The formal notice (advertising) period for the application has now closed and as a result, the period in which people who wish to contest the application or be heard in relation to the application before VCAT has also closed.

The application documents can still be viewed on Council’s online planning application register.

Council has now resolved a formal position to advise VCAT that Council opposes the application on the following grounds:

1. The design response fails to give appropriate consideration to the built form impacts on significant view lines to Hanging Rock and Mount Macedon and from the Calder Freeway. This is contrary to Clauses 02.03-2 (Significant environments and landscapes), 11.03-5 (Distinctive areas and landscapes), 12.05 (Landscapes), 15.01 (Urban Design), 15.01 (Built Environment) and 16.01-3L (Rural Residential Development – Macedon Ranges) which seek to ensure that development visually protects and enhances the landscape values of Hanging Rock and Mount Macedon.

2. The proposed development is contrary to the landscape and transport objectives contained within the Macedon Ranges Statement of Planning Policy as it would not Maintain view lines of state-significant landscape features from the main road and rail transport corridors and would undermine significant sequences of views to Mount Macedon and the Macedon Ranges. It is therefore contrary to Clause 51.07 of the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme.

3. The proposed land use is a poor response to the purpose and decision guidelines of the Farming Zone and broader planning policy at Clauses 02.03-4 (Natural Resource Management – Agriculture), 14.01 (Natural Resource Management - Agriculture) that seek to protect productive agricultural land and ensure that non-agricultural land uses do not adversely affect the use of the land for agriculture. The proposal would result in a permanent change in land use that is contrary to the relevant planning policy framework and would detrimentally impact on the viability of surrounding rural land uses.

4. The Land Capability Assessment fails to demonstrate that wastewater treatment disposal has been appropriately considered and can be managed in a way that:

• is appropriate for a land use and development of this scale and nature, including both the volume and type of wastewater to be generated;
• is appropriate for a Special Water Supply Catchment area (Lake Eppalock);
• will not result in adverse impacts on the water catchment; and
• would result in an orderly planning outcome.

This is contrary to Clauses 02.03-9 (Infrastructure), 14.02-1S (Catchment Planning and Management), 19.03 (Development Infrastructure) and Clause 42.01 (Environmental Significance Overlay) Schedule 4.

5. The proposal would result in a permanent and unplanned change in land use within an investigation area for Woodend which could undermine the orderly and strategic planning of the investigation area having regard to Clause 11.01-1L the Woodend Town Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Character Study (Planisphere, May 2014) and the Macedon Ranges Statement of Planning Policy.

6. The proposal is an unacceptable response to the requirements of Clause 53.05 (Freeway Service Centre) and the Freeway Service Centre Guidelines having regard to:

• the location of the site;
• the proximity of the site to existing Freeway Service Centres being less than 50km from a freeway service centre and an existing freeway interchange;
• the absence of permission for the freeway connection and pylon sign from the relevant authority under the Road Management Act 2004;
• the landscape setting and the adverse impacts of the proposal in terms of light spill, pollution and adverse impacts of expansive built form and hard stand areas
• the failure to provide an architectural outcome that makes a positive contribution to the setting;
• a lack of adequate information regarding signage and how it promotes high standards of road safety enhance the safe operation of the freeway or comply with the relevant VicRoads (DTP) requirements;
• inadequate landscape design;
• the floor area for retails facilities in excess of 240 square metres.

7. The proposal does not comply with the requirements of Clause 52.05 (Signs) as insufficient information has been provided for details of all proposed signage (illumination, baffles, colour, lettering style and materials). The application has not identified or assessed any significant view lines or vistas that could be affected by the proposed signs, nor has it assessed the road safety, proportion, scale or form of the proposed signages relative to the setting and landscape.