title: Heritage Overlay HO934 - The Palms, 45 Palm Avenue Spring Gully council: greater-bendigo state: vic category: constraint classification: MINOR status: in-progress last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf
Heritage Overlay HO934 - The Palms, 45 Palm Avenue Spring Gully
HO934 is a heritage-control correction rather than a newly discovered heritage place: the council report states that The Palms at 45 Palm Avenue, Spring Gully had already been mapped under the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme, but had not been inserted into the Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay schedule as required. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.108) The practical planning effect is to align the map, the Heritage Overlay schedule, and the incorporated statement of significance so that the overlay can operate with clearer statutory footing for the relevant part of the land. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-107)
Background
HO934 forms one component of Planning Scheme Amendment C285gben, a municipal corrections amendment that proposes to correct zoning and overlay mapping errors, remove redundant overlays, update planning scheme text, rezone one property to a residential zone, and apply the Heritage Overlay to two properties and part of 23 other properties. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-34) The amendment affects land across multiple Greater Bendigo suburbs and localities, including Spring Gully. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.33, 101)
For The Palms, the amendment proposes to insert HO934 into the Schedule to Clause 43.01 for part of the land at 45 Palm Avenue, Spring Gully. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-106) The amendment also proposes to insert the incorporated document titled Statement of Significance: Part of 45 Palm Avenue, Spring Gully, dated March 2019, into Clause 72.04. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.106)
Analysis
Statutory Mechanism
The mechanism is a schedule-and-document correction to the Heritage Overlay, not a broad rezoning or land supply change. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108) In simple terms, the planning scheme map already showed the heritage control for The Palms, but the written list that gives the mapped control its detailed planning-scheme identity did not include the place. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.108) Amendment C285gben therefore works like fixing a label in a filing system: the place was in the mapped drawer, but the written index was incomplete. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108)
The amendment proposes three linked statutory actions for HO934. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-107) First, it identifies HO934 as The Palms on part of the land at 45 Palm Avenue, Spring Gully in the Heritage Overlay schedule. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-106) Second, it relies on a March 2019 statement of significance for part of 45 Palm Avenue as an incorporated document. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.106) Third, it treats the omission from Clause 43.01 as an anomaly to be corrected because the mapped heritage place was not inserted into the schedule when required. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.108)
This matters because Planning Practice Note 1 requires accurate correlation between the Heritage Overlay map and the Heritage Overlay schedule, and the council report expressly relies on that principle when explaining the corrections to heritage controls. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.122-123) The issue is therefore not whether Spring Gully should generally have heritage controls, but whether the planning scheme accurately records the existing mapped heritage place and its statement of significance. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108, 122-123)
Planning Effect
The direct planning effect is confined to part of 45 Palm Avenue rather than the whole property. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-106) Because the source document does not reproduce the HO934 map extent or the March 2019 statement of significance, this page cannot identify the exact heritage fabric, curtilage, contributory elements, or permit triggers that would apply on the affected part of the land. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108)
The available material indicates that the purpose of the HO934 correction is planning-scheme legibility and enforceability. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.107-108, 122-124) If the amendment proceeds, decision-makers would have a clearer link between the mapped heritage place, the Clause 43.01 schedule entry, and the incorporated statement of significance. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108) If the amendment does not proceed, the agenda material indicates the anomaly would remain: the place would continue to be mapped, but the schedule entry and incorporated documentation would not be corrected through C285gben. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108)
Relationship to Amendment C285gben
HO934 is one of five heritage places that C285gben proposes to insert into the Clause 43.01 schedule with references to five statements of significance. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-107) The other listed heritage places are Hard Hill at 57 Green Street, California Gully; Hope Park at 12 Weir Court, Kangaroo Flat; Residence at 1320 Calder Highway, Marong; and Sheard’s House and Orchard Wall at 216 Carpenter Street and associated land in Quarry Hill. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-107)
The amendment is not a heritage-only amendment. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-34) It also proposes zoning corrections, removal of redundant overlays, changes to the public open space contribution map, and application of Design and Development Overlay Schedule 35 to 31 Ayres Street, Argyle for bushfire-related setbacks. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.101-107) This wider packaging means HO934 is procedurally tied to unresolved submissions about vegetation controls elsewhere in the amendment, even though the available report does not identify any submission objecting to HO934 itself. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.34-36)
Submissions and Contested Issues
C285gben received nine submissions after exhibition, including five opposing submissions and four supporting submissions. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.34) The unresolved submissions relate to vegetation protection in Bendigo Regional Park, not to The Palms or HO934. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32, 34-36) Three opposing submissions were withdrawn after clarification by council officers or did not require amendment changes, while two unresolved submissions were recommended for referral to a Planning Panel. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.34-36)
The key contested issue in the amendment is whether removing Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 2 from public land in Bendigo Regional Park would weaken vegetation protection. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.34-36) Council officers responded that the affected public land is protected by public land zoning, Parks Victoria management, and statutory responsibilities under the Parks Victoria Act 2018. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.35-36) This contested issue can delay the whole amendment pathway because the council report recommends referral of all submissions to an independent Planning Panel. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-33, 36-37)
Policy Fit
The amendment is framed as supporting Clause 15.03-1S, which seeks conservation of places of heritage significance, because it applies heritage controls to new places and updates statements of significance for heritage places. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.120) It is also framed as supporting Clause 02.03-5 of the Municipal Planning Strategy, which identifies protection of heritage assets while accommodating projected population growth. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.121-122)
For HO934, the policy fit is narrow but important: it strengthens the administrative completeness of the heritage control for one Spring Gully place. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108, 120-123) The agenda material does not provide enough evidence to assess whether the March 2019 statement of significance is robust, whether the mapped curtilage is proportionate, or whether any alternative heritage-control extent was considered. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108)
Current Status
C285gben was exhibited from 23 October 2025 to 22 December 2025 after the original exhibition period was extended due to a minor administrative error requiring additional notifications. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.37) The April 20, 2026 council agenda recommended that Council request the Minister for Planning to appoint a Planning Panel and refer all submissions to that Panel. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-33) The explanatory report listed a directions hearing in the week starting Monday 18 May 2026 and a Panel hearing in the week starting Monday 15 June 2026. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.101)
The available source is an agenda, not adopted minutes or a Panel report, so this page can confirm the officer recommendation and scheduled panel dates but cannot confirm whether Council resolved as recommended, whether the Panel was appointed, or whether any Panel directions changed the HO934 component. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-39, 101)
Dependencies
- Blocks: The available material does not identify any development, permit, or strategic planning process that is blocked by HO934. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-39, 105-108)
- Blocked by: HO934’s schedule correction is procedurally dependent on C285gben progressing through the amendment process, including resolution of unresolved submissions through the Planning Panel pathway. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-37)
- Informed by: The HO934 correction is informed by the March 2019 Statement of Significance for part of 45 Palm Avenue, Spring Gully, but that statement is not reproduced in the supplied source. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.106)
- Implements: The amendment is framed as implementing heritage conservation policy at Clause 15.03-1S and built environment and heritage directions at Clause 02.03-5. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.120-122)
- Conflicts with: The available material does not identify any conflict specific to HO934, and the unresolved amendment submissions relate to vegetation protection controls elsewhere. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.34-36)
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
The available material does not identify a cross-jurisdictional dependency for HO934. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-39, 105-108) C285gben was referred to relevant authorities, and the agenda includes no-objection responses from Goulburn-Murray Water and Head, Transport for Victoria for the amendment as a whole. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.96-98) Those authority responses do not provide HO934-specific analysis. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.96-98)
Gaps in This Analysis
The main analytical gap is the absence of the March 2019 Statement of Significance for part of 45 Palm Avenue, Spring Gully. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, p.106) Without that document, this page cannot identify the heritage criteria, significant fabric, historical associations, aesthetic values, comparative analysis, integrity, curtilage rationale, or conservation management implications for The Palms. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108)
The second gap is the absence of the HO934 planning scheme map extract. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-106) The agenda states that HO934 applies to part of 45 Palm Avenue, but it does not show the boundary, area, or relationship between the mapped control and buildings, gardens, accessways, outbuildings, or subdivision boundaries. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.105-108)
The third gap is procedural. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-39, 101) The available source is the April 20, 2026 agenda and does not include adopted minutes, the Planning Panel report, Council’s post-panel decision, ministerial approval, or gazettal notice. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-39, 101) This should be recorded in _gaps as an important gap for final status confirmation. (Source: agendas-and-meeting-minutes-city-greater-bendigo-council-meeting-april-20-2026-agenda.pdf, pp.32-39, 101)