Bacchus Marsh residents are fighting a proposed planning amendment which would label their properties “flood-prone”.
Moorabool council last Wednesday considered submissions to a proposed Amendment C73, which would introduce flood controls to the Moorabool Planning Scheme based on three Melbourne Water flood study reports.
The reports, completed in 2010 and 2011, mapped the flood potential of areas within the catchment of Werribee River, Lerderderg River and Little River using digital modelling undertaken over a number of years by water surveying company GHD.
Residents in those catchments, mostly in Bacchus Marsh and Darley, would have to declare their properties flood-prone before selling.
Progress of the amendment was abandoned by Moorabool council at Wednesday’s special meeting and referred to a planning panel appointed by the planning ministry.
Almost 100 residents filled Moorabool council chambers and spilled into the corridor at the meeting to hear and make submissions against the proposal.
Darley resident Vivian Evans said her insurance premiums would soar to $780 if her property was declared flood-prone.
“This amendment will affect our ability to afford insurance,” Ms Evans said.
“Where will I get $780 on an aged pension? Our properties will be devalued, but you can bet our rates will still go up.”
Bacchus Marsh resident John Lucas said the floodplain maps showed flooding would be less than “gutter height” on his property.
“One section of the floodplain map shows a flood-prone area surrounded by dry land with no indication of waterflow to the flood-prone area,” he said. “How can this be so?”
Civil engineer David Caligari, a Bacchus Marsh resident, was among the objectors and said there were too many inaccuracies in the report to progress with Amendment C73.
“GHD actually states that there are inaccuracies in all three of the models used to map the floodplain,” he said.
“They identified inaccuracies along the Werribee river.”
Mr Caligari said a ground survey of his land found the modelling was out by at least 200mm.
Cr Tom Sullivan voted against the motion to abandon the amendment because he believed there was sufficient evidence that flood controls were needed.
“I say we don’t abandon it and get some ground truth [surveying] done,” he said.
“It’s not going to go away. Floods happen in Bacchus Marsh and we can’t do anything about it.
If you buy a house and aren’t told it’s flood-prone, how would you feel?”
Melbourne Water integrated planning manager Chris Williams said the proposed planning amendment was to protect existing homes and businesses from flooding by placing appropriate controls on future developments.
