title: Amendment C99moor - Halletts Way council: moorabool state: vic category: amendment classification: MAJOR status: pending last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- agenda-omc-3-april-2024.pdf
- attachments-omc-3-april-2024.pdf
- minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf
Amendment C99moor - Halletts Way
Amendment C99moor is a small-area but structurally important planning scheme amendment because it converts a 2.6 hectare remnant Farming Zone parcel at Halletts Way and Adelong Way, Bacchus Marsh, into an urban edge package of residential/community-use land and river-interface reserves (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17; Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.25). The amendment matters less for gross land supply than for how it resolves a leftover parcel created by surrounding greenfield road and estate development, while retaining flood and environmental controls along the Werribee River (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-20).
Background
Council considered Amendment C99moor at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 3 April 2024, where officers asked Council to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit the amendment (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17). Council resolved to apply to the Minister under section 8A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and to authorise the Executive Manager Community Planning and Development to make minor changes that do not alter the amendment intent (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17).
The amendment is a section 96A application, meaning the planning scheme amendment and permit pathway are being advanced together rather than as separate sequential processes (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17). The proposal applies to Lot A on Plan of Subdivision 821090T, a 2.6 hectare parcel divided into irregular land portions by the construction of Halletts Way and Adelong Way (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.19). In practical terms, the land is like a leftover piece of a puzzle after the larger road and subdivision pieces have already been placed: it is still formally Farming Zone land, but the surrounding physical context has shifted toward an urban growth-edge setting (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-20).
The site sits within land identified as part of the Bacchus Marsh Irrigation District in the 2018 Bacchus Marsh Urban Growth Framework, which normally points toward protecting high-value irrigated agricultural land from urban encroachment (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.18). Officers distinguished this site from viable irrigation land because it is described as a remnant or leftover parcel from recent residential development and is surrounded by the Underbank, Stonehill and Belleview Tops residential developments (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-20).
Analysis
Statutory Effect and Amendment Mechanics
The amendment changes the statutory instructions for the land in three main ways: it rezones land from Farming Zone to Neighbourhood Residential Zone Schedule 9, rezones the overlay-affected river-interface land to Public Park and Recreation Zone, and applies a Development Plan Overlay to guide future land use and development (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.19-20). It also removes Design and Development Overlay Schedule 2, which officers describe as a rural visual-amenity control dealing with reflective materials, because the site is no longer being treated as part of a rural built-form setting (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22).
The mechanism is important. A straight rezoning would change permissible land use, but the Development Plan Overlay keeps a second layer of control over how the site is arranged before development proceeds (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20-22). The officer report states that the Development Plan Overlay is intended to ensure future development considers landscaping, the Werribee River and escarpment, and built form that responds to the abutting neighbourhoods and intersection (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). That means the amendment does not simply open the land to standard residential subdivision; it creates a later council-controlled development plan step where access, buffers, rockfall fencing, river-edge treatment and built form can be resolved in more detail (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.21-23).
There is one internal source inconsistency. The executive summary says the amendment will apply Development Plan Overlay Schedule 7, while the detailed proposal says it will apply Development Plan Overlay Schedule 8 (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 20). The agenda version contains the same inconsistency, with Schedule 7 in the summary and Schedule 8 in the proposal text and concept plan heading (Source: agenda-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18, 20-22). The detailed proposal and concept plan references appear to point to Schedule 8, but the extracted attachment text does not contain the ordinance or schedule wording needed to confirm the final schedule number (Source: attachments-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17-59).
Land Supply, Lot Structure and Open Space Consequences
The amendment affects approximately 2.6 hectares, so its direct housing-supply contribution is modest compared with a precinct structure plan or township growth framework (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.25). Its practical land-supply role is to convert a constrained and fragmented edge parcel into three urban lots plus two reserve lots, rather than to create a new growth front (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 23). The three urban lots are intended to support future residential or community uses such as childcare or a medical centre, while the two reserve lots are intended to become Public Park and Recreation Zone land vested in Council (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.23).
The amendment therefore separates the site into two functions. The upland or developable portions are moved toward Neighbourhood Residential Zone use, while the Werribee River and flood-prone interface is moved into a public reserve framework (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.19-23). This is a boundary-making exercise as much as a land-supply exercise: the subdivision is intended to create a statutory boundary between the Neighbourhood Residential Zone land and the Public Park and Recreation Zone land (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.23).
The open-space mechanism is more complicated than simply creating reserves. Officers state that Lots C and E are encumbered land and therefore cannot be classified as public open space for contribution purposes (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.23). Because the land may be further subdivided and surrounding public open space is described as minimal, the permit pathway is expected to require a monetary public open space contribution equal to 5 percent of site value under section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988 (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.23-24). The planning consequence is that Council receives river-edge reserve land but still treats the development as creating demand on the usable open-space network, because flood or environmental encumbrance limits the reserve lots’ ability to function as unencumbered local open space (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.23).
No dwelling yield is provided in the available sources (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17-25). That is a material analytical gap because the proposal allows potential residential development, but the available record does not state the number of dwellings, lots after future subdivision, building envelopes by area, or assumed density (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20-23). The strongest defensible conclusion from the source set is that the amendment increases housing and community-use capacity at the margin, not that it delivers a quantified dwelling pipeline (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.25).
Agricultural Interface and Urban Growth Logic
The key policy tension is that the site is identified in the Bacchus Marsh Irrigation District, where the Bacchus Marsh Urban Growth Framework seeks to protect high-value irrigated horticultural land from residential encroachment (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.18). The officer report resolves that tension by arguing that this particular parcel is no longer viable for meaningful agricultural practice because it has been fragmented by road construction and recent residential development (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.19-20).
This is a narrow exception logic. The amendment does not read as a broad retreat from protecting the Bacchus Marsh Irrigation District; it reads as an attempt to tidy a parcel that has already been physically isolated from the agricultural system (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-20). That distinction matters because Clause 11.01-1L-02 is cited as encouraging clear separation between urban development and farming activities, protection of irrigated horticultural land from residential encroachment, and appropriate interface treatments where development abuts these areas (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.18). If the amendment is assessed as a remnant-site correction, it is consistent with the officer rationale; if it is treated as a precedent for further residential movement into viable irrigated land, it would create a different policy question (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-20).
The surrounding context supports the remnant-site interpretation in the available record. The site is described as being surrounded by Underbank, Stonehill and Belleview Tops residential developments and as closely linked with those greenfield areas (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.18). The western portion was used for vehicle parking during construction of Underbank Estate, and the future development is described as effectively operating as a small extension to Underbank Estate (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.19-20). The applicant is identified as Kataland, the developer of Underbank (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.20).
Flood, River Corridor and Environmental Controls
The Werribee River is the main physical constraint shaping the amendment package. The land is covered by Environmental Significance Overlay controls and by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay where it adjoins the Werribee River along the south-eastern boundary (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.19). The amendment retains Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 2, Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 8 and the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.20).
The statutory mechanism is to put the most constrained land into Public Park and Recreation Zone rather than to remove the environmental or flood controls (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20-22). Officers state that applying Public Park and Recreation Zone where the Environmental Significance Overlay and Land Subject to Inundation Overlay affect the site will restrict development within the flood-prone area adjacent to the Werribee River (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). In simple terms, the amendment keeps buildings away from the wet edge and uses that edge to extend public green-space and shared-path functions (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20-23).
The concept plan includes increased revegetation, a shared path, opportunities for an artist trail and seating within the Public Park and Recreation Zone (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.20). This creates a planning trade-off: the river corridor becomes more publicly connected and environmentally framed, but the encumbered nature of the reserve land means it does not remove the need for a separate public open space contribution (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.23-24).
Transport, Access and Movement Dependencies
The access issue is not whether Halletts Way exists; it is whether the small set of future lots can be accessed without undermining Halletts Way traffic function (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). The Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Traffix Group in July 2023 considered development scenarios for either residential or community land uses (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). The recommended access structure is for Lots A and B to use Adelong Way, while Lot D uses the existing roundabout, with a possible left-in and left-out arrangement from Halletts Way as an alternative for Lot D (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22).
The downstream implication is that final access design remains a development plan and permit-stage matter, not a fully resolved item in the council report (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). That is important because community service uses such as childcare or a medical centre can create different peak-hour traffic and parking patterns from standard residential use (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20, 22). The available record confirms that traffic scenarios were considered, but it does not provide trip-generation rates, queue modelling, intersection performance, parking numbers or turn-treatment drawings (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22).
Pedestrian and cycling connectivity is a stronger element in the available source material. An existing shared path runs along the Werribee River, and the proposal is intended to provide connectivity around the proposed lots and toward abutting neighbourhoods (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.23). The future town centre site within Underbank Estate is described as being within walking and cycling distance, and once established it would be within 1 kilometre of the subject land (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.23). This makes the site more defensible as a small urban infill or edge-consolidation amendment than as isolated residential expansion (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20-23).
Hazards, Contamination and Geotechnical Controls
Bushfire is acknowledged but not presented as a hard constraint in the available source material. A Bushfire Report by Terramatrix Pty Ltd identified surrounding vegetation, but also noted that the local road network provides ready access to lower-threat areas to the north, south and west (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). The report identified vegetation separation distances that achieve a BAL rating of 12.5, and those distances were included on the concept plan for future consideration (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22).
Contamination is also treated as low risk in the officer summary. The environmental site investigation found no potential for contamination and no need for a Preliminary Risk Screen Assessment to determine residential suitability (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). The officer report still states that formal referrals to the EPA would occur at exhibition stage, which means the low-risk conclusion had not removed the need for statutory agency process (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22).
The more concrete site-specific hazard is geotechnical. Northern parts of the site are described as subject to potential rockfall because of slope conditions and boulders and cobbles around the north boundary (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). The proposed control response is to use permit conditions and Development Plan Overlay guidance for rockfall fencing and boundary buffer zones (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.22). This means the developable lot pattern cannot be understood only from zoning; it also depends on how rockfall buffers and fencing affect building envelopes at the later design stage (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.22-23).
Exhibition, Submissions and Decision Pathway
The 3 April 2024 resolution did not approve the amendment; it authorised the next step of seeking ministerial authorisation to prepare and exhibit it (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17). After authorisation, the officer report proposes public exhibition under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and Ministerial Direction No. 15 (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.24). The consultation program is described as mail-out, gazette notice, Moorabool newspaper notification and Council website notice, with an exhibition period of approximately 40 business days after receipt of authorisation (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.24-25).
The key procedural risk identified by officers is community awareness: community members may miss the opportunity to comment on the amendment (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.24-25). The proposed control is extensive engagement with existing residents, including letters to property owners and occupiers (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.24). Submissions are to be reported to Council, and unresolved submissions can be referred to an independent Planning Panel (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.24-25).
No submissions are available in the manifest source set because the available documents stop at the authorisation decision point (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 24-25). The main likely contested issues, based on the officer report, are access to Halletts Way, treatment of the Werribee River and flood-prone land, the agricultural-interface rationale, public open space contribution treatment, and rockfall buffers (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-24). These are source-derived risk themes rather than recorded community objections, because the extracted documents do not include exhibition submissions or a panel report (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.24-25).
Current Status
As at the 3 April 2024 minutes, Council had carried a resolution to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C99moor (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17). The next documented steps were ministerial authorisation, public exhibition for approximately 40 business days after authorisation, reporting of submissions back to Council, and possible referral of unresolved submissions to an independent Planning Panel (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.24-25). The provided source set does not include a later authorisation notice, exhibition material, submissions report, panel report, adoption decision, approval notice or gazettal notice (Source: agenda-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-26; Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17-25; Source: attachments-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17-59).
Dependencies
- Blocks: Final urban use and subdivision of the 2.6 hectare Halletts Way and Adelong Way land cannot proceed on the amendment logic until the planning scheme amendment, development plan and permit conditions resolve zoning, overlays, access, services, open-space contribution and hazard controls (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 20-24).
- Blocked by: The amendment pathway is blocked by ministerial authorisation, exhibition, Council consideration of submissions, any required Planning Panel process, and later approval steps not documented in the provided source set (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 24-25).
- Informed by: The officer report states that background reports were prepared on stormwater, traffic, environmental matters, bushfire, cultural heritage and geotechnical issues, and specifically names the July 2023 Traffix Group Traffic Impact Assessment and a Terramatrix Pty Ltd Bushfire Report (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.21-22).
- Implements: The amendment is framed as consistent with Council Plan 2021-2025 Strategic Objective 2 and Priority 2.1, which concern liveable and thriving environments and planning mechanisms to enhance liveability (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.24). It also relies on growth-management and housing-supply policy at Clause 11.02-1S and Clause 16.01-1A of the planning scheme as cited in the officer report (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.20-21).
- Conflicts with: The principal policy tension is with the Bacchus Marsh Irrigation District protection logic in the Bacchus Marsh Urban Growth Framework, although officers argue the subject land is a non-viable remnant rather than quality agricultural land (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.18-20).
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
The available record identifies statutory and agency interfaces rather than cross-council dependencies. Minister for Planning authorisation is required before exhibition, EPA referral is expected at exhibition stage, and servicing authorities were consulted on subdivision servicing conditions (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 22-24). The Werribee River corridor creates a catchment and environmental-management context, but the manifest sources do not include Melbourne Water, Catchment Management Authority, water authority or transport authority documents that would allow a broader cross-jurisdictional infrastructure analysis (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.19-23).
Gaps in This Analysis
The largest gap is that the extracted attachment text does not expose the substantive Amendment C99moor documentation or the plan of subdivision, even though the attachment table of contents lists Amendment C99moor amendment documentation at pages 17-58 and the Plan of Subdivision at page 59 (Source: attachments-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.3; Source: attachments-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17-59). This prevents verification of the ordinance wording, Development Plan Overlay schedule text, zoning map changes, permit conditions, lot dimensions, reserve areas, building envelopes and subdivision geometry (Source: attachments-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17-59).
Several technical reports are referenced but not available as extracted source documents: stormwater, traffic, environmental, bushfire, cultural heritage and geotechnical reports (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.21-22). Without those reports, this page cannot quantify stormwater discharge requirements, traffic generation, parking demand, cultural heritage management requirements, rockfall buffer dimensions, BAL separation distances or contamination assumptions beyond the officer summary (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.21-23).
The amendment lifecycle after 3 April 2024 is also missing. The manifest does not include ministerial authorisation, exhibition notice, submissions, Council post-exhibition report, panel material, adoption decision, approval notice or gazettal notice (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.17, 24-25). This page should therefore be read as an authorisation-stage analysis rather than a complete amendment history (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, p.17). These missing items should be tracked in _gaps because they limit the ability to confirm current statutory status and final controls (Source: minutes-omc-3-april-2024.pdf, pp.24-25).