Greater Dandenong councillors have voted down a triple townhouse proposal, citing a glut of development in Ardgower Road Noble Park.
Eleven residents objected to the three double-storey townhouses at No.25 , raising issues such as traffic and on-street parking impacts in what is termed in real estate circles as the “Harrisfield Estate”.
Councillor Angela Long, backed by a majority of colleagues, said the road already had too many units, with a multi-unit development on the way at No.29.
“On-street parking is a nightmare at the moment. When those units are finished (at No.29) we’ll have more problems with on-street parking.
“It’s an overdevelopment, not of the site, but of the area.”
Cr Long said the council’s decisions shouldn’t be always based on what VCAT might do.
“We’re here to represent the residents in our city,” Cr Long said.
“We’re individuals, we’re not sheep. We vote how we feel.”
In opposition, the ward’s councillor Sean O’Reilly and councillors Tim Dark and Bob Milkovic cited the proposal’s full compliance with planning criteria.
Cr O’Reilly said he “empathised” with neighbours’ concerns about the growing amount of development in Ardgower Road.
But he didn’t want to give them “false hope” by playing “VCAT roulette”.
“I don’t think that wasting thousands of dollars on a lawyers’ picnic on a futile attempt to fight this at VCAT on non-planning grounds is representing residents’ best interests.
“In my 10 years on council, this is the worst refusal motion I’ve seen in this time.”
Cr Dark said the council should seek to encourage young families in the area, which had “capacity” for further dwellings.
“We want to have diverse housing stock, where people can get in at a price point” rather than forcing people to commute from Pakenham and Clyde, he said.
If challenged at VCAT, the council would “look like a bunch of clowns.”
Cr Milkovic said if the council took an “emotional” rather than “rational” approach, it would be “crucified” at VCAT.
An appeal ran the risk of the council’s planning conditions being removed and the developer having “free rein”.
Council officers noted that the homes each with double garages complied with on-site parking requirements.
The proposal was suitable for the medium-density ‘incremental change’ zone, which was gradually regenerating with multi-dwelling developments.
It was assessed as close to major road networks, community facilities and public transport.
