title: Clause 53.01 Public Open Space Contribution and Subdivision Map and Street Name Correction council: greater-bendigo state: vic category: strategy classification: MINOR status: in-progress last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf
- City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-Minutes-April-20-2026.pdf
Clause 53.01 Public Open Space Contribution and Subdivision Map and Street Name Correction
This initiative is a narrow correction to the Clause 53.01 Public Open Space Contribution and Subdivision schedule rather than a new open-space funding policy: the amendment keeps the contribution rates intact and updates Map 1 for the Locality of Bendigo by correcting two street names, Havlin Street East and Charleston Place. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36) The practical planning issue is that the exhibited version accidentally introduced a boundary error, showing the Locality of Bendigo boundary following the railway line in the south when council officers state it should follow Breen Street and Gladstone Street. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36)
Background
The Clause 53.01 correction sits inside Planning Scheme Amendment C285gben, a broader corrections amendment that addresses zoning and overlay mapping errors, removes redundant overlays, corrects planning scheme text, rezones one property to a residential zone, and applies the Heritage Overlay to two properties and part of 23 properties. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.32) Amendment C285gben applies across multiple Greater Bendigo suburbs, towns and localities, including Bendigo, California Gully, Eaglehawk, Epsom, Flora Hill, Golden Gully, Golden Square, Jackass Flat, Kangaroo Flat, Kennington, Marong, Quarry Hill, Spring Gully, West Bendigo, Heathcote, Argyle, Big Hill, Lockwood South and Shelbourne. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.33)
Council previously resolved on 22 April 2024 to request authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit the amendment, prepare the amendment documentation subject to authorisation, exhibit the amendment under section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and authorise minor officer changes that did not alter the amendment’s overall intent. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.38-39) The Minister for Planning authorised preparation and exhibition on 22 August 2025, subject to conditions, including deletion of three properties so proposed rezonings were consistent with Clause 13.02-1S Bushfire planning. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.39)
The amendment was exhibited from 23 October 2025 to 22 December 2025 after the exhibition period was extended because a minor administrative notification error required additional notices. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.37) Exhibition included approximately 800 letters to affected and adjoining owners and occupiers, Government Gazette notices on 23 October 2025 and 20 November 2025, notice to prescribed ministers and relevant authorities, newspaper notices, and online access through council and Department of Transport and Planning channels. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.37)
Analysis
Mechanism of the Clause 53.01 Correction
The operative Clause 53.01 schedule in the agenda attachment lists three residential subdivision public open space contribution settings: 2 per cent for residential subdivisions within the locality of Bendigo, 6.3 per cent for land within the former Golden Square Primary School site at 6 Laurel Street, Golden Square, and 5 per cent for all other residential subdivisions. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.135) The correction therefore matters because Map 1 defines the Locality of Bendigo area to which the 2 per cent contribution applies, while land outside that locality but still within the general residential subdivision category is listed at 5 per cent unless another specific line applies. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.135)
The amendment documentation states that Amendment C285gben would amend the Schedule to Clause 53.01 by replacing Map 1 with an updated locality map for Bendigo. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.106) The officer report later narrows the purpose of that update: the exhibited amendment proposed minor wording changes to the Clause 53.01 map by updating two street names to Havlin Street East and Charleston Place. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36) In making those street-name updates, the exhibited document inadvertently created a Locality of Bendigo boundary error. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36)
The under-the-hood planning mechanism is simple: a map intended to clarify labels accidentally changed the apparent spatial boundary that determines where the 2 per cent Bendigo locality rate applies. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135) Council officers stated that the current boundary on the Locality of Bendigo map is accurate and that the only intended ordinance changes are the street-name updates for Havlin Street East and Charleston Place. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36)
Why the Boundary Error Matters
The difference between the 2 per cent Bendigo locality rate and the 5 per cent general residential subdivision rate is 3 percentage points, meaning the general rate is 2.5 times the Bendigo locality rate. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.135) If a boundary line were wrongly interpreted, the potential effect would be not merely cartographic: it could change which open-space contribution rate applies to residential subdivision land near the Locality of Bendigo boundary. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135)
Council’s proposed treatment limits that risk by telling the Planning Panel that the existing boundary remains the correct boundary and that the amendment should only update the two street names. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36) This makes the Clause 53.01 component an administrative correction rather than a policy shift in public open space funding, because the agenda material does not identify any proposed change to the 2 per cent, 5 per cent or 6.3 per cent contribution rates. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135)
Relationship to the Broader C285gben Corrections Amendment
The Clause 53.01 correction is a small part of a larger amendment that primarily corrects zoning anomalies or mapping errors affecting 40 properties. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.107) Of those 40 properties, 23 are publicly owned or managed and are proposed to be rezoned from inappropriate public or private-purpose zones to either Public Conservation and Resource Zone or Public Park and Recreation Zone. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.107) Seventeen of the 40 properties are privately owned and are proposed to be rezoned to Farming Zone Schedule 1, Low Density Residential Zone Schedule 1 or General Residential Zone to reflect their private ownership and current farming or residential use. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.107-108)
The broader amendment also responds to public open space governance issues beyond Clause 53.01: some council-owned General Residential Zone land has been transferred into council ownership as public open space contribution through residential subdivision, and rezoning that land to Public Park and Recreation Zone is intended to confirm that it will be retained and managed for its intended public open space purpose. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.107) This is related to, but different from, the Clause 53.01 map correction: the rezoning changes secure the planning zone of existing public open space land, while the Clause 53.01 map correction clarifies the spatial operation of public open space contribution rates. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.106-107, 135)
Submissions and Contested Issues
Nine submissions were received during exhibition: five opposed the amendment and four supported it. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.34) Three supporting submissions came from public authorities and one supporting submission came from the Taungurung Land and Waters Council. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.34) Four opposing submissions raised concerns about removal of Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 2 from public land near submitters’ properties, and one opposing submitter asked for additional land to be included in the amendment. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.34)
The two unresolved submissions concern vegetation protection within Bendigo Regional Park, not the Clause 53.01 public open space contribution map. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.32) The officer recommendation was to refer unresolved submissions to an independent Planning Panel because council could not resolve all submissions and because referral is one of the statutory options after exhibition where submissions remain. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36-37)
The available agenda material does not record a submission objecting to the Clause 53.01 street-name correction or to the public open space contribution rates. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.34-36) The main procedural risk for Clause 53.01 is therefore not a contested policy position in submissions, but the need for the Planning Panel and amendment process to avoid carrying forward the inadvertently changed Locality of Bendigo boundary. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36)
Process and Governance Implications
Following exhibition, section 23(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 required the planning authority to either refer submissions to an independent Planning Panel, change the amendment as requested and adopt it, or abandon the amendment or part of it. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36-37) Council officers recommended referral to a Panel because two submissions remained unresolved. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.37)
Ministerial Direction No. 15 required council to resolve to request appointment of a Panel within 40 days of the close of submissions, but more than 40 days had elapsed because officers worked to resolve submissions before requesting a Panel. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.37) The Minister for Planning granted an extension to that 40-day timeframe. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.38)
The financial responsibility for progressing the amendment was recorded as covered within operational resourcing. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36) This supports classification of the Clause 53.01 component as MINOR, because the available source material identifies no new infrastructure funding package, no new open-space acquisition program, and no quantified capital works commitment arising from the map correction. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135)
Current Status
At the 20 April 2026 council meeting, council resolved to note the explanatory report, consider all submissions, endorse the officer response as the basis for council’s submission to the Planning Panel, request that the Minister for Planning appoint a Planning Panel, refer all submissions to that Panel under Part 8 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and advise submitters of council’s decision. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-Minutes-April-20-2026.pdf, pp.18-19) The motion was carried with 7 votes for, 0 against, no abstentions, and one councillor absent. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-Minutes-April-20-2026.pdf, pp.19-20)
The current procedural position is therefore in-progress: the amendment has completed exhibition, unresolved submissions have triggered a Panel pathway, and officers are to inform the Panel that the Clause 53.01 boundary error was inadvertent and that the intended Clause 53.01 changes are limited to the two street-name updates. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-Minutes-April-20-2026.pdf, pp.18-19)
Dependencies
- Blocks: Final correction of the Clause 53.01 Locality of Bendigo map is blocked until the Panel process and subsequent council consideration of the Panel’s recommendations are completed. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-Agenda-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.32)
- Blocked by: The amendment is blocked by the unresolved submissions process, because council chose the Panel referral pathway after two submissions remained unresolved. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.32, 37)
- Informed by: The Clause 53.01 component is informed by the exhibited amendment documents, the officer report, and Attachment 9.1.4 showing the proposed Clause 53.01 schedule and Map 1 heading for the Locality of Bendigo. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135)
- Implements: The broader amendment is framed as improving planning scheme accuracy, legibility and efficiency by correcting zoning anomalies, deleting redundant overlays, and updating planning scheme text. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.33, 107)
- Conflicts with: The available sources identify a contest about vegetation protection in Bendigo Regional Park, but they do not identify a conflict about Clause 53.01 contribution rates or the intended street-name corrections. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.34-36)
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
The available source documents identify the Department of Transport and Planning as a channel for amendment exhibition material and identify the Minister for Planning as the decision-maker for Panel appointment and amendment authorisation. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.37, 39) The broader amendment also involves public landowners or managers including the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action, Parks Victoria, the City Property Unit and Coliban Water Corporation, but the available material links those agencies to zoning and overlay corrections rather than to the Clause 53.01 map correction. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.107)
Gaps in This Analysis
The source set is thin for cartographic verification because the extracted text provides the officer description of the Clause 53.01 boundary error but does not provide a readable map geometry showing Breen Street, Gladstone Street, the railway line, Havlin Street East and Charleston Place in spatial context. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, p.36) A complete analysis would need the exhibited Clause 53.01 map, the corrected proposed map, and the current incorporated planning scheme map layer to verify whether any parcels would move between the 2 per cent and 5 per cent contribution areas if the erroneous boundary were retained. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135)
The source set also does not include the future Planning Panel report, council’s post-Panel adoption decision, the Minister’s approval decision, or any gazettal notice, so the final statutory outcome of the Clause 53.01 correction cannot yet be confirmed from the available documents. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-Minutes-April-20-2026.pdf, pp.18-20) The available documents do not quantify affected land area, parcel count, or any public open space contribution revenue effect associated with the boundary error, so no reliable dollar or hectare impact can be calculated from the provided corpus. (Source: City-Greater-Bendigo-Council-Meeting-April-20-2026-Agenda.pdf, pp.36, 135)