title: Amendment C104moor - Anomalies and Rezoning council: moorabool state: vic category: amendment classification: MINOR status: adopted last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf
- minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf
Amendment C104moor - Anomalies and Rezoning
Amendment C104moor is an administrative planning scheme correction package rather than a strategic growth amendment: its operative purpose is to rezone land where existing zoning does not match ownership or use, correct zone and overlay anomalies, and remove obvious wording, formatting and redundant-reference errors from the Moorabool Planning Scheme (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). Council adopted the amendment on 6 March 2024 under section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and authorised submission to the Minister for Planning under section 31(1), so the remaining statutory step identified in the available record is Ministerial approval rather than further Council decision-making (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18).
The amendment matters because small mapping and drafting errors can change how permit triggers, referral expectations and land-use permissions are read at property scale, even where the amendment is not designed to introduce a new policy direction (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). The available source record is thin: the actual amendment package, summary of submissions and summary of changes were attachments under separate cover, so the detailed parcels, zones, overlays and text clauses affected cannot be independently tested from the two documents available for this page (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
Background
The amendment arose from recommendations of the Moorabool Planning Scheme Review 2020, which the Council report says identified zone and overlay anomalies, typographical errors and other obvious errors needing correction in the planning scheme (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). Its mechanism is housekeeping at the statutory instrument level: it seeks to align zones with land ownership and land use, fix mapping anomalies, correct wording and formatting errors, and delete redundant references so the scheme operates with clearer and more current content (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
Council resolved on 19 July 2023 to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C104moor under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). At the same 19 July 2023 stage, Council also resolved to seek an exemption from the full notice requirements under section 19(2) of the Act so consultation could be targeted to relevant government agencies and affected landowners (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). The Minister authorised preparation and exhibition on 13 September 2023 and approved the exemption from full notice requirements on 21 September 2023 (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
The amendment was exhibited from 9 November 2023 to 11 December 2023 (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20). Notice was sent to relevant government departments, agencies and landowners affected by proposed rezonings, hard-copy documentation was placed at Council offices in Darley, Bacchus Marsh and Ballan, and notice was also advertised in the Victorian Government Gazette, the Department of Transport and Planning website and the Council website (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
Analysis
Statutory Mechanism and Practical Effect
C104moor is best understood as a scheme-maintenance amendment: it changes the legal map and text of the planning scheme so that the instrument better matches the intended administrative position (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). In everyday terms, this is like correcting labels on a set of drawers: the drawers may already be used in a certain way, but the labels need to match so that future users do not open the wrong drawer or apply the wrong rule (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
The zoning component is the part with the highest statutory consequence because zones control land-use permissions, permit triggers and decision pathways in the planning scheme (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). The Council report states that land is being rezoned where inappropriate zoning is applied, and that mapping anomalies are being fixed so zoning more accurately reflects ownership and use (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). Without the amendment package itself, the available record does not identify the affected properties, the existing zones, the proposed replacement zones, the area of land affected, or whether any zoning change alters permit requirements for existing or future uses (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
The overlay component is also material because overlays can impose additional permit triggers, design controls, environmental requirements, heritage controls, flood controls or referral requirements, depending on the overlay type (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). The source record confirms that zone and overlay anomalies are being corrected, but it does not name the overlays affected or quantify whether the correction adds, removes or realigns overlay controls on any land (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). That limits the ability to assess whether the amendment merely regularises known conditions or materially changes the assessment pathway for any property (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
The text correction component appears lower risk than rezoning because the officer report describes it as correcting wording and formatting errors and deleting redundant references (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). However, planning scheme text is still operative law once approved, so even minor terminology changes can affect how referral authorities, responsible authority officers and applicants interpret a control (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22). The clearest example in the available record is Central Highlands Water, whose submission requested updated terminology and resulted in minor changes to the amendment documentation (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22).
Exhibition, Submissions and Absence of Panel
The consultation pathway was targeted rather than full-notice because the Minister approved Council’s section 19(2) exemption request on 21 September 2023 (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). That matters because it frames the level of public testing: directly affected landowners, prescribed ministers, referral authorities and government agencies were notified, while broader public notice occurred through the Gazette, Council website and Department of Transport and Planning website (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, pp.21-23).
Council received three submissions by the close of exhibition (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). The officer report states that the submissions were generally supportive, that no objecting submissions were received, and that two submissions sought clarifying information or minor wording changes (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). Central Highlands Water requested updated terminology, and the Council report says minor changes were made in response (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22).
The absence of unresolved objections changes the statutory pathway. Under the Council report’s explanation of section 23 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, after considering submissions requesting a change Council could change the amendment, refer submissions to an independent planning panel, or abandon all or part of the amendment (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, pp.21-22). Because the submissions were resolved and no unresolved submissions remained, the officer report concluded that an independent Planning Panel was not required and that Council could adopt the amendment and submit it to the Minister for Planning (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22).
The minutes confirm that Council accepted that pathway on 6 March 2024: the motion was moved by Cr Tom Sullivan, seconded by Cr Rod Ward, and carried (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18). The adopted resolution considered the submissions, adopted Amendment C104moor under section 29(1), authorised submission to the Minister under section 31(1), and allowed the Executive Manager Community Planning and Development to make minor non-intent-changing documentation changes if required (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18).
Planning Scheme Governance Effect
C104moor implements a maintenance function in the local planning system: it does not appear from the available record to introduce a new settlement strategy, growth area, infrastructure funding mechanism or policy framework (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). Its stated purpose is to improve readability, structure and effectiveness of the Moorabool Planning Scheme by correcting technical and obvious errors (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
This type of amendment can still be important because planning schemes rely on precision. If a parcel is in the wrong zone, a permit application may be assessed against controls that do not match the land’s actual public or private use (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). If an overlay boundary is wrong, a permit trigger may be applied to the wrong land or omitted from land that should carry the control (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). If redundant references remain in ordinance text, responsible authority decisions can be slowed by avoidable interpretation questions (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
The Council Plan relationship is modest but clear. The officer report links the amendment to Council Plan 2021-2025 Strategic Objective 2, “Liveable and thriving environments”, and Priority 2.1, “Develop planning mechanisms to enhance liveability in the Shire” (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22). The mechanism is not delivery of new infrastructure or housing supply; it is improved administration of planning controls so land use and development decisions rest on more accurate maps and text (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.23).
Financial, Rating and Tax Consequences
The officer report characterises the cost to Council as minimal and limited to the standard cost of a planning scheme amendment, including statutory fees, mail-outs, advertising and officer time (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22). No capital works cost, development contributions mechanism, infrastructure delivery program or external funding dependency is identified in the available documents (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22).
The officer report states that the proposed rezoning changes are not expected to trigger windfall gains tax because the properties meet exemptions regarding property size (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22). It also states that the zoning changes are administrative and are not expected to influence land rating (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22). Those conclusions cannot be independently checked from the available record because the parcel list, land areas, current zones and proposed zones are contained in attachments under separate cover rather than in the extracted agenda or minutes (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
Risk Profile
The risk profile is low on the available evidence because no opposing submissions were received, all questions and suggestions were reported as resolved, and the officer report identifies no direct occupational health and safety risks associated with the recommendation (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, pp.21-22). The officer report also states that the subject matter does not raise human rights issues under the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
The principal planning risk is not the Council adoption decision itself; it is the absence of detailed source material in the current corpus. The amendment package, summary of submissions and summary of changes are all listed as attachments under separate cover, and those attachments contain the information needed to verify which parcels, zones, overlays and clauses changed (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20). Without those attachments, the page can identify the amendment’s purpose and lifecycle, but cannot quantify land area, name affected properties, test overlay impacts, or assess whether any individual landowner’s permit pathway changes (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
Current Status
Council adopted Amendment C104moor on 6 March 2024 under section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18). Council also authorised the Executive Manager Community Planning and Development to submit the adopted amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval under section 31(1) of the Act (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18). The available documents do not confirm Ministerial approval, gazettal or the date on which any approved controls commenced operation (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18).
Dependencies
- Blocks: The available record does not identify any development, permit, infrastructure project or strategic planning program blocked by C104moor; the amendment is described as correcting anomalies and obvious errors rather than enabling a named project (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
- Blocked by: After Council adoption on 6 March 2024, the next identified step was Ministerial approval under section 31(1), and the available record does not confirm that approval or gazettal occurred (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18).
- Informed by: The amendment is stated to be in line with recommendations of the Moorabool Planning Scheme Review 2020, but that review is not included in the manifest for this page (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
- Implements: The officer report links the amendment to Council Plan 2021-2025 Strategic Objective 2 and Priority 2.1 concerning planning mechanisms that enhance liveability (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22).
- Conflicts with: No policy conflict, unresolved objection, panel issue or competing amendment is identified in the available agenda or minutes (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22).
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
Central Highlands Water is the only infrastructure authority specifically identified as shaping the final amendment wording, through a request for updated terminology that resulted in minor documentation changes (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.22). The available documents do not show that the amendment changes water, sewer or drainage servicing obligations, and they do not identify any cross-boundary infrastructure dependency with another council or state agency (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, pp.21-22).
The Department of Transport and Planning was involved procedurally through exhibition approval and the public exhibition notice pathway, but the available record does not identify any transport-network effect, arterial-road referral change or transport infrastructure dependency arising from the amendment (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, pp.21-23).
Gaps in This Analysis
The main gap is the absence of the three attachments listed under separate cover: the Summary of Submissions, the Amendment C104moor package, and the Summary of Changes (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20). These missing attachments prevent parcel-level analysis of affected land, zone transitions, overlay corrections, ordinance text changes, land area, ownership pattern, and any specific consequences for permit triggers or referral requirements (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.20).
A second gap is the absence of the Moorabool Planning Scheme Review 2020, which the officer report identifies as the source of the recommendations underpinning the amendment (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21). Without that review, the causal chain from identified scheme defect to amendment change cannot be tested beyond Council’s statement that C104moor responds to the review’s recommendations (Source: agenda-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.21).
A third gap is the absence of a gazettal notice or Ministerial approval record. The minutes establish Council adoption and authorisation to submit the amendment to the Minister, but they do not establish that the amendment was approved, gazetted or commenced in the Moorabool Planning Scheme (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18). The page should therefore be read as an analysis of Council adoption-stage material, not as confirmation of final statutory commencement (Source: minutes-omc-6-march-2024.pdf, p.18).