The pages listed under this menu have comparisons of zoning permissions and prohibitions in the current LEP with those that will be introduced at the time of the gazetting of the Draft LEP.
Many properties will remain with the same zoning and many will be rezoned. The same zoning does not mean the same conditions. Almost all will have increased control placed over them by the new LEP.
The conclusions and summaries are at the top of the page, the details below.
It is important that all landowners are aware of these changes as soon as possible.
Comparing the Current RU1 and Proposed RU1 zoning tables, the changes are significant and represent a major shift in planning philosophy for the Primary Production zone.
The Proposed RU1 zone represents a more prescriptive and protective planning framework.
This comparison reveals a potential strategic reclassification of land from a productive agricultural zone to a landscape protection zone.
Rezoning from Current RU1 to Proposed RU2 represents a strategic decision to reclassify land away from a primary production focus towards a landscape protection focus. By requiring consent for forestry, horticulture, and viticulture, the council gains the ability to refuse or condition these uses to ‘protect’ landscape character.
Current RU2 -> Proposed RU2
This is a comparative analysis of the Current RU2 and Proposed RU2 Rural Landscape zones. The changes follow a similar, transformative pattern to the RU1 zone but are tailored to the “Rural Landscape” context.
Note: Electricity generating works, which includes solar farms, wind turbines and battery storage are allowed with consent.
Conclusion: A Fundamental Re-prescription
The Proposed RU2 zone represents a decisive move away from a flexible, multi-functional rural zone towards a highly prescriptive, protectionist zone.
Current RU2 -> Proposed C2
This isn’t a direct update of the same zone, but rather a comparison that reveals a likely **planned rezoning or policy shift** for certain lands. The differences are stark and reveal a fundamental change in land management philosophy.
Conclusion: A Contested and Compensable Rezoning
Comparing these zones reveals what is likely a **highly contentious strategic planning decision:** to rezone certain “Rural Landscape” areas to “Environmental Conservation.”
Current RU2 -> Proposed C3
This is a fundamental strategic reclassification that would move land from a broad, permissive rural zone to a tightly controlled environmental protection zone.
Conclusion: A Contested and Compensable Rezoning
Rezoning from **Current RU2** to **Proposed C3** represents one of the most **drastic changes possible** in the planning system. It transforms land from a **working rural landscape** into a **protected environmental area**.
Current RU2 -> Proposed C4
This comparison reveals a potential strategic reclassification of land from a broad, production-oriented rural zone to a more tightly controlled, residential-focused environmental living zone.
Conclusion: From Working Landscape to Residential Enclave
Rezoning from Current RU2 to Proposed C4 represents a fundamental shift in land use philosophy. It transforms land from a working rural landscape (where farming, tourism, and light industry are encouraged) into a low-density residential enclave (where homes are the priority and other activities are strictly limited to those that do not harm environmental values).
Current RU3 -> Proposed RU3
Unlike the drastic rewrites seen in RU1 and RU2, the changes to RU3 are more focused, though still significant.
Conclusion: A Modernisation and Tightening of Controls
The Proposed RU3 zone is not a philosophical overhaul like RU1/RU2, but a technical update with significant regulatory implications.