Councillors say they are powerless to stop infill developments that are out of character with a
low-rise neighbourhood.
low-rise neighbourhood.
By Catherine Watson
BASS Coast Shire councillors have approved a controversial three-dwelling development in Cowes following a lengthy debate about neighbourhood character, community values and the limits of council power under state planning laws.
The application, for three double-storey houses and subdivision at 23 Birdwood Avenue, drew 20 objections from local residents, who cited concerns about the development's bulk, scale, overshadowing, and inconsistency with the older-style coastal character of the street.
Council officers recommended approval of the planning permit, as it was consistent with the general residential zone and strategic planning policy.
Cr Ron Bauer moved an alternative motion to reject it, arguing the development would fundamentally change the character of the area.
BASS Coast Shire councillors have approved a controversial three-dwelling development in Cowes following a lengthy debate about neighbourhood character, community values and the limits of council power under state planning laws.
The application, for three double-storey houses and subdivision at 23 Birdwood Avenue, drew 20 objections from local residents, who cited concerns about the development's bulk, scale, overshadowing, and inconsistency with the older-style coastal character of the street.
Council officers recommended approval of the planning permit, as it was consistent with the general residential zone and strategic planning policy.
Cr Ron Bauer moved an alternative motion to reject it, arguing the development would fundamentally change the character of the area.
“There are 20 objections to this development,” he said. “It’s not the infill that is the problem here. It’s the massive height and overbearing of construction … It’s one thing to be able to tick all the planning boxes, it’s another to make our community have to live with it.”
Despite support from fellow Island Ward councillors Tracey Bell and Tim O’Brien, Cr Bauer’s motion was defeated, and the original motion to approve the development was eventually passed by six votes to three.
The debate highlighted deep frustration among councillors who felt powerless to stop developments they believed were inappropriate.
Cr O’Brien said Birdwood Avenue’s charm lay in its “older style beachside cottages” and that residents were entitled to expect that character would be preserved.
“There could be two houses, it could be a dual occupancy block, but jamming in three double-storey units will stick out like a sore thumb.”
Cr Bell also expressed concern over overshadowing and questioned whether double-storey dwellings were appropriate for local housing needs. She cited Bass Coast’s submission to the state’s Housing Committee, noting the highest demand was for one- and two-bedroom homes.
“I am for infill, but it needs to fit in with the neighbourhood character and meet the need of our community.”
Cr Jon Temby sympathised with the objectors and said he was unhappy about the visual impact and overshadowing on neighbouring properties. But, he said, “this plan meets all the planning rules and therefore if we say no it'll go to VCAT and go straight through.”
Several councillors echoed this concern, acknowledging that the development complied with all statutory planning requirements and council risked losing an appeal if they refused it.
Cr Jan Thompson urged her colleagues not to waste public funds on a case they were unlikely to win. “Our officers are professionals who know the rules and the planning. And they've said to us that we won't have a leg to stand on if it goes to VCAT.
“It'll cost us another $10,000 to $15,000. I ask all councillors to be mindful of this and not waste taxpayers' money. Because how many times have we gone to VCAT and lost recently?”
Cr Mat Morgan said he, too, was uncomfortable with aspects of the development, particularly vegetation removal, “but at the end of the day, this development meets the legislative requirements from everything that I’ve heard and the advice that we’ve received from council officers,” he said.
Cr Brett Tessari said the trend toward infill was inevitable given that the township boundaries had been fixed.
“People want to move down to our beautiful area. They’re going to have to move somewhere so we need to make options for them … People want a variety of homes. Some people want to live in a two-storey townhouse close to town. Some people want to live on a quarter-acre block.”
Despite support from fellow Island Ward councillors Tracey Bell and Tim O’Brien, Cr Bauer’s motion was defeated, and the original motion to approve the development was eventually passed by six votes to three.
The debate highlighted deep frustration among councillors who felt powerless to stop developments they believed were inappropriate.
Cr O’Brien said Birdwood Avenue’s charm lay in its “older style beachside cottages” and that residents were entitled to expect that character would be preserved.
“There could be two houses, it could be a dual occupancy block, but jamming in three double-storey units will stick out like a sore thumb.”
Cr Bell also expressed concern over overshadowing and questioned whether double-storey dwellings were appropriate for local housing needs. She cited Bass Coast’s submission to the state’s Housing Committee, noting the highest demand was for one- and two-bedroom homes.
“I am for infill, but it needs to fit in with the neighbourhood character and meet the need of our community.”
Cr Jon Temby sympathised with the objectors and said he was unhappy about the visual impact and overshadowing on neighbouring properties. But, he said, “this plan meets all the planning rules and therefore if we say no it'll go to VCAT and go straight through.”
Several councillors echoed this concern, acknowledging that the development complied with all statutory planning requirements and council risked losing an appeal if they refused it.
Cr Jan Thompson urged her colleagues not to waste public funds on a case they were unlikely to win. “Our officers are professionals who know the rules and the planning. And they've said to us that we won't have a leg to stand on if it goes to VCAT.
“It'll cost us another $10,000 to $15,000. I ask all councillors to be mindful of this and not waste taxpayers' money. Because how many times have we gone to VCAT and lost recently?”
Cr Mat Morgan said he, too, was uncomfortable with aspects of the development, particularly vegetation removal, “but at the end of the day, this development meets the legislative requirements from everything that I’ve heard and the advice that we’ve received from council officers,” he said.
Cr Brett Tessari said the trend toward infill was inevitable given that the township boundaries had been fixed.
“People want to move down to our beautiful area. They’re going to have to move somewhere so we need to make options for them … People want a variety of homes. Some people want to live in a two-storey townhouse close to town. Some people want to live on a quarter-acre block.”
People are going to continue to want to move down here because we live in the best place in the world. We've locked boundaries right across the shire so we're going to have to put extra dwellings on the bigger blocks. |
Mayor Rochelle Halstead said the state government’s push for greater housing density had left councils with very limited influence over local planning outcomes.
“We have a housing affordability problem, and the state government are addressing it by doubling down on the township boundaries, forcing people to cut up their blocks,” she said.
“You only have to look at the planning documents from the state government to see, we as a local government no longer have the power we used to have.”
Cr Morgan, who moved the motion to approve the permit after Cr Bauer’s was defeated, said the only way council could hope to influence future developments was by initiating changes to the planning scheme – a long and complex process.
“At the end of the day, when we are assessing planning applications, we have to follow the legislation,” he said. “This doesn’t help the very community members who have lodged objections.”
In closing the debate, Cr Tessari said similar cases would become increasingly common.
“People are going to continue to want to move down here because we live in the best place in the world. We've locked boundaries right across the shire so we're going to have to
put extra dwellings on the bigger blocks. And as long as it ticks off the legislation, we're going to find ourselves in this position multiple times every month.”
The application was approved 6–3, with Island Ward councillors Ron Bauer, Tim O’Brien and Tracey Bell voting against.
“We have a housing affordability problem, and the state government are addressing it by doubling down on the township boundaries, forcing people to cut up their blocks,” she said.
“You only have to look at the planning documents from the state government to see, we as a local government no longer have the power we used to have.”
Cr Morgan, who moved the motion to approve the permit after Cr Bauer’s was defeated, said the only way council could hope to influence future developments was by initiating changes to the planning scheme – a long and complex process.
“At the end of the day, when we are assessing planning applications, we have to follow the legislation,” he said. “This doesn’t help the very community members who have lodged objections.”
In closing the debate, Cr Tessari said similar cases would become increasingly common.
“People are going to continue to want to move down here because we live in the best place in the world. We've locked boundaries right across the shire so we're going to have to
put extra dwellings on the bigger blocks. And as long as it ticks off the legislation, we're going to find ourselves in this position multiple times every month.”
The application was approved 6–3, with Island Ward councillors Ron Bauer, Tim O’Brien and Tracey Bell voting against.