It’s been dubbed a “reincarnation” of a past failure, now “a satellite city”, but a revised development plan for Harpers Lane is expected to progress.
Last week, Macedon Ranges Shire councillors voted 5-3 to approve a 65-lot residential development with extensive conditions for the 24-hectare Kyneton South site.
VCAT and council rejected the initial 87-lot subdivision for the site, which had strong community opposition.
The VCAT member said lot size and density were not contextually responsive to the features of the site, including its topography and its rural character context.
Discussing revised plans last week, Cr Janet Pearce said an in-depth report showed careful consideration by planning officers.
New plans show 23 lots would be greater than 3000m² in size, with the remaining 42 lots proposed to be between 2000m² and 3000m² in size.
Cr Pearce said there had been a lot comparison made to the nearby Tilwinda Views with larger lot sizes. She said Tilwinda began development in 2003 and requirements had changed since that time.
“This has been zoned low-density residential for at least 20 years. We know that it was initially a 4000m2 minimum lot size subdivision but, whether we like it or not, this was changed by the minister back in 2007 and we must work to the current policy.
That is a minimum of 2000m2 is allowed because of the sewerage connection,” she said.
“Although many people may have hoped for larger lot sizes for this application, if you consider the past VCAT decision and the current planning scheme conditions for the zone, that is what we must work with and I believe the officers have worked very hard to do that.”
Cr Pearce highlighted important conditions including the reduction of lots, placement of larger lots around the perimeter, an extra retarding basin, reduced cut and fill, changes to building envelopes, height restrictions and footpaths.
Cr Annette Death agreed there were clear VCAT recommendations that planning officers had built into the extensive conditions.
“I think there are very strong planning grounds that this application should proceed,” she said.
However, not all were convinced the application hit the mark, including some neighbouring objectors.
Cr Jennifer Anderson argued not enough had changed to make the plan fit with its surrounds.
“What VCAT was looking for was more space around this new development so that it didn’t stand out starkly in that open rural landscape,” she said.
“They wanted it to have a better relationship with the surrounding rural zones of the Rural Living Zone and Farm Zone. In my opinion, I don’t think it responds enough.
“I still feel this is an overdevelopment of the site. This is a challenging location but, for me, it’s really important that we keep that rural character and landscape.”
Cr Anne Moore also felt the proposal didn’t fit with its surrounds. She wanted to see the plans reduced by a further 15-20 lots.
“I can’t support this little satellite city sitting amongst Rural Living and Farming Zone,” she said.
When it came to the vote, a division recorded those in favour of the development’s approval were Crs Death, West, Bonanno, Pearce and Neil. Those against were Crs Anderson, Moore and Guthrie. Cr Mark Ridgeway did not enter debate/vote due to a conflict of interest.
The applicant has the right to appeal the conditions and decision at VCAT.
