A businessman who hamstrung his local council by filing a series of private prosecutions against councillors has been embroiled in a long-running planning dispute involving allegations he developed high-end tourism accommodation without council permission.With names like Zulu, Sahara and Serengeti, the African-themed accommodation site linked to the dispute offers sweeping views of the central Victorian countryside for tourists willing to pay hundreds of dollars per night.The business — Clifftop at Hepburn — describes itself as the best holiday accommodation in the country and features in Qantas's points program.But an extensive ABC investigation based on court and tribunal documents, neighbour complaints and a Freedom of Information (FOI) release has unearthed allegations of development taking place at the site without council planning approval.Booking information and social media posts suggest two allegedly unauthorised villas are being advertised while the complicated planning dispute plays out.The broader Clifftop at Hepburn business has several accommodation offerings in the local area. (ABC News: Danielle Bonica)Clifftop at Hepburn co-owner David Penman made headlines when he launched a series of ill-fated private prosecutions against four Hepburn Shire councillors, the mayor and the council's then-CEO earlier this year.However, the charges were only the most visible part of a campaign of legal action understood to be straining the resources of the small rural council.Two Supreme Court matters and a tribunal case were among the matters Mr Penman or his business had brought against the council when the criminal matters were filed.In response to questions from the ABC, Mr Penman provided a long statement addressing his history with the Hepburn Shire Council.David Penman at Ballarat Magistrates' Court in early August. (ABC News: Laura Mayers)He said he did not accept the premise "that I have simply installed tourist accommodation in defiance of the planning scheme" and said the private prosecutions were distinct from the planning dispute."The prosecutions concerned alleged conduct and evidence in their own right," he said in the statement."They were not brought as leverage in a planning dispute, and temporal overlap does not establish causation."'Lit up like Luna Park'Clifftop at Hepburn took over the site, which overlooks the town of Hepburn Springs and came to be known as the Sahara villas, in August 2022.In a sleepy region known for its bucolic charm, neighbours were not happy as new structures, lights and business signage allegedly began to appear on the property in the months afterwards."It is lit up like Luna Park," one wrote in a complaint to the council about an illuminated sign.Neighbours have complained about lighting at the site. (Supplied: Clifftop at Hepburn)Council documents released under FOI show the site is affected by bushfire and environmental overlays, planning tools that can trigger stricter regulations for development proposals in sensitive areas.When council staff inspected the property, two additional accommodation units, the conversion of a garage into accommodation and a bus and train also under conversion were among "extensive additional works" identified, according to an internal email released under FOI."A number of potential breaches have been identified including non-compliance with endorsed plans, additional dwellings built without planning and building approvals, signage, lighting and vegetation removal," officers wrote in the early 2024 document.Satellite imagery shows new structures appearing on the site beyond the main residence, garage and three detached cottages initially built there.Before: A November 2022 satellite image of the site. (Google Earth/Airbus). . After: A January 2026 satellite image of the site. (Google Earth/Airbus). .Instructions: Use left and right arrow keys to control image transition Before and after imagesSLIDE A November 2022 satellite image of the site. (Google Earth/Airbus) / A January 2026 satellite image of the site. (Google Earth/Airbus)The new structures are understood to include Jumanji, a converted shipping container with an adjoining pergola advertised for about $300 a night. Eaglesnest, a one-bedroom villa frequently advertised for about $450 per night, appears to have been installed in 2023.A third structure, a converted train carriage, is expected to be available to book from next year.The Jumanji villa, which overlooks Hepburn Springs. (Supplied: Clifftop at Hepburn)The council took steps to resolve issues identified during its inspections, including by endorsing the converted garage — known as Safari — and some signage under a planning pathway known as secondary consent.This is a streamlined planning pathway generally used for minor changes that do not transform the nature of existing permits.But a complicated dispute about the extent of permissions required began to unfold.In a 2025 social media post, Clifftop at Hepburn suggested Eaglesnest was installed without council approval."When we realised [the council] were never going to approve a villa, we did the only thing left: we built one anyway," it said."Armed with the rights to register the site as a caravan park, we planted Eaglesnest right there on the cliff."Social media posts suggest the Eaglesnest villa was installed in 2023. (Supplied: Clifftop at Hepburn)Other social media posts and material filed with the Victorian Civil and Adminsitrative Tribunal (VCAT) suggest the business's relationship with the Hepburn Shire Council also deteriorated.Council figures have been antagonised on the business's social media page, with neighbours occasionally targeted too."Can't wait till our nosy neighbours call council to have a sook," read one 2023 post showing apparent works on the property."Move on council, no permit required."The business has claimed on social media that it does not need a permit for certain works. (Facebook: Clifftop at Hepburn)According to the VCAT filings, the council's former CEO, Bradley Thomas, restricted Mr Penman's contact with other council staff in 2022 due to allegedly "abusive, aggressive, defamatory" communications — a characterisation Mr Penman rejected.In court documents, meanwhile, Mr Penman argued he was being bullied as the council took or contemplated action over the planning dispute."Despite being invalid or unfounded, the ongoing threat of enforcement and associated legal costs — amounting to many tens of thousands of dollars — forced the cessation of all construction projects and the lay off three full-time workers [sic]," he wrote in a Supreme Court affidavit.Legal action brought over council knockbackIn 2025, Clifftop at Hepburn's planning team lodged a planning application proposing more accommodation options at the property.As well retrospectively endorsing the new structures, the plans showed a handful of additional yurts and glamping domes proposed for the site.Social media posts suggest a converted train structure will be available for use as accommodation next year. (Supplied)The business again sought approval for the changes under secondary consent, arguing the move was supported by case law and that the site's original permit allowed the entire lot to be used as a tourist establishment.The council also registered the site as a caravan park last year, which Mr Penman says significantly relaxed regulatory requirements for the new structures, which are properly characterised as moveable dwellings.A planning barrister engaged by the council, meanwhile, advised a tribunal would likely agree the entire site could be used for tourism — but that planning permissions would be needed for additional buildings and works to be carried out.The council rejected the application last August. In a statement, it said the changes could not be approved under secondary consent and the caravan park registration did not override the need for a planning permit.This knockback prompted Clifftop at Hepburn to bring a VCAT case testing whether secondary consent was an available pathway.The Hepburn Shire Council's office in Daylesford. (ABC News: Danielle Bonica)That matter was progressing through the tribunal when the business successfully sought an adjournment to clear the way for a new legal proceeding, this time in the Supreme Court, seeking the refusal be quashed.In court filings, Clifftop at Hepburn alleges the decision was biased, in part because it was made the day Mr Penman inadvertently texted a council phone in relation to a personal safety intervention order a council planning officer had applied for against him.In his statement to the ABC, Mr Penman called the intervention order application a "proxy campaign of political retribution" and said it was ultimately withdrawn.The council, its former CEO, its longest-serving councillor, Don Henderson, and the planning officer were listed as defendants in a second Supreme Court case launched in January over a separate set of council decisions.The defendants' legal representatives have pushed for the matter to be dismissed, with some telling a hearing last fortnight that they had raised significant flaws in the lawsuit months earlier. However, a barrister appointed by Mr Penman the day before the hearing was granted an opportunity to amend the case.Two Supreme Court cases involving the council are underway. (ABC News: Shane Willner-Browne)Although complicated by potential costs orders and insurance claims, the toll of the legal action on council resources is understood to be significant.Mr Penman said he was concerned about the use of public resources but "the cost of seeking a remedy cannot automatically be blamed on the person affected".The ABC understands he has previously offered to discontinue the civil cases and some other matters before VCAT if the council agreed to a favourable planning outcome and a $450,000 settlement payment to Clifftop at Hepburn.Business-owner insists property is safeMr Penman told the ABC his legal position was that the current uses and operations of the Sahara villas site were lawful.His lengthy statement made frequent reference to an earlier attempt by Clifftop at Hepburn to convert a nearby plot of land into a glamping site.The properties offer guests stunning views of the central Victorian countryside. (ABC News: Danielle Bonica)In that matter, a previous iteration of the council twice voted against the advice of its officers and refused to issue a permit — events Mr Penman described as "the point at which a planning disagreement hardened into something personal and institutional"."The story that followed was not one of a resident deciding that planning law did not apply to him," he wrote."It was one of an applicant repeatedly using the mechanisms planning law provides (applications, secondary consent, registration, VCAT review and judicial review) when council's position changed or when the integrity of its process was in genuine dispute."Mr Penman argues bushfire risk at the Sahara villas site has been properly assessed, first by the Country Fire Authority (CFA) in relation to the site's initial permit, then in an independent assessment submitted with the caravan park application, "which finds the site safe".The surrounding region is known for its country charm. (ABC News: Danielle Bonica)In VCAT filings, he wrote that "it would amount to a ridiculous 'triple assessment' to suggest that we also need bushfire to be further assessed by CFA through a buildings and works process".Mr Penman declined to provide further details about the independent assessment.Neighbours who have opposed Mr Penman's operations say the outcome of the earlier proposal demonstrates why the new one needs thorough assessment.While the earlier glamping application was eventually granted, with a more sophisticated bushfire safety plan, on second appeal to VCAT, the tribunal imposed restrictions on its operation to account for the area's "very high bushfire risk".Properties in the area were threatened by a bushfire in February 2019. (Supplied: Linda Hancock)"I was actually evacuated for four days from my property in 2019 during the bushfire season, when the whole of the Hepburn town was threatened by bushfire," said Linda Hancock, a neighbour seeking to be joined to the more recent VCAT matter."We are located, and so is this application, in a bushfire management overlay area."This means that there should be certain provisions related to planning and construction that accords with the standards of buildings in particular to protect those staying there."State government moves to change stand-down lawThe private prosecutions Mr Penman brought against council figures earlier in the year were ultimately dropped after the Office of Public Prosecutions (OPP) reviewed a "large volume of material" provided by Mr Penman and found there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.While they were on foot, Mr Penman cast the matters — which related to allegations of misconduct in office against Mr Thomas and Mr Henderson and issues with the council budget — as a bid to hold the council accountable."I've heard it said that what right does one person have to do this, are they eroding democracy?" he told 774 ABC Melbourne in July."I don't see private prosecutions as an erosion of democracy. I see them as a last line of defence in a democracy."The council, on the other hand, labelled the move a purposeful manipulation of local government laws, which required the affected councillors to step down while the matters played out.That requirement left the council in a state of dysfunction, without quorum to make council decisions, until the charges were dropped.It is understood Mr Penman was ordered to pay the defendants' legal costs in the criminal matters last week.Upcoming legislative changes will mean councillors only have to stand down if the charges are brought by a law enforcement body.In a statement, the Hepburn Shire Council said it had provided Clifftop at Hepburn with advice about how to legalise the "illegally built structures" before an application was lodged under the "incorrect" secondary consent pathway.The council claims it gave Clifftop at Hepburn advice about how to legalise the structures. (ABC News: Danielle Bonica)"The structures that have been built at [the site] cannot be treated as minor, administrative changes," its statement said."The correct process would be to lodge a planning permit application to apply to legalise the structures."In addition to neighbours, public agencies such as the Country Fire Authority, and water authorities, would be notified through a formal referral, providing an opportunity to record any concerns or objection."The planning-related Supreme Court case was vacated before a trial was due to get underway last week.The VCAT case is still before the tribunal.