearing, the council suggests that a landscaping plan could be submitted for further approval. Given the planning controls relevant to the site and the nature of the dispute, such landscaping would need to be 'firewise', locally indigenous and be a form that has a density to screen or filter views.
5. Even with this offer of landscaping, the applicant maintains that the landscaping will take time to grow and will not be a continuous visual screen. Furthermore, the applicant submits that planting does not offset other environmental impacts or the amenity impact from the small second dwelling.
6. I find it appropriate to require landscaping for the following reasons:
   1. The proposed landscaping will provide local indigenous planting to an area that has been incorporated into paddocks for animal grazing for some time. I find that this is consistent with various planning policy that seeks to 'enhance' natural environment and natural processes, biodiversity, and landscape values. The new planting on the subject site will complement the remnant vegetation found along the River and that proposed by the applicant as a part of her project to create a rewild garden on her land.
   2. I acknowledge that landscaping takes time to establish and grow. It is common for new planting to be incorporated into planning proposals as a tool to soften potential impact from development. The proposal is no different in that regard.
   3. To the extent that wildlife and pest animals may prevent landscaping from growing, council has included a condition on the NOD that landscaping must be carried out, completed and thereafter maintained (including the replacement of any dead, diseased or damaged plants). I have modified the landscaping plan condition to require details of any wildlife or pest fencing to assist the permit holder in delivering the planting on the site.
   4. The area has ample water supply.
7. In forming my view that landscaping in this area is appropriate, I acknowledge that this area is within the Bushfire Management Overlay. Whilst there is no restriction to planting within a designated bushfire risk area unless there is a specific trigger for permit under the Bushfire Management Overlay, the Victorian planning schemes prioritise the protection of human life over all other policy considerations.
8. Any fire risk can be minimised by creating a defensible space, choosing less flammable plants, and strategically spacing and arranging vegetation.

1. With respect to the submission that the small second dwelling may have an unacceptable impact on the rehabilitated land, I find this to be unfounded. The rehabilitated land will be fenced from any occupants of the small second dwelling. Human habitation of this part of the site is no more likely to attract mice and rats than the farm animals that reside nearby. The impact of domestic pets on wildlife can be minimised with responsible pet ownership and compliance with the relevant local laws.

1. The septic field will be located 100 metres from the waterway at it's closest point. A land capability study ('LCA') has been prepared under Regulation 25 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 2021 (Vic). The LCA is based upon best practice (septic sewerage) management options. The LCA recognises that the site is located within the Eppalock Special Water Supply Catchment, nominates the there is no evidence of a shallow water table or other significant constraints, and concludes the risk of effluent transport offsite to human health and the environment is very low.
2. The NOD contains a series of specific conditions imposed by the council's environmental health unit and Goulburn Murry Water that seeks wastewater treatment and disposal system to be installed as per the LCA and the EPA Victoria - Guidelines for On-Site Wastewater Management.
3. Taking into account the specific policy and planning controls through the ESO4 that seeks to protect the water quality within water catchments, I am not persuaded that circumstances arise in this instance that warrant wastewater management that is over and above what is achieved by the EPA Victoria - Guidelines for On-Site Wastewater Management.
4. I am also satisfied that the relevant water authorities have had ample opportunity to assess and participate in this application. Council advises that Goulburn Murray Water has been referred the application on three separate occasions and that an officer from Goulburn Murray Water inspected the site as part of their assessment.

**_Will the small second dwelling result in any unacceptable amenity impacts?

1. The applicant submits that the new building will impact on the rural character and landscape. It is her opinion that the building is an eyesore.
2. I find that the compact size of the structure, even including the appurtenances, will have limited visibility and impact on the rural landscape. When I observed the building onsite, the appearance of the small second dwelling is akin to the horse shelters already located on the site in relation to scale, materiality and design. The height of the building, even atop of a trailer and taking into account the topography of part of the applicant's site that sits in a shallow depression is modest.
3. The setback of the small second dwelling from the road and the river is appropriate and allows for additional planting to reduce views. The landscaping will filter views from the adjoining property and the River. I find that it is not necessary for the landscaping to obliterate all views to the small second dwelling from adjoining property. I say this as the policy context does not require development to be concealed. However, the landscaping will screen or filter views to the building.

Impact on the quiet enjoyment, seclusion, privacy and amenity

1. The applicant submits that the small second dwelling unacceptably impacts on the quiet enjoyment, seclusion, privacy and amenity of her property.
2. The site is in a rural area and therefore amenity expectations are not the same as that might be expected in a residential area. I am not persuaded that land compatibility issues arise from the location of a small second dwelling on the site where rural residential activities already exist on the land.
3. I find that the location of the dwelling at 367 Chambers Road at approximately 296 metres from the small second dwelling is a very significant and generous separation.
4. While the applicant is particularly concerned about the impact of the second dwelling from her enjoyment of the land within the 'U' shape, the planning scheme does not afford 'extra' amenity protection for the 'U' shape part of the property and her site offers other locations for the desired seclusion, privacy and amenity.
5. Regardless, a separation in excess of 30 metres to the 'U' shape part of the property will be generous to reduce any impact, particularly with the presence of landscaping.

Is the use of the site for a small second dwelling appropriate?

1. The applicant submits that the proposal offends strategic policy under clause 02.03-1 of the scheme that seeks limited infill development in smaller settlements, but to do so without changing their role, size, services and character.
2. As mentioned above, the inclusion of small second dwellings in the Victorian planning schemes is a recent amendment to increase housing supply of self-contained residences. In many zones, a small second dwelling does not require planning permission for its use. However, in the RCZ1, it must be demonstrated that the use is appropriate.
3. The RCZ1 contains a number of requirements under clause 35.06-2 of the scheme that dwellings and small second dwelling must meet. There were no submissions put to me that the small second dwelling do not enjoy the necessary attributes set out in the relevant clause.
4. The purposes of the RCZ1 do not specifically seek to encourage residential use or development, nor does the RCZ1 have specific encouragement to protect the amenity of existing dwelling occupants.
5. The decision guidelines at clause 35.06-6 of the scheme require consideration of land catchment, land compatibility, protection and enhancement of the environmental, agricultural and landscape qualities of the site and its surrounds, biodiversity, flora and fauna of the area, stabilisation of soil, pest plant and animal control.
6. Whilst I acknowledge that it is preferrable for additional housing to be located within settlements, this is not to say sites outside of the designated settlements cannot contribute to housing supply, particularly when the scheme has purposefully allowed small second dwellings within the RCZ1.
7. The site already contains a dwelling amongst horse paddocks. The introduction of a small second dwelling will not introduce a residential use onto the site. I am satisfied that the small building footprint of the small second dwelling, driveway and waste water field will not make a notable change to agricultural uses on the land or nearby sites.
8. Whilst the applicant is concerned about the potential of someone permanently living on the site that will be accommodated within the small second dwelling, I have not been persuaded that there would be an amenity impact that would result in the refusal of the application.

1. As foreshadowed above, I have imposed an additional condition that requires a landscaping plan to be submitted and approved by council that will screen or filter views from the small second dwelling to the 'U' shape parcel of land on the adjoining site. Planting will need to be appropriate for screening or filtering views, firewise, and locally indigenous plants.
2. The applicant requests that the landscaping plans be submitted 'in consultation' with her. I have declined to include this in the condition as the PE Act does not facilitate this process and therefore it is not appropriate for me to afford power to the applicant when it does not exist under legislation.

1. For the reasons given above, the decision of the responsible authority is varied. A permit is granted subject to conditions.

To construct or carry out buildings and works associated with a use in section 2 of clause 35.06-1.

To construct a building within 100 metres from a waterway, wetland or designated floodplain.

1. Before the use of the small second dwelling commences, a copy of the landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of this permit. The plan must be in accordance with Condition 3 of this permit.
2. At all times what the permit allows must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of any document approved under this permit to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
3. Before the use of the small second dwelling starts, a landscape plan must be approved and endorsed by the responsible authority. This plan must show:

(a) The area or areas set aside for landscaping, which must include an area of screen planting located between the proposed small second dwelling and the 'u-bend' section of the Campaspe River located at 367 Chambers Road, Ashbourne, to the west. The vegetative screen must extend for a length of at least 25 metres adjacent to the existing fence located between the small second dwelling and the Campaspe River to the west.

(b) A schedule of all proposed plants. The proposed design must minimise fire risk by creating a defensible space, choosing less flammable plants, and strategically spacing and arranging vegetation to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plant selection must include locally indigenous and evergreen species and comprise plants in a form that screens or filters views from outside of the site.

(c) The location and number of each species to be planted, which must include a portion of plants which grow to a mature height of at least 6 metres.

(d) Individual and clumps of shrubs must not exceed 5 square metres in area and must be separated by at least 5 metres in accordance with the measures outlined in Table 6: Vegetation management requirement of Clause 53.02 of the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme.

(e) Details of fencing of planting areas to protect the juvenile plats, if any.

(f) Water supply to the planting area.

1. Unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority, prior to the occupation of the small second dwelling, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out, completed and thereafter maintained (including the replacement of any dead, diseased or damaged plants) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
2. The layout of the use and development must not be altered from the layout on the approved and endorsed plans without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.
3. External materials must be of muted non reflective tones to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
4. No polluted and/or sediment-laden run-off is to be discharged directly or indirectly into drains or watercourses. Soil erosion control measures must be employed throughout the works to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
5. Before the small second dwelling is occupied, a legal point of discharge must be approved by the responsible authority and any other statutory authority for which approval is required to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
6. Before the small second dwelling is occupied, a crushed rock vehicle crossover to suit the proposed driveway must be constructed to councils standard to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
7. The proposed building(s) and works must be drained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

1. All wastewater from the dwelling, must be treated to a secondary standard of at least 20mg/L BOD and 30mg/L suspended solids and disposed of via pressure compensating subsurface irrigation.
2. All wastewater generated must be treated and contained within the property boundaries.
3. The wastewater disposal area must be located at least 100 metres from any potable waterways and 60 metres from any dams/non-potable waterways - these setbacks may be reduced by 50% if the effluent is treated to a secondary standard and a service contract is in place.
4. The wastewater disposal area is to be free of stock, horses, buildings, driveways and service trenching.
5. An 'Application to install a septic tank' must be submitted to Council's Environmental Health Department to ensure the proposed wastewater treatment and disposal system is installed as per the LCA and the EPA Victoria - Guidelines for On-Site Wastewater Management.

1. All construction and ongoing activities must be in accordance with EPA Publication 1834.1 Civil Construction, Building and Demolition Guide (September 2023).
2. All wastewater from the second dwelling must be treated and disposed of using an approved system. The system must have a certificate of conformity issued by the relevant body (or equivalent approval) and be installed, operated and maintained in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard(s) and EPA Guideline for Onsite Wastewater Management, May 2024, as updated or replaced.
3. The wastewater disposal area must be located in accordance with the setback distances set out in Table 4-10 of the EPA Guideline for Onsite Wastewater Management, May 2024, as updated or replaced.
4. The wastewater management system must be appropriately designed to manage the potential volume of wastewater generated under full occupancy, including an appropriately sized disposal area based on a full water balance specific to the proposal and subject land in accordance with the requirements of the relevant Australian Standard(s) and EPA Guideline for Onsite Wastewater Management, May 2024, as updated or replaced.
5. The wastewater disposal area must be kept free of stock, buildings, driveways and service trenching and must be planted with appropriate vegetation to maximise its performance. Stormwater must be diverted away. A reserve wastewater disposal field of equivalent size to the primary disposal field must be provided for use in the event that the primary field requires resting or has failed.
6. Stormwater run-off from buildings and other impervious surfaces must be dissipated as normal unconcentrated overland flow or directed to storage tanks. Stormwater must be directed to the legal point of discharge as nominated by the Responsible Authority, must not cause erosion and must minimise the transport of sediment off-site.
7. No buildings are to be constructed within 30 metres of any waterways or on any drainage lines.

1. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

(a) The development is not completed within two years of the date of this permit.

(b) The use is not commenced within two years of the date of this permit.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months after the expiry date for commencement, or within twelve months after the expiry date for completion.

[1] The siting of the proposed use and development of the small second dwelling is not located within the Bushfire Management Overlay.

[2] No vegetation is sought to be removed and therefore no permit triggers exist under the Vegetation Protection Overlay.

[3] The submissions of the parties, any supporting exhibits given at the hearing and the statements of grounds filed have all been considered in the determination of the proceeding. In accordance with the practice of the Tribunal, not all of this material will be cited or referred to in these reasons.

[4] [2007] VCAT 603.

[5] [2022] VCAT 833.

[7] State of Victoria (Department of Premier and Cabinet).

[8] Section 3 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic).

[9] Knox CC v Tulcany Pty Ltd [2004] 18 VSC 375 at [13].

[10] Knox CC v Tulcany Pty Ltd [2004] 18 VSC 375 at [13].