A retirement village for Gisborne is likely to proceed on land once zoned for a future hospital in a vote that split Macedon Ranges Shire councillors.
Benetas applied to build a retirement village on land bounded by Robertson, Neal and Hamilton Streets, seeking land rezoning and removal of a restrictive covenant.
Humphrey Dixon donated the land for the Gisborne and District Bush Nursing Hospital in 1987 and included a covenant that the land be used only for healthcare purposes.
Councillors agreed to amend its planning scheme and support a planning permit for the retirement village development. They also included a Section 173 agreement in a bid to restrict future use of the land to only a ‘retirement village’ and/or ‘residential aged care facility’.
The staged development has been brought to council multiple times over the past six years. Last month’s council meeting was the most crucial step at a local planning level and a split vote saw the mayor, Cr Kate Kendall, use her casting vote twice for its approval.
Councillors weighed up the strategic justification for zoning changes and what it would allow should the retirement village proposal not go ahead.
MRSC referred the application to an independent planning panel for advice last year, which found strategic justification for the covenant’s removal, however, some disagreed with the findings.
Cr Alison Joseph called on councillors to abandon the amendment as it could result in inappropriate development of the area.
“There is no guarantee that once the land is rezoned the landowner would not develop the land for other general residential purposes to on-sell it,” she said.
“The removal of the covenant will allow the land to be subdivided, sold, transferred or otherwise disposed.
“I believe it would extremely short-sighted for councillors to rezone this land from its intended medical use, given that we have no plans to replace it. We’re going to need these types of medical services in the future.”
Cr Joseph gained the support of Crs Jennifer Anderson, Cassy Borthwick and Daniel Young, who voiced similar concerns. Some doubted the strength of a Section 173 Agreement over the existing covenant. Cr Joseph’s initial motion to abandon the amendment was lost when a 4-4 vote was decided by the mayor’s casting vote.
Moving the successful motion, Cr Janet Pearce said councillors had different views on the proposal but they all wanted was best for the community.
“The amendment and the planning application are being sought together, which to me indicates intention, which I don’t believe has changed over six years,” she said.
“I understand there are concerns by councillors that this could be sold off and/or made into residential developments. This motion places a section Section 173 Agreement that restricts what can be done and will bring it back to council if there are any changes.”
The motion passed following another split and the mayor using her casting vote once again. The planning scheme amendment will now be referred to the planning minister for approval.
