THE fate of the revised proposal by Yumbah Aquaculture for an abalone farm on Dutton Way will be decided in Portland.

Planning Panels Victoria’s Priority Projects Standing Advisory Committee recently issued orders resulting from a directions hearing held online on December 2.

That hearing, reported in the Observer, had two major issues outstanding – where the meeting would be held and what would be allowed to be raised in it.

Yumbah is proposing a 500-tonne farm on the site, down from the 1000-tonne project rejected by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in 2020 on the grounds that it was incompatible with the Rural Living Zone.

Now Yumbah is seeking a change to the planning scheme to specifically allow its proposal within the existing zone.

Committee chairman Lester Townsend says in a letter to parties that after requests to have the matter heard in Portland, largely due to the poor internet access in and around Dutton Way, “the Committee advises that the hearing (or a substantial part of it) will be held in Portland”.

“Venue options are being explored,” Mr Townsend says.

The hearing is scheduled to begin on February 21 and finish by March 3, a total of nine days.

Meanwhile in relation to what can be raised at the hearing the Committee would “proceed on the basis that only matters that are materially different to the previous VCAT decision need to be pursued in submissions or evidence from (Yumbah)”.

These included issues related to visual and landscape impacts because these would be different with the new proposal, matters where fact or policy had changes since the VCAT decision, strategic planning considerations including any broader implications for the Rural Living Zone in the region and whether proposed conditions would appropriately manage issues.

For those opposing the proposal the Committee “does not seek, at this stage, to limit the scope of issues that people objecting to the proposal can raise, noting that no party has indicated its intention to call evidence revisiting the matters determined by VCAT”.

“The Committee does not require (Yumbah) to call evidence or provide detailed submissions on matters it thinks were resolved by VCAT ahead of submissions by other parties,” Mr Townsend’s letter says.

“If those submissions raise specific issues, leave will be granted to (Yumbah) to make submissions or call evidence to address these issues.”