Grange Planning Brain

title: Amendment C95 - Koala and Local Area Policy Controls council: ballarat state: vic category: amendment classification: MAJOR status: approved last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:

  • Victoria Government Gazette G45 2006.pdf
  • Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf
  • Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf
  • Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 72.04 Schedule.pdf
  • Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf
  • Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf
  • City of Ballarat Planning Policies and Strategies.pdf
  • Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf

Amendment C95 - Koala and Local Area Policy Controls

Amendment C95 was not a single-purpose conservation amendment. It was a compound statutory package that joined three planning tasks: settlement direction for Canadian Valley, municipality-wide koala habitat protection, and updated native vegetation controls across Ballarat. The practical effect was to move koala habitat and native vegetation from background environmental values into permit-triggering planning controls, while also limiting parts of the Canadian Valley to constrained infill and non-urban landscape roles. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928)

The amendment matters because it created a planning mechanism where development design, subdivision layout, fencing, road design, dog-management measures, vegetation removal, and habitat restoration could all be considered together when land affected by koala habitat was proposed for development. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)

Background

Ballarat City Council prepared Amendment C95 under authorisation A493, with notice published on 9 November 2006 and submissions closing on 15 December 2006. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G45 2006.pdf, p.2442) The land affected by the amendment was described as the Canadian Valley, including Mount Clear, Mount Helen and Buninyong, together with land across the municipality containing significant vegetation and koala habitat. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G45 2006.pdf, p.2442)

The amendment was explicitly built from three prior bodies of work: the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan 2005, the Ballarat Native Vegetation Mapping and Review of the Vegetation Protection Overlay 2005, and the Ballarat Koala Plan of Management Parts 1 and 2, 2006. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G45 2006.pdf, p.2442) The City of Ballarat planning policies page identifies the same three source documents as published planning references: the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan, the Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management Parts 1 and 2, and the Native Vegetation Mapping and Review of the VPO1. (Source: City of Ballarat Planning Policies and Strategies.pdf)

The Minister for Planning approved Amendment C95, and it came into operation on 12 November 2009 when the approval notice was published in the Government Gazette. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928) The approval notice records seven statutory effects: updating the Municipal Strategic Statement, adding three reference documents, replacing Buninyong and Mount Clear policies with a Canadian Valley policy, rezoning land in the Canadian Valley, introducing koala policy and ESO5 controls, replacing VPO1 and its mapping, and incorporating the Koala Plan of Management Koala Planning Map. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928)

Analysis

The statutory mechanism: one amendment, three control layers

C95 worked by layering policy, overlays, mapping and zoning rather than relying on one control. The list of changes shows map amendments to zones, VPO maps, ESO5 maps, MSS clauses, local policies, Rural Conservation Zone Schedule 3, ESO Schedule 5, VPO Schedule 1, planning scheme maps, incorporated documents and the list of amendments. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The first layer was local policy. C95 inserted new text into Clause 21.04 for koala protection and landscape protection in the Canadian Valley, inserted new text into Clause 21.05 for Canadian Valley settlement principles, inserted text into Clause 21.06 for the University of Ballarat Technology Park, and updated Clause 21.08 to reference the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan 2005, Ballarat Koala Plan of Management 2006 and native vegetation mapping review. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The second layer was place-specific local policy. C95 replaced Clause 22.10 with a new Canadian Valley local planning policy and replaced Clause 22.13 with a new koala and koala habitat policy. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf) This means the amendment did not treat koala habitat only as a mapped environmental constraint; it also embedded decision guidance into the planning policy framework. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The third layer was statutory permit control. C95 introduced ESO5 for koala and koala habitat protection, replaced VPO1 for native vegetation protection, inserted new ESO5 maps across 29 planning scheme map sheets, and updated or inserted VPO maps across 29 planning scheme map sheets. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf) The practical mechanism was that the policy framework explained why protection mattered, the maps identified where it mattered, and the overlays created permit triggers for land use and development proposals. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf; Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)

Canadian Valley: growth was redirected, not simply prevented

The Canadian Valley component of C95 was a settlement-management instrument. The approval notice states that the amendment implemented the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan 2005 and introduced strategies for development within the Canadian Valley. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928) The later Clause 21.09-3 policy records the core settlement principle: the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan recommends limiting residential development to land already zoned for residential use because native vegetation, landscape character and non-urban areas constrain expansion. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.3)

The policy identifies Canadian Valley as including Mount Clear, Mount Helen and Buninyong, and also identifies the University of Ballarat and the University of Ballarat Technology Park as major institutional land uses in the area. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.3) It states that most of Ballarat’s population growth is to be directed to the Ballarat West growth corridor, with only some growth occurring in Canadian Valley in areas already designated for residential development. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.3)

The available quantified policy evidence is narrow but important. Clause 21.09-3 states that by 2021 the Canadian Valley population would grow by nearly 2,500 people to more than 11,000 people, equivalent to about 1,400 additional dwellings. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.3) It also states that, excluding vegetated areas and using an average lot size of 800 square metres, there was about 12 years of vacant residential land supply to accommodate that growth. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.3)

The planning implication is that C95 did not freeze Canadian Valley. It allowed a measured infill and township-growth pathway while protecting larger non-urban breaks, ridgelines, vegetated backdrops and environmental corridors. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, pp.3-6) This is clearest in the Mount Clear strategies, which support medium-density housing near shops and community facilities, infill that retains environmental features, and lot sizes from 450 square metres to 2,000 square metres with larger lots in native bush areas and along Canadian Creek and Canadian Forest. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.4)

For Buninyong, the policy supports tourism, retail and economic functions while preserving heritage and village character, encourages infill within the crown township where services and access can be economically provided, and contains residential development within the existing residential area unless guided by specific local planning. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, pp.3-5) For Mount Helen and the university precinct, the policy supports staged expansion of the University of Ballarat Technology Park toward the Mount Helen campus if the expansion is sympathetic to landscape and environmental qualities. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, p.4)

Koala habitat: ESO5 turns habitat movement into a development-design test

ESO5 identifies Ballarat’s native vegetation as both habitat and food source for koalas, with Manna Gum and Messmate Stringybark singled out as important tree species. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, p.1) The schedule states that the 2002 Ballarat community-based Koala Survey found strong community support for koala conservation and identified perceived pressures from logging, housing development, vegetation removal on private land and roadsides, roaming dogs, roads and traffic. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, p.1)

The control is mechanism-rich because it regulates both habitat loss and movement risk. ESO5 has three objectives: maintain and enhance koala habitat, ensure development type, density, design and layout minimise adverse impacts on koala movements and koala health, and coordinate koala habitat protection with native vegetation protection across Ballarat. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, p.1)

ESO5 requires a permit to construct buildings or works where native trees are to be removed, construct a fence, remove native trees, or subdivide land. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, p.1) These triggers matter because koala impacts can arise from small design choices as well as outright vegetation removal: fencing can interrupt movement, subdivision can fragment habitat, roads can introduce vehicle strike risk, and domestic dogs can create predation or disturbance risk. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)

The application requirements show how the planning scheme converts ecological concern into assessable information. An application on a site containing koala habitat must provide a habitat assessment by a suitably qualified person, identify vegetation to be cleared and retained, identify building envelopes, propose habitat restoration measures that can create net gain over time, address safe koala movement through road design, speed mitigation, fencing, landscaping and swimming pool specifications, address dog-impact mitigation, and provide monitoring programs for subdivisions affecting koala habitat. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)

The decision guidelines then require the responsible authority to consider restoration opportunities, connectivity between habitat areas, prevention of further fragmentation of habitat and habitat linking areas, and measures to reduce threats to safe koala movement. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, p.2) The practical consequence is that subdivision layout and site design are not secondary matters; they are part of the statutory test for development in mapped koala habitat. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)

Native vegetation and VPO1: the municipal-scale control is broader than koalas

C95 replaced the existing Schedule 1 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay and expanded VPO1 mapping to significant native vegetation areas across the municipality. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928) The list of changes identifies 16 existing VPO map sheets amended and 13 new VPO map sheets inserted to include significant native vegetation. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The Rural Land Use Strategy later describes VPO1 as applying to significant remnant vegetation, including roadsides, and states that the VPO requires a planning permit to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.19) The same strategy describes ESO5 as applying to rural land throughout Ballarat where koala habitat and food sources have been identified. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.19)

The interaction between VPO1 and ESO5 is important. VPO1 deals with significant native vegetation as vegetation, while ESO5 deals with koala habitat and movement as an ecological system. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.19; Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2) A tree-removal proposal in mapped habitat therefore has two planning dimensions: the loss of native vegetation and the effect on habitat continuity or koala movement. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.19; Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)

Rezoning and rural conservation: C95 used zoning to define non-urban roles

C95 made several zoning changes in and around Canadian Valley. It rezoned Crown land on planning scheme maps 28, 34, 39 and 42 to Public Park and Recreation Zone, rezoned land at the end of Lavery Avenue in Mount Clear from Residential 1 Zone to Rural Conservation Zone, rezoned land at the eastern end of Recreation Road in Mount Clear from Low Density Residential Zone to Rural Conservation Zone, rezoned land on the western side of Eddie Road in Mount Helen from Residential 1 Zone to Rural Living Zone, and rezoned land at Yendon No. 2 Road in Buninyong from Farming Zone to Rural Conservation Zone. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The pattern is significant because it shows C95 distinguishing between land suitable for urban consolidation and land whose role is conservation, rural landscape or non-urban separation. The Mount Clear and Buninyong rezonings used the Rural Conservation Zone to recognise environmental significance, while the Eddie Road rezoning used the Rural Living Zone to recognise non-urban land in the Canadian Valley. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The 2010 Rural Land Use Strategy later reinforced that the south precinct around Buninyong, Mount Helen, Magpie and Scotchman contained a mix of primary production, rural living, biodiversity values, scenic landscapes, forestry plantations and conservation areas. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.66) That same strategy records that the precinct contained most of Ballarat’s Rural Living zoned land, generally in lots under 10 hectares, and that farming was generally focused on dairy, cropping and grazing in the southern end of the precinct. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.66)

The Rural Land Use Strategy also cites the C95 and C102 Panel Report as finding that Farming Zone land between Mount Helen and Mount Clear on the east side of Geelong Road may be more appropriately zoned for another purpose because it was constrained for productive farming. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.77) This is a key downstream signal: C95 settled several Canadian Valley controls, but the panel process left further strategic zoning work for constrained fringe land between Mount Helen and Mount Clear. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.77)

C95 introduced a new incorporated document mapping koala habitat in the municipality. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928) The list of changes identifies this as the Koala habitat mapping introduced through Clause 81.01. (Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

The later Clause 72.04 schedule lists Koala Plan of Management - Koala Planning Map July 2006 as an incorporated document introduced by C95. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 72.04 Schedule.pdf, p.1) This matters because the map is not merely background evidence; it is an incorporated planning scheme document that helps determine where the ESO5 application requirements are activated. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 72.04 Schedule.pdf, p.1; Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, p.1)

Community and contested issues

The source set does not include the C95 Panel Report itself, but the Rural Land Use Strategy records several issue categories that align with the C95 policy terrain. Submitters to the rural land use process sought a more proactive approach to remnant vegetation protection in the Canadian Valley and raised Council responsibility for significant roadside vegetation reserves. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.7)

The same strategy records rural living and urban development submissions concerning land supply, development constraints, requests for Rural Living Zone changes near Mount Rowan, south of Buninyong and Brown Hill, requests around Buninyong for higher-density urban zoning, and concern about further rural living land in the south and south-east of the municipality. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.8)

The strategy also records that Canadian Valley landowners raised fairness concerns about land being used as green breaks between Mount Helen and Buninyong and between Mount Helen and Mount Clear, particularly where those landowners faced urban-rural interface pressures, poor soil quality and limited productive farming capacity. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.8) The planning issue is therefore not a simple conservation-versus-growth question; it is a three-way tension between habitat protection, rural production, and the allocation of landscape-separation functions to privately owned land. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, pp.7-8)

Current Status

Amendment C95 is approved and operative from 12 November 2009. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928) The Koala Plan of Management - Koala Planning Map July 2006 remains listed in the planning scheme’s incorporated documents schedule in the available Clause 72.04 extract dated 23 August 2018. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 72.04 Schedule.pdf, p.1)

The local policy content has since been reorganised. The available Clause 21.09 extract is dated 22 December 2016 under C194 and contains the Canadian Valley local-area policy, including the Canadian Valley population and dwelling assumptions, infill principles and environmental design requirements. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme Clause 21.09 Local Areas.pdf, pp.3-6)

Dependencies

  • Blocks: C95 blocks unconstrained subdivision, fencing, native tree removal and buildings or works in mapped koala habitat where those proposals do not address habitat assessment, habitat connectivity, movement safety, restoration, dog impacts and monitoring requirements. (Source: Ballarat Planning Scheme ESO5 Koala and Koala Habitat Protection.pdf, pp.1-2)
  • Blocked by: The amendment itself is no longer blocked because it was approved on 12 November 2009. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928)
  • Informed by: C95 was informed by the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan 2005, Ballarat Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management Parts 1 and 2, 2006, and Ballarat Native Vegetation Mapping and Review of the VPO1, 2005. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G45 2006.pdf, p.2442; Source: City of Ballarat Planning Policies and Strategies.pdf)
  • Implements: C95 implements Canadian Valley settlement planning, municipality-wide koala habitat mapping, significant native vegetation mapping, ESO5, VPO1 revisions, and the incorporated Koala Planning Map. (Source: Victoria Government Gazette G46 2009.pdf, p.2928; Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)
  • Conflicts with: The available sources show tension with rural living demand, requests for rezoning, green-break expectations on private land, rural productivity limits, urban-rural interface impacts and conservation objectives. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, pp.7-8, 66-67, 77)

The direct C95 controls are municipal, but the Rural Land Use Strategy records that Golden Plains Shire and Central Highlands Water supported Council’s rural land management approach during consultation. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.8) The same strategy notes that rural residential land in Golden Plains Shire directly south of Ballarat forms part of the regional rural-residential supply serving Ballarat. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.78)

This matters because restrictive settlement and conservation controls in southern Ballarat cannot be read only within Ballarat’s boundary. Rural living demand and water-catchment management issues interact with nearby Golden Plains land supply and Central Highlands Water’s catchment interests. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, pp.8, 78-79)

Gaps in This Analysis

The source set is adequate to explain the statutory architecture of C95 but too thin for full ecological or parcel-level analysis. The C95 Panel Report is referenced by the Rural Land Use Strategy, including a specific finding about land between Mount Helen and Mount Clear, but the panel report itself is not included in the manifest. (Source: Ballarat Rural Land Use Strategy November 2010.pdf, p.77)

The source set includes links or references to the Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management Parts 1 and 2, the Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan, and the Native Vegetation Mapping and Review of VPO1, but it does not include their extracted text as source documents for this compilation. (Source: City of Ballarat Planning Policies and Strategies.pdf) Because those underlying technical documents are absent, this page cannot quantify habitat extent, affected hectares, mapped habitat categories, tree-species distribution, submission counts, panel recommendations, or property-level effects with the standard expected for a major amendment. (Source: City of Ballarat Planning Policies and Strategies.pdf)

The most important corpus gaps for _gaps are: Ballarat Planning Scheme Amendments C95 and C102 Panel Report February 2008; Ballarat Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management Part 1 August 2006; Ballarat Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management Part 2 August 2006; Canadian Valley Outline Development Plan June 2005; City of Ballarat Native Vegetation Mapping and Review of the Vegetation Protection Overlay August 2005; and the full C95 amendment map set showing ESO5, VPO1 and zoning changes. (Source: City of Ballarat Planning Policies and Strategies.pdf; Source: Amendment C95 List of Changes.pdf)

Graph View