Quick update – tonight at the Special Planning Committee, the Councillors did not support the town planners decision to grant a permit. A permit was refused on numerous grounds.
More details to come in the morning.
A fantastic effort was put in by all the speakers and an awesome show of support by residents who turned out to pack the gallery.
Thank you Councillors.
This article regarding the 6 Paine St development has just been published in the Hobsons Bay Weekly.
We’re gobsmacked by the developer’s response to the newspaper. See below red text. He has a lack of respect and understanding of individual rights and the objection process. No wonder he fails to understand our opposition to his development when he mistakenly believes only some objections are valid.
Article below by Hobsons Bay Weekly.. or go to the article at the Hobsons Bay Weekly website. Copy below.
Residents opposed to a 43-dwelling, three-storey development on the site of the former Newport Timber Yard are calling on Hobsons Bay councillors to reject an officer’s report that recommends granting a planning permit.
Two previous applications for the site at 6 Paine Street, lodged by Domain Hill, were refused by the council and also the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
But a council officer’s report states that the third application is “less foreign, more well mannered and less monolithic”.
More than 300 objections have been lodged with the council, with residents labelling the proposed building “a gross over-development in one of Newport’s nicest low-density precincts”.
Anthony Simmons, of the Protect Newport residents action group, said the community felt that town planners had “caved in”.
“The consensus is the planners have ignored the community and their own heritage adviser’s call for a significant redesign. Instead, they have given in to mediocre and insignificant changes put forward by the developer.
“The latest application is still a large single building of 43 units up to four storeys high with an ugly cantilevered façade and other clearly inappropriate design elements.
“It still significantly exceeds ResCode standards for height and site coverage. These mass, height, and density issues have not been addressed in all three of the developer’s applications.”
Applicant, Domain Hill director Peter Cahill, suggested the number of objections was inflated.
“When people go about some aggressive lobbying and you end up with multiple objections from the one household, including in some cases we know of, children, these things happen.
“We’ve made a range of changes to the design in order to accommodate the residents’ requests and I’ve got that fairly well documented.”
A decision will be made tomorrow night by a special planning committee of the council.
Come to tonight’s Special Planning Committee and support the speakers who will present cases to Council as to why the development should not be granted a permit.
Special Planning Committee: 5 September, 6:00 pm, to be held in the Civic Centre at 115 Civic Parade, Altona.