By KATH GANNAWAY
A NEW 10-lot subdivision is set to go ahead in Yarra Junction after Yarra Ranges councillors rejected a planning department recommendation to refuse the planning application.
The officer report noted that the land at 35 Little Yarra Road was outside the designated residential consolidation area and was marked for ‘incremental change only’.
O’Shannassy Ward councillor Jim Child argued and that the application fulfilled all the requirements and that there had been no objections.
He said it was an ideal location for unit development being within a few minutes’ walk of the township.
“We have No 37 next door which is virtually the same as far as the site is concerned; it’s exactly the same size and on this site there are going to be two less homes. I believe this (motion) does very well address these things,” he said.
Moving an alternative motion, he said there were 42 conditions attached which would address concerns of planners around issues that included the slope of the land, drainage issues and concerns that, without the requirement for a development plan, it could not be demonstrated that the lots could be developed appropriately.
Both Cr Samantha Dunn and Cr Len Cox, however, called for the matter to be deferred saying there were too many unanswered questions.
“We have no idea of the built form contemplated for this site,” Cr Dunn said.
“Neighbourhood character is not about repeating bad decisions of the past,” she said in response to Cr Child’s comparison and praise of the existing adjoining unit development.
Cr Cox said he had had not had sufficient time to adequately look over the conditions attached to the alternative recommendation.
“I found the alternative recommendation when I got here today, along with the associated conditions,” he said.
“I am being asked to vote on something and I don’t think there is anyone around this table who knows the answer and our planners are still trying to work it out,” he said after asking for some detail on one of the conditions.
Cr Wilcox supported the development saying there was the same development next door, only bigger.
“No-one has objected to this, it’s within 400 metres of the shops and with a footpath out the front,” he added.
The motion was passed with councillors Child, Witlox, Callanan, McCarthy, McAllister and Avery voting in favour and Cox, Dunn and Cliff against.
