Why I live in Daylesford

“It is sad to hear of boundary changes that are being proposed in this historic town. To turn productive food producing land, some of the best in Victoria, into housing and industry.”

“While the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance applauds Hepburn’s efforts in the Rural Hepburn Strategy to protect agricultural land from further inappropriate development for so-called lifestyle blocks we assert that the town structure plans as drafted will thwart this intent to the detriment of both valuable farmland and the character and liveability of our shire’s towns.
First, rezoning agricultural land to expand the Daylesford town boundary will merely open it up for inappropriate development wildly out of character with its historical development.
Making the 14 hectares at East Street available to development is not ‘planning for predicted growth’, it is pre-empting growth - making it almost a certainty that the town will grow quickly and uniformly for the profit of some distant development company.
It will not benefit locals by delivering more affordable housing stock, including rental houses, and the developments are nearly guaranteed to be a mundane monoculture of drab and unsustainable design.
In the interest of brevity, we make a final point, looking to the loss of peri-urban agricultural land around Melbourne, such as at Koo Wee Rup and Werribee, and say that while it may be ‘only’ 14 hectares this year, how many next time, and the next?
Drawing a line to protect farmland to feed our communities must be a priority in all rural strategies. There is plenty of space within the town boundary as outlined by council itself, if subdivision permissions are eased and the 380 vacant lots developed instead of farmland.
A policy to discourage or even prohibit the proliferation of short-term accommodation that leaves up to 40 per cent of houses vacant on any given night would genuinely address the housing crisis, whereas cheap, ugly peri-urban development will not.
We recommend reading the Foodprint Melbourne reports to better grasp the long-term implications of allowing towns to sprawl, which presents a serious threat to food security and the well being of local communities.”

“Hepburn Shire Council have completed a tremendous task in producing the Future Hepburn Housing Strategy, but they have reached some unnecessary and damaging conclusions.
The most contentious is to extend the town boundary along East Street in what the council officer confirmed could be to a 100-house suburb.
The council has at no stage in drawing up this draft strategy consulted the Powell family who have farmed the land for over 100 years or any of the residents who live in the area. Council also confirmed there are 380 vacant blocks of land in Daylesford which is between 15–25 years’ supply
The 100 houses and mooted shops to support the new suburb have the potential to change the character of Daylesford by dragging traffic through the streets east of Vincent Street and taking business away from the main street. Residents, tourists and farmers will all lose.
By the council’s own admission this rezoning of vital farmland isn’t required, but the consequences for all who love Daylesford are clear. The council at the end of the consultation process must abandon the rezoning of farmland.”

“After attending Tuesday (May 14) afternoon’s meeting, I am still perplexed as to why the council has spent money on four consultants for over two years to come up with a solution that is not only basic and unimaginative but directly contradicts both the community feedback (via the consulting group of 21 residents and the community survey) and its own Agriculture Land Study and Rural Settlement Strategy.
They are determined to silo projects even when they are intrinsically linked which results in outcomes that are limited, short sighted and doomed to failure.
We currently have enough vacant land for 380 new homes within the existing boundary. By their own admission – this is 20 years of stock. This doesn’t include any infill, subdivisions or existing developments. So why even commission this study? This entire rezoning proposal will only create 100 new lots whilst having a devastating impact on our town, our farming, agriculture and tourism.
And even then, it does not address the most significant cause of the current housing crisis: the conversion of hundreds of homes from owner-occupier/permanent rentals to short-term holiday rentals (currently over 400 just on Airbnb alone).
This “boom” has not only resulted in many locals living in streets without any neighbours, but long term holiday rentals becoming less and less viable as the market becomes saturated.
It could also be argued that the altered “balance” between permanent and holiday properties could have contributed to the marked increase in domestic burglaries of late. It doesn’t take blind Freddy to think that a vacant holiday house is easy picking for a criminal.
If the council lacks the skills, passion or desire to achieve great outcomes, they should let us devise the solutions. This community has more talent, expertise and passion than the council gives us credit for. We are not an “everyday” run-of-the-mill country town. We need a vision that reflects the nature and character of our town – innovative, sustainable and extraordinary.”

“I want to start by acknowledging the sheer enormity of the work council staff have undertaken in the development of the draft structure plans for the entire shire.
And no doubt a rewarding effort for council staff if this is endorsed by councillors in the upcoming council meetings. However, the expense, effort, process, content and outcome have massively let down the community that this council supposedly serves.
I’m a resident in Daylesford’s east and it was an enormous shock to see a proposed town boundary expansion over active and exquisitely picturesque farmland be dropped like a nuclear bomb into the draft plan.
Described as a “minor” piece of land in the report, the proposition is given a whole lot of non-conclusive reasons for proposing such an expansion. As a community we will continue to interrogate this and it’s very apparent already that the town boundary is not needed to expand to accommodate understandable and projected growth requirements into the future.
I will also declare that I was one of the voluntary community engagement panellists that has been referenced continuously by council communication as being part of the backbone of “community consultation”. This is not the case. The panels did not contribute to tactical or planning outputs, instead we were invited into well facilitated and target discussion groups that worked around vision (also not unanimously endorsed) and identifying core focus areas like housing, business and economy, urban design, environment and heritage etc.
The exaggerated use of this panel’s input is not acceptable. And as found in the council’s Wayfarer Consulting Report (June 2023) available on its website, the #1 ask of the community was to keep housing within the town boundary. Unsurprisingly, this was also articulated in the engagement panel workshops at multiple times.
It is a giant leap from these loose, yet productive panel workshops and community questionnaire to this draft plan that proposes to steal farmland from multi-generational farmers. It is at complete odds with the council’s ‘Agricultural Land Study and Rural Settlement Strategy’ draft plan, that’s also been released, and would dismantle the townships hamlet feel pulling it eastwards (and with the traffic through the cosy streets of town) to a proposed 100+ housing estate. And not forgetting the enormous environmental oversights.
Remarkably, in the draft plan the spring and creek know as Smith’s Creek, that rises from this farmland and meanders down through Cornish Hill and into Lake Daylesford, is conveniently not listed as one of the creek/water sources that will be preserved in the draft plan. This needs a lot of explanation.
This draft plan does not serve the community or the land and to enable it to be rushed through prior to imminent council elections should not be tolerated by our community. We deserve better. Because once it’s gone, it’s gone!
My heart sinks when I see the rich soils of ‘Middleton Fields’ be trenched, but its prudent to remember that while these proposed developments generated much community protest, it was already seemingly too late. The rezoning had already been done well prior. The town boundary proposition in the east has not.”

“Rezoning to industrial zone is being considered to productive farmland (farming zone) on Settlement Road, just down from the Farmers Arms and will be visible from Daylesford/Trentham Road.
Beautiful volcanic soil used as farmland for generations. By considering rezoning it to industrial, this is inconsistent with other commitments the council has made.
Settlement Road backs onto farmland so not only will it remove productive farmland, and potentially leach toxins into the soil, it will also destroy the neighbourhood character and entrance into town that is currently farmland, farmlets and cottages.
I believe this is the sleeper issue and is inconsistent with the council’s broader planning objectives.”