title: Heritage Overlay HO999 and HO843 Deletion - 8 Union Street, West Bendigo council: greater-bendigo state: vic category: constraint classification: MINOR status: in-progress last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf
Heritage Overlay HO999 and HO843 Deletion - 8 Union Street, West Bendigo
The proposed deletion of HO999 and HO843 from 8 Union Street is a site-specific correction within Amendment C285gben, not a strategic reassessment of heritage significance across West Bendigo. The practical effect is to remove two Heritage Overlay controls from one privately owned residential property because Council’s exhibited amendment material states that the overlays were mapped onto the site in error. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.105-106)
The main planning issue is therefore accuracy of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme rather than loss of a confirmed heritage place. The secondary issue is bushfire risk, because the same site remains within the Bushfire Management Overlay and Council’s amendment material assesses whether removing the heritage control could increase exposure to bushfire risk. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.114-116)
Background
Amendment C285gben is a corrections amendment prepared by the City of Greater Bendigo 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 parts of 23 other properties. (Source: 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 West Bendigo. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.33) For 8 Union Street, West Bendigo, the amendment proposes to delete HO843, identified as the Lazarus Street/Poorman’s Gully Precinct, and HO999, identified as Miners’ Cottages - Bendigo, Ironbark, Long Gully, North Bendigo and West Bendigo, from Planning Scheme Map No. 18HO. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.105-106)
Council’s explanatory report states that 8 Union Street contains a 1950 dwelling and was incorrectly identified and mapped as part of both HO999 and HO843. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.109) The mapping reference table identifies the land as private land and links the deletion to mapping reference Greater Bendigo C285gben d-hoMap18 Exhibition. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.129-130)
Analysis
Mapping Correction Mechanism
The mechanism is simple: the planning scheme map currently applies two heritage controls to a private residential lot, and Amendment C285gben would change the Heritage Overlay map so those controls no longer apply to that lot. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.105-106) In practical terms, the amendment is treating 8 Union Street as a cartographic error rather than as a place whose heritage significance has been positively disproved through a full heritage assessment in the exhibited agenda material. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.109)
This matters because a Heritage Overlay is a permit trigger and conservation control; if it is wrongly applied, it can require heritage assessment for works on land that the planning authority does not regard as containing the heritage fabric or precinct value the overlay was intended to manage. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.122-123) Council’s strategic assessment says the amendment rationalises the use of the Heritage Overlay by deleting it from places where its application cannot be justified or is erroneous. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.122)
The specific effect for 8 Union Street is narrow because the amendment does not rezone the land, does not remove the Bushfire Management Overlay, and does not introduce a new land-use permission for the site. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.114-116) The change removes heritage permit triggers associated with HO999 and HO843, but other applicable planning controls continue to operate. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.114-116)
Heritage Logic and Planning Scheme Integrity
Council frames the deletion as consistent with Planning Practice Note 1 because that guidance requires accurate correlation between the Heritage Overlay schedule and the Heritage Overlay map. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.122-123) The underlying planning logic is that an overlay should match the heritage place it is intended to protect; if a boundary captures unrelated land, the planning scheme becomes harder to administer and may impose controls without a clear heritage basis. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.122-124)
The agenda material does not provide the statements of significance for HO843 or HO999, nor does it provide a site-specific heritage citation explaining why the 1950 dwelling at 8 Union Street falls outside the heritage values of those overlays. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.105-110) That is an analytical limitation: the available source supports the conclusion that Council considers the mapping erroneous, but it does not allow independent testing of the original overlay boundary, the heritage criteria for HO843 or HO999, or the physical relationship between 8 Union Street and the relevant precincts or miners’ cottages grouping. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.105-110)
Bushfire Risk Interaction
8 Union Street is within the Bushfire Management Overlay, so Council assessed whether deleting the Heritage Overlay could alter bushfire risk. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.114) The site is described as approximately 890 square metres, developed with a dwelling and associated sheds, and located within an established residential area. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.114-115)
Council’s bushfire assessment identifies Box Ironbark Forest within 150 metres to the north and north-west, with generally flat to downslope topography from the site. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.115) The same assessment states there is no vegetation to the south, south-east, east or north-east because those areas are generally developed with dwellings. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.115)
The site has access and egress via Union Street, Harvey Street and Lazarus Street, connecting through an urban area for approximately 240 metres to Marong Road to the south. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.115-116) Council identifies Marong Road as being in Transport Zone 2 and approximately 240 metres south of the site. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.115)
Council characterises the bushfire risk at 8 Union Street as moderate because the site is within 150 metres of dense vegetation to the north and north-west. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.115) Council also states that future development on the site can achieve a BAL rating of less than 12.5 because a 126 metre setback from vegetation to the north-west is achievable. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.115)
The risk conclusion is that deleting the Heritage Overlay is unlikely to put more people or property at risk because the lot is small, the existing bushfire risk is moderate, the land is already developed, the site is in an established residential area, and the Bushfire Management Overlay remains in place. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.115-116) Council states that the deletion is unlikely to result in a net increase in risk to life, property, community infrastructure or the natural environment from bushfire. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.116)
Submissions and Contestation
The amendment was exhibited from 23 October 2025 to 22 December 2025 after the exhibition period was extended due to a minor administrative error requiring additional notifications. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.37) Council received nine submissions, comprising five opposing submissions and four supporting submissions. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.34)
The unresolved submissions did not focus on 8 Union Street; the agenda identifies the two unresolved issues as concerns about removal of Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 2 from public land in or near Bendigo Regional Park. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32, 34-36) Four opposing submissions were from residents concerned about VPO2 removal from public land near their properties, and one opposing submitter requested that the amendment be changed to include their land. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.34)
This means the 8 Union Street heritage deletion appears uncontested in the exhibited submission summary available in the agenda. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.34-36) The practical significance is that the Panel process for Amendment C285gben is likely to focus on unresolved vegetation-protection issues rather than the West Bendigo heritage map correction, unless a submitter or agency raises 8 Union Street separately in material not included in the agenda. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.34-37)
Current Status
As reported to Council on 20 April 2026, Amendment C285gben had completed public exhibition, had received nine submissions, and had two unresolved submissions. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32-36) The officer recommendation was for Council to request the Minister for Planning to appoint a Planning Panel and refer all submissions to that Panel under Part 8 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.33)
The exhibited amendment material listed a directions hearing for the week starting Monday 18 May 2026 and a Panel hearing for the week starting Monday 15 June 2026. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.101) The agenda states that a further report would be presented to Council after the Panel’s recommendations to support a decision on adoption of the amendment. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.32)
Dependencies
- Blocks: The deletion blocks final removal of HO999 and HO843 from 8 Union Street until Amendment C285gben completes the amendment process and the relevant planning scheme map is changed. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32-33, 105-106)
- Blocked by: The deletion is procedurally tied to Amendment C285gben, including Panel referral because unresolved submissions remain on the broader amendment. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32-37)
- Informed by: The available source is the Council agenda and explanatory report for Amendment C285gben, including the strategic assessment, bushfire assessment and mapping reference table. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.100-130)
- Implements: The deletion implements Council’s stated objective of correcting overlay mapping errors and improving the legibility and efficiency of the planning scheme. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.107-108, 122-124)
- Conflicts with: No site-specific conflict about 8 Union Street is identified in the submission summary available in the agenda. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.34-36)
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
The available source does not identify any cross-jurisdictional planning dependency for the 8 Union Street heritage deletion. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.100-130) State-level process links remain relevant because the amendment requires Ministerial authorisation, potential Panel appointment, and completion through the Victorian planning scheme amendment process. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32-39)
Transport for Victoria advised that Amendment C285gben comprises administrative and mapping corrections, does not affect land within Transport Zone 1 or Transport Zone 2, does not affect road access arrangements or operation of the State Transport Network, and is not expected to have any material impact on transport interests. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.97-98) Goulburn-Murray Water advised that it had no objection to Amendment C285gben. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.96-97)
Gaps in This Analysis
The source set is thin because the manifest contains only one Council agenda document. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf) The analysis lacks the original HO843 and HO999 statements of significance, the exhibited d-hoMap18 map sheet, any heritage citation or field assessment for 8 Union Street, and any post-exhibition Panel material. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.105-110, 129-130)
The agenda states that the CFA had not yet been consulted on the proposed deletion of the Heritage Overlay from 8 Union Street and that CFA views would be sought during formal exhibition. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.116) No CFA response specific to 8 Union Street is included in the available source, so the bushfire-risk analysis relies on Council’s assessment rather than an independent fire authority response for this site. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.114-116)
The agenda does not include a final Council resolution, Panel report, adopted amendment documents, approved amendment documents, or gazettal notice. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32-39) The current status should therefore be treated as in-progress unless later statutory documents confirm adoption, approval or abandonment. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32-39)