Any reference to CASACIR or its directors, shareholders, owners or operators relates to pre-14 February 2024 when the company was sold. In no way can anything said relate to the company or its new owners, operators, directors, and shareholders after that sale.
The following identifications of the requirement for the protection of amenity are provided to assist you in your fight to know what the authorities are supposed to use to do the right thing and protect you. It is critical that performance standards are met at such a buffer distance as to provide that protection, and this must be upheld. In particular, the following list of information is important as it has a significant emphasis on separation distances and the requirement for the operator to own or control them. Do remember though, that the clauses I have used here are accurate as at 15 July 2011, but they do change from time to time (including the clause numbers). However, the requirements stay the same: protection!
The Planning Scheme states that the amenity of persons is to be protected and, where possible, enhanced or improved:
01 Objectives [emphasis mine]: “… To secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for all Victorians and visitors to Victoria …” [having higher than ambient noise destroys this (ambient level being the level prior to industry arriving)]
13.04-1 Noise abatement states [emphasis mine]: that the Objective is “To assist the control of noise effects on sensitive land uses” [i.e. not to see how loud it can be inflicted on us] and the Strategy is to: “Ensure that … community amenity is not reduced by noise emissions, using a range of building design, urban design and land use separation techniquesas appropriate to the land use functions and character of the area” [i.e. our amenity is not to be reduced!!]
13.04-2 Air quality protection states [emphasis mine]:
“Objective: To assist the protection and improvement of air quality.
Strategies: Ensure that land-use planning … provision contributes to improved air quality by: … Ensure, wherever possible, that there is suitable separation between land uses that reduce amenity and sensitive land uses.
Policy guidelines: Planning must consider as relevant:
* State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management).
* Recommended Buffer Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions (Environmental Protection Authority, 1990) in assessing the separation between land uses that reduce amenity and sensitive land uses.” [but, in our case, the “Recommended Buffer Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions” had been ignored, and the requirement for the “protection and improvement of air quality” has also, in our case, been ignored].
14.03-2 Stone resources [emphasis mine] “Provide buffer areas between new extractive industries and sensitive land uses, determined on the following principles: * Clearly defined buffer areas appropriate to the nature of the proposed extractive uses, which are to be owned or controlled by the proponent of an extractive industry, are specified in an application for permit”. [the purpose of the buffer is so that the noise (and dust, etc) is contained within land owned or controlled by the proponent or operator, and to ensure that the ambient situation is protected and maintained, but, in our case, this has been ignored, as has the requirement for “Clearly defined buffer area” and the need for the buffer to be “owned or controlled by the proponent”]
17.02-2 Industry [emphasis mine] “Provide adequate separation and buffer areas between sensitive uses and offensive or dangerous industries and quarries to ensure that residents are not affected by adverse environmental effects, nuisance or exposure to hazards”. [nuisance and hazards includes noise, dust, exhaust, odour, gases, vapours, danger and the like and the buffer is so that the noise and dust, etc is contained and the ambient situation is protected and maintained, but, in our case, this has been ignored]
17.03-1 Facilitating tourism [emphasis mine] “Encourage the development of a range of well designed and sited tourist facilities, including … smaller scale operations such as host farm, bed and breakfast …. and be compatible with and build upon the assets and qualities of surrounding … rural activities and cultural and natural attractions” [Bed and breakfast tourism is an “as-of-right” under the Farming Zone (35.07) whereas extractive industry is not an “as-of-right” under the FZ, is not even an “as-of-right” in an EIIA (extractive Industry Interest Area). We have been barred from having a bed and breakfast due to the authorities, including EPA, having thrust noise (and dust, and, and, and) upon us, thus making sure that no-one would want to come and stay]
21.07 Environmental Values [Baw Baw Shire Council] [emphasis mine] “Ensure environmental quality and that expert advice is obtained on the potential impact of developments or land uses on the environment and amenity of residents” [but the expert advice has to be valid and not biased, and has to be accurate. The “amenity of residents”, but, in our case, it has been reduced]
21.09 Economic Activity [emphasis mine]:
21.09-3 “Protect the amenity of residents by appropriate design and siting requirements and pursuit of minimum impacttechniques” [again, our amenity has to be protected, but, in our case, has not been so protected – to the contrary]
21.09-4 “Seek to attract high quality tourist development that is compatible with the environmental values of the area” [emphasis is in the planning scheme, and bed and breakfast tourism is an “as-of-right” under the Farming Zone (35.07) whereas extractive industry is not an “as-of-right” under the FZ, is not even an “as-of-right” in an EIIA (extractive Industry Interest Area). We have been barred from having a bed and breakfast due to the authorities, including EPA, having thrust noise (and dust, and, and, and) upon us, thus making sure that no-one would want to come and stay]
22.01 General land use and development policies states [emphasis mine] “Policy – It is policy that: * The co-ordinated and planned development of land should be pursued in order to achieve economic growth, sustainable management of the environment, a continuing increase in the quality of life for all residents and a systematic process of urban development.” [far from an “increase in the quality of life for … residents”, in our case there has been a significantdecrease]
22.05 Economic Development (22.05-2) [emphasis mine] “Baw Baw Shire Council seeks to attract high quality tourist development that is compatible with the environmental attributes of the area. Development should be designed to be unobtrusive and ensure that current environmental and aesthetic values are retained and not degraded”. [Bed and breakfast tourism is an “as-of-right” under the Farming Zone (35.07) whereas extractive industry is not an “as-of-right” under the FZ, is not even an “as-of-right” in an EIIA (extractive Industry Interest Area). We have been barred from having a bed and breakfast due to the authorities, including EPA, having thrust noise (and dust, and, and, and) upon us, thus making sure that no-one would want to come and stay]
35.07 Farming Zone [emphasis mine] “To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies” [as identified above and below, including but not limited to the protection of the amenity that existed prior to the arrival of industry]
52.09 Extractive Industry And Extractive Industry Interest Areas [emphasis mine]: “To ensure that use and development of land for extractive industry does not adversely affect the environment or amenity of the area during orafter extraction” [protection of the amenity that existed prior to the arrival of industry, but, in our case, it has been ignored and there are significant adverse impacts]
52.09-3:
- “* The effect of the extractive industry operation on the natural and cultural landscape of the surrounding land and the locality generally….
- * The effect of vehicular traffic, noise, blasting, dust and vibration on the amenity of the surrounding area.”
[protection of the amenity that existed prior to the arrival of industry, but, in our case, the impacts have been minimised, ignored and denied, in spite of reality]
Other legislation
SEPP N1 [emphasis mine]: (clause 20) “ “beneficial use” means a use of the environment or any element or segment of the environment which is conducive to public benefit, welfare, safety or health and which requires protection from the effects of the emission of noise” [but our “benefit”, our “welfare”, our “safety”, and our “health” have all been ignored, and, in our case, there has been no “protection from the effects of the emission of noise”]
Mineral Resource (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 (s77J Conditions of extractive industry work authorities) [emphasis mine]: “(1) The Minister may impose conditions to which an extractive industry work authority is to be subject, including but not limited to conditions about— … (d) the protection of the amenity of the area” [the condition has been provided but, in our case, there has not been the required enforcement of that “protection of the amenity of the area”. In addition, unless the planning scheme has been complied with, the work authority can be cancelled (s77O Cancellation of an extractive industry work authority) [emphasis mine]: “(1) The Minister may cancel an extractive industry work authority by instrument served on the holder of the work authority if at the end of 28 days the Minister is satisfied that the holder— (a) has not substantially complied with— (i) this Act or the regulations; or (ii) any condition to which the authority is subject; or (iii) a condition of a work plan under section 77G; or (iv) a condition on the approval of a variation of a work plan under section 77H; or (v) any relevant planning scheme or planning permit; or (b) has endangered an employee or a member of the public on or near land to which the extractive industry work authority applies; or (c) has undertaken work on the land other than in accordance with the work plan” [but, in our case, the quarry had not complied with the Act because it had not implemented the planning scheme, had not complied with conditions, had not provided all the information a work plan is required to provide, had not complied with the permit, had not complied with the planning scheme, had not complied with the work plan, had provided information which allows for the future danger to persons on their own land, and had undertaken work on land that is not in accordance with the work plan, etc]
The EP Act 1970 states [emphasis mine]:
“1A Purpose of Act
(1) The purpose of this Act is to create a legislative framework for the protection of the environment in Victoria having regard to the principles of environment protection.
(2) The principles of environment protection are set out in sections 1B to 1L.
(3) It is the intention of Parliament that in the administration of this Act regard should be given to the principles of environment protection.”
“1B Principle of integration of economic, social and environmental considerations
(1) Sound environmental practices and procedures should be adopted as a basis for ecologically sustainable development for the benefit of all human beings and the environment.
(2) This requires the effective integration of economic, social and environmental considerations in decision making processes with the need to improve community well-being and the benefit of future generations.
(3) The measures adopted should be cost-effective and in proportion to the significance of the environmental problems being addressed.”
“1C The precautionary principle
(1) If there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation.
(2) Decision making should be guided by—
(a) a careful evaluation to avoid serious or irreversible damage to the environment wherever practicable; and
(b) an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.”
“1D Principle of intergenerational equity
The present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations.”
“1E Principle of conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity
The conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration in decision making.”
“1F Principle of improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms
(1) Environmental factors should be included in the valuation of assets and services.
(2) Persons who generate pollution and waste should bear the cost of containment, avoidance and abatement.
(3) Users of goods and services should pay prices based on the full life cycle costs of providing the goods and services, including costs relating to the use of natural resources and the ultimate disposal of wastes.
(4) Established environmental goals should be pursued in the most cost effective way by establishing incentive structures, including market mechanisms, which enable persons best placed to maximise benefits or minimise costs to develop solutions and responses to environmental problems.”
“1G Principle of shared responsibility
(1) Protection of the environment is a responsibility shared by all levels of Government and industry, business, communities and the people of Victoria.
(2) Producers of goods and services should produce competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and improve quality of life while progressively reducing ecological degradation and resource intensity throughout the full life cycle of the goods and services to a level consistent with the sustainability of biodiversity and ecological systems.”
“1H Principle of product stewardship
Producers and users of goods and services have a shared responsibility with Government to manage the environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of the goods and services, including the ultimate disposal of any wastes.”
“1I Principle of wastes hierarchy
Wastes should be managed in accordance with the following order of preference—
(a) avoidance;
(b) re-use;
(c) re-cycling;
(d) recovery of energy;
(e) treatment;
(f) containment;
(g) disposal.”
“1J Principle of integrated environmental management
If approaches to managing environmental impacts on one segment of the environment have potential impacts on another segment, the best practicable environmental outcome should be sought.”
“1K Principle of enforcement
Enforcement of environmental requirements should be undertaken for the purpose of—
(a) better protecting the environment and its economic and social uses;
(b) ensuring that no commercial advantage is obtained by any person who fails to comply with environmental requirements;
(c) influencing the attitude and behaviour of persons whose actions may have adverse environmental impacts or who develop, invest in, purchase or use goods and services which may have adverse environmental impacts.”
“1L Principle of accountability
(1) The aspirations of the people of Victoria for environmental quality should drive environmental improvement.
(2) Members of the public should therefore be given—
(a) access to reliable and relevant information in appropriate forms to facilitate a good understanding of environmental issues;
(b) opportunities to participate in policy and program development.”
“4 [Definitions]: ‘beneficial use’ means a use of the environment or any element or segment of the environment which—
(a) is conducive to public benefit, welfare, safety, health or aesthetic enjoyment and which requires protection from the effects of waste discharges, emissions or deposits or of the emission of noise; or
(b) is declared in State environment protection policy to be a beneficial use”
“13 Powers, duties and functions of Authority
(1) The powers duties and functions of the Authority shall be— …
(k) to undertake investigations and inspections to ensure compliance with this Act and to investigate complaintsrelating to breaches of this Act…”
In our case, there were significant failures in the above areas.
Other confirmation
SEPP N1 Explanatory Notes [emphasis mine]
- (point 1 “Purpose”) “…(SEPPs) set out policies of the Government to control and reduce environmental pollution. They protect the environment from pollution caused by waste discharges and noise” [this has not been done]
- (point 2 “Aims”) “to protect people from the effects of noise in noise sensitive areas where people sleep, or carry out other normal domestic activities” [this has not been done]
- (point 5.2) “Beneficial uses protected (Part II) – The Policy aims to protect normal domestic and recreational activities.” [ in our case this has not been done]
N3/89 Control Of Noise From Industry In Country Victoria states [emphasis mine] “…When in the opinion of the Authority a particularly quiet area should be preserved it may establish more stringent limits or to oppose the proposal at the outset.” [in our case this has not been done]
The Extractive Industry Proposals VPP Practice Note April 2006 (DSE publication) states [emphasis mine]:
- (page 4): “Clause 52.09 of the VPP contains provisions relating to extractive industry and Extractive Industry Interest Areas (EIIA). The provisions ensure that use and development of land for extractive industry does not adversely affect the environment or amenity of the area, …” and “Clause 52.09 also sets out specific requirements that a responsible authority must consider before deciding on an application. The responsible authority should also consider the wider implications of an extractive industry on the local area, as well as the site, when assessing the planning permit application. In particular, consideration should be given to: • the State, regional and local benefit of the proposal • any environmental … • the likelihood of dust and noise emissions …• any traffic impacts such as accessibility, car parking, road degradation and maintenance, road pollution, road safety or disturbance to residents …” [in our case this has not been done]
- (page 7): “In order to both safeguard extractive industry operations as well as the amenity, health, safety and environment of surrounding land it is necessary to ensure an appropriate separation distance, or buffer, is maintained between extractive industry operations and sensitive uses on adjoining land. New extractive industries are required to own or control a clearly defined buffer area which is appropriate to the nature of the proposed operations.” [in our case this has not been done]
Geological Survey of Victoria Technical Record 1996/1 Melbourne Supply Area Extractive Industry Interest Areas states: (page – point 11) “[suggestion] Performance standards – to be met at the quarry boundaries for noise, dust, ground vibration, air blast, and fly rock – are the key factors that will determine the internal buffer widths of future quarries, including current applications. Considering all the evidence and the indicative distances, the Committee believes it is prudent to have a minimum internal buffer of 200 metres. These performance standards should be included in the State Extractive Industry Policy.” (response noted in the document) “The Government agrees with the concept of performance standards. Such standards will be applied on a site specific basis to determine the width of internal buffers for future quarries necessary to protect amenity in adjoining areas. The Government does not agree that there should be a minimum internal buffer of 200 metres. To require a minimum 200 metres buffer would impose an unnecessary burden on operators and is contrary to the concept of performance standards. Part of Recommendation 11 is that current applications should contain internal buffers determined by performance standards. It is the Government’s view that it would be unreasonable to rigidly impose performance based internal buffers on applications that were made before this concept was proposed. However the Government is considering a requirement that all quarries meet the performance standards at their boundaries within a certain number of years. In the meantime, adequate buffers need to be maintained around such sites to protect amenity in adjoining areas.” [in our case there is no protection and no adequate buffer]
Guidelines To Planning Reforms Associated With The Extractive Industries Development Act 1995 G2 (page 2): “In this context, objectives of the Government’s extractive industries reforms are to: …* • protect environmental and amenity values” [in our case this has not been done]
Noise Vibration and Airblast Control – Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining (by Environment Australia, Department of the Environment) [extractive industry now comes under the MRSDA along with mining]:
- (clause 1.2) “Noise from mining is a common source of community concern because operational noise emissions frequently occur on a continuous basis. This can interfere unreasonably with day to day activities, particularly concentration, recreation and sleep, and result in an adverse impact on residential amenity.” [in our case there is a significant adverse impact on the amenity of those adjacent]
- (clause 2.3) “In addition to effects on the body, noise and vibration also cause psychological reactions. The psychological response is determined by personal factors and by factors associated with the noise or vibration itself. The attitude or mood of the person, his or her environment, the degree of arousal or distraction and whether the noise or vibration is felt to be an invasion of privacy or disruptive (particularly involving concentration such as studying, etc) will dictate personal response. The importance of the task being performed, the relationship of the noise or vibration to reaction. There are very specific ways that noise produces psychological effects. These are, essentially, interference with communication and concentration, sleep disturbance and in inspiring fear. These factors lead to irritability which is the first sign of the psychological impact of noise. …” [clearly noise impacts the psychology of people affected by it, and this has proved true in our case – it has caused both anxiety and depression. We had intended to retire to our beautiful quiet property, but, because council, DPI, EPA (and other authorities) ignored the planning scheme requirements, as a consequence are unable to retire here or have the planned bed and breakfast, and now have a property that is fairly useless and has suffered a conservative loss of ~21% in value]
The planning officer and manager for statutory planning, Peter McWhinney, stated in relation to a quarry application (now a quarry) adjacent to us, in his report dated 11 June 2008:
(page 4) “…in addition to the decision guidelines of Clause 65 of the scheme requires the council to consider: *…The effect of vehicular traffic, noise, blasting, dust and vibration on the amenity of the surrounding area …”
(pages 4 & 5) “What matters should the responsible authority consider when assessing a planning permit application for extractive industry? Clause 52.09 of the VPP contains provisions relating to extractive industry and Extractive Industry Interest Areas (EIIA). The provisions ensure that use and development of land for extractive industry does notadversely affect the environment or amenity of the area….The responsible authority should also consider the wider implications of an extractive industry on the local area, as well as the site, when assessing the planning permit application. In particular, consideration should be given to:
- … the likelihood of dust and noise emissions
- … the general amenity (landscape and visual)
- buffer requirements set out in Clause [14.03] of the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF), including ensuring that the buffer area to a new extractive industry is owned or controlled by the proponent boundary setbacks.”
(page 7) “Protecting existing extractive industries. Extractive industry operations can generate ground and air vibration, dust, noise, and changes to the topography and landscape. In order to both safeguard extractive industry operations as well as the amenity, health, safety and environment of surrounding land it is necessary to ensure an appropriate separation distance, or buffer, is maintained between extractive industry operations and sensitive uses on adjoining land. New extractive industries are required to own or control a clearly defined buffer area which is appropriate to the nature of the proposed operations.”
(page 12) “Whilst a prosperous economy is encouraged by the scheme, the scheme also requires the protection of the environment, amenity, landscape values and health and well-being”.
(page 16) “Whilst the area is not in a residential zone it is still important to protect the amenity of residents and the scheme requires this”.
However, Peter then failed to adequately consider those very things that he said he must consider!
It is clear that the amenity and protections have largely been ignored in our case, because instead of ensuring that “amenity is not reduced” and that there is a “protection and improvement” of the amenity, it has been significantly reduced, land values have significantly decreased, and agricultural land use ability on our property has been significantly reduced. There has certainly been no increase in the welfare of quality of life, and there has absolutely been a decrease in both.
The very requirements have been ignored and the reverse has been thrust upon us – with no apparent care or concern – but such failures apparently meets the authorities’ “satisfaction” criteria!!