Maddingley Planning Study adopted – Moorabool Shire Council meeting briefs

MOORABOOL Shire Council has adopted the Maddingley Planning Study and is now seeking State Government approval for an amendment to its planning scheme.

The unanimous adoption took place at the council’s final meeting for 2025 and was preceded by four speakers and a written submission.

All were in support although one came with qualifications.

Speakers focused primarily on the extent of a special use zone covering the Calleja Group-owned Maddingley Brown Coal operation, which along with other group holdings make up 72 per cent of the study area.

The first speaker, Christine Levy, said she and other residents had lived under restrictions of the special use zone – which discourages residential development in favour of industrial use – for 25 years.

Ms Levy said she supported a planning study recommendation to cut back zone boundaries to cover only the area used by the coal mine.

“Lifting the limitations and restrictions of the special use zone would allow careful planning … to allow development that would treat landholders with dignity and respect,” she said.

The second speaker, Robert Levy, told the meeting that the impact the zone had had on private landholders was visible in the condition and uses of the land.

“My property is covered in weeds that have blown in after we cleared, sprayed and sowed paddock seed,” Mr Levy said.

“Our fences were covered in serrated tussock seeds from the properties that were stifled in their plans for development.

“We sit waiting and watch the degradation of the land around us.”

Carol Wharton, who described herself as the longest continuous resident in the study area at 44 years, said she tried to sell her property nine years ago and even had a keen buyer, but the sale fell through because a bank would not finance a property purchase in a special use zone.

She had also been blocked in a subsequent plan to put a house elsewhere on her property, Ms Wharton said. “Get us out of this zone for goodness sake. Change it to something – anything – other than that so that we can make some use of the land,” she said.

“As my neighbours have said, the land itself is going to pot. It’s a disgrace.”

Speaking on behalf of the Calleja Group, Alice O’Mara said the group supported elements of the study but criticised its release only days before the council meeting.

Ms O’Mara said the group wanted to request that the council defer the study adoption and consideration of the accompanying planning scheme amendment until its February meeting.

She said that would allow for “meaningful” consultation on the document.

“In the context of a multi-year planning process this does not appear to be an unreasonable delay,” Ms O’Mara said. She said the group was not opposed to a reduction in the size of the zone but wanted more consultation on it.

If Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny approves the study’s accompanying planning scheme amendment, known as C119moor, it will be incorporated into the scheme in the first phase of changes that will result in future rezonings.

New housing precinct gets go-ahead

Councillors voted unanimously to adopt a planning scheme amendment allowing a residential development of up to 930 lots in Ballan.

Several speakers addressed the council before the vote, one of whom indicated he would sell his property and move on if the amendment was approved.

But the speaker, Bernard Reimert, actually was in favour of the plan because it would finally provide clear direction for the future.

Mr Reimert, who lives on Old Melbourne Road, said his property was among others that abut the proposed development.

“We have been in limbo for five years while this process has been going on,” he said.

“We came to Ballan to have a rural lifestyle. When it seemed inevitable that was not going to be the case we decided we would try to sell. We can’t sell because of this process … it’s been quite glacial in its movement.

“I just wish we could proceed with this plan so the people that abut this development can sell and hopefully move on.”

The development proposal would rezone 98.5 hectares from Rural Living Zone to Neighbourhood Residential Zone and would be able to accommodate a suburb of up to 2800 people.

The planning scheme amendment was exhibited between January and March last year, attracting 68 submissions.

Councillors voted at their May meeting to refer the submissions to an independent panel.

The subject land is at the western gateway to Ballan and is bounded by the Western Freeway to the north, the Werribee River to the east, Old Melbourne Road to the south, and Geelong-Ballan Road to the west.

It is about 420 metres west of the Inglis Street activity centre.

The planning panel supported the amendment, but at least one of the speakers at the meeting did not.

Chris Stockham, who lives on the Geelong-Ballan Road, said he and his family only recently moved to Ballan with an understanding there would be no residential development behind their property.

“So all I want to know is, is this definitely going ahead? Because if it is we’ll sell up and move to somewhere else that’s not going to have 2000 houses behind us,” Mr Stockham said.

Jodie Valpied, who spoke on behalf of the Bacchus Marsh Platypus Alliance, argued there remained some outstanding issues to be resolved.

Ms Valpied said one was the location of the development’s commercial centre. She said it would be located right beside the Werribee River corridor on top of a windy, elevated area.

Ms Valpied said that could result in litter being blown into the river area, posing an unacceptable risk to native wildlife including platypus, and the alliance recommended moving the commercial centre to a different location before a vote was taken.

“It’s better to get this right now, than having to deal with the litter issue and associated costs in the future,” she said.

The final speaker, Urick Ivchenko, expressed concern about a proposed roundabout on the corner of Old Melbourne Road and Daylesford Road – otherwise known as Geelong-Ballan Road.

Mr Ivchenko said a roundabout would create problems for B-Double trucks because they would have to slow to a virtual stop, with associated noise from their airbrakes.

“You’re going to create a lot of noise factor because when they drop their gearing and (use) their airbrakes the noise is horrendous,” he said.

Cr Paul Tatchell told Mr Ivchenko he had been in the transport industry for 42 years and himself operated B-Doubles.

“…and roundabouts are my nightmare,” Cr Tatchell said. “I get more phone calls about going around roundabouts where people live than any other thing. I concur with your problem, I can tell you.”

The amendment will be submitted to the State Government for final approval.

Municipal charge a possibility

The Shire will seek community feedback on the possibility of introducing a municipal charge.

Councillors voted unanimously to consult ratepayers about the option, which would not simply increase the money the Shire raises.

It would instead reallocate existing rate revenue from the current variable, property valuation-based component to a fixed charge applied equally across properties or property categories.

That mechanism changes how the rate burden is distributed across different property types and values.

Properties with higher valuations typically experience reduced rate obligations under a municipal charge system, but conversely properties with lower valuations can experience higher rates because they could benefit less than under an exclusively valuation-based calculation.

Municipal funding submission

The Shire will make a submission to a Federal Government inquiry into the funding and financial sustainability of Australian councils.

A notice of motion by Cr Rod Ward – carried unanimously – called for a submission to be made to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport on the issue by 3 February.

Cr Ward’s motion wanted the submission to note that sustainably funded councils can deliver local solutions to national priorities but need “a significant increase” in untied and non-competitive federal funding.

The submission will argue that financial assistance grants to municipalities should be reinstated at a level of 1 per cent of Commonwealth tax revenue.

It will say that the grant formula should be reformed so that distributions are made on an equity basis, based on assessments of councils’ relative capacity to raise revenue.

Cr Ward’s motion also called for a copy of the submission to be sent to various state and federal parliamentarians.

The notice of motion was carried without discussion.

Griffith Street upgrade move

In his own notice of motion, Cr Jarrod Bingham called for action on the deterioration of Griffith Street in Bacchus Marsh.

“Griffith Street has been a long-standing concern for our community,” Cr Bingham said in the motion’s explanatory notes. “For years now residents have been raising the same issues – potholes, surface failures and a road that is clearly deteriorating beyond what should be acceptable.

“We continue to be told that Griffith Street is scheduled for a future upgrade, but the reality is that no firm timeline has been provided.”

Cr Bingham said he understood that large capital works needed planning, funding and coordination, but “the current condition of Griffith Street poses real safety risks to motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.”

“Waiting indefinitely for an upgrade is no longer reasonable. The community deserves interim action now.”

Cr Bingham said a significant number of elderly people and vulnerable pedestrians use the street.

“There is currently no safe crossing point, and this has been raised with me repeatedly,” he said. “It is appropriate that council investigate all possible pedestrian treatments – whether that is a refuge, a formal crossing or any other suitable measure.”

Under the terms of the motion, council officers will provide an update on the existing Griffith Street update project, including funding arrangements and timelines.

They will also investigate pedestrian safety improvements including but not limited to a pedestrian crossing, a refuge island and traffic calming measures. The motion was carried unanimously.