Lifestyle village rejected

    VivaLife's proposal would develop 12 hectares of rural living land for 183 independent living units and communal facilities.

    Amy Hume

    Macedon Ranges Shire Council has rejected a large-scale residential lifestyle village planned for Kyneton but the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal will have the final say.


    Last week councillors weighed up local demand for seniors’ affordable housing against the appropriateness of the Edgecombe Road site.


    VivaLife’s proposal would develop 12 hectares of rural living land for 183 independent living units and communal facilities.


    Councillor Mark Ridgeway said despite pressure for this type of development in Kyneton, the plan “did not tick enough boxes”.


    “It also represents an inappropriate urban residential form for this particular area,” he said.

    The proposal is for land at 106 Edgecombe Road and 3 Baynton Road nearby the imminent Bunnings, service station and convenience restaurant on Edgecombe Road.


    Cr Ridgeway said concern was mounting over traffic management at the Saleyards, Edgecombe and Pipers Creek roads intersection.

    “If this proposal were to go ahead, it would likely exacerbate those traffic issues which are already present,” he said.


    Cr Janet Pearce questioned the lack of connectivity for the style of development and location.


    “It’s an urban-style development in the rural living area and there is no doubt there is interest in these types of developments for Kyneton but it’s about the position,” she said.


    “With other developments like this there have been footpaths and other connections to the town. This is outside the settlement boundary and across the Calder where there’s high density traffic with trucks.”


    Other considerations were the impact on environment and biodiversity, format and character.


    The councillors sided with planning officer advice to refuse the application.


    The application will be decided at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal following the council’s failure to grant a permit within the prescribed timeframe. MRSC’s decision last week will help inform the case.


    The VCAT case is expected to be heard in June following a compulsory conference at the end of March.