THE continued growth of the Mitchell Shire was an issue at the recent Council meeting, with a contentious vote narrowly going in favour of approving a housing development plan at Watson Street West in Wallan.
The proposed development plan applied to houses in the Eden Place area, with Councillor Bob Cornish moving an amendment to include further conditions.
“The staff have had, as I mentioned, discussions with the applicant and they were designed to improve, encourage the greater housing choice and diversity through the allocation of standard and higher density lot layouts, including conventional standard density lots,” he said.
“It’s a very, very busy precinct and this development will eventually involve other people getting involved in providing infrastructure. Urban channel road upgrades and improvements with cars coming out of Eden Place and Duke Street up the top of the development.”
The amendment and overall plan generated a fierce 37-minute discussion.
Councillor Riley Evans said while he appreciated Cr Cornish’s attempts to make the plan better, he did not agree with it.
“I appreciate what Cr Cornish has done to try and jazz it up a little bit, but I think this is a pretty black and white scenario here.” he said.
“If there was a couple of acres spare in Toorak, would this development go ahead? Probably not. So I urge people at home to watch closely the councillors who do not support this, because no more am I coming in here as a councillor and just going by the recommendations to allow these developments to go ahead. I was elected to do the right thing and not allow these developments to come in destroy our towns.
“It’s black and white to me, and I hope the other councillors will reject a terrible proposal from developers who are taking advantage of our towns time and time again.
“Enough’s enough. I hope other councillors support me rejecting (the proposal). And once again, Cr Cornish, nothing against you, I understand what you’re doing, but this (speech) is against the amendment and the original proposal.”
Councillor Claudia James said while she understood both sides of the argument, she had to go with the plan.
“I know exactly where Cr Evans is coming from and I think we all do in this room… but I do know that this area of Wallan, the Eden Place area as I know it and most people in Wallan know it, is in danger of becoming another very monotonous neighbourhood unless something is done about the way the development takes place,” she said.
“Unfortunately, you know, as councillors, a lot of things are put onto us by the state government, and we have to do our best within a type of straitjacket in a way. I’m trying to be practical and trying to think of the best way to approach a bad situation.”
Cr Nathan Clark supported the motion, saying while most councillors would not be supportive of where housing has gone over the last 25 years, he also acknowledged there were far worse outcomes, while Bob Humm said it was an area that has also been underlooked for many years.
Mayor Councillor John Dougall also chipped in with his thoughts, saying it was a dilemma.
“This is a complex subject and Crs Evans, James, Clark and Cornish have all alluded to this dilemma we find ourselves in,” he said.
“What I grew up with and my expectation for housing is completely different from what is facing new families at the moment.
“This is a real dilemma for me. I almost see it as an ethical, moral dilemma because we, by supporting the types of densities we’re seeing in precinct planning, which is agricultural farming land into residential and in this case residential into more dense forms of residential, is effectively a change in living standards that we as Australians have become accustomed to.”
Cr Cornish tried to take the emotion out of the debate, saying that while he’s never been in favour of small lot sizes, and was part of the Wallan structure plan, introductions for small lot sizes in recent years had taken the decision effectively out of council’s hands.
Councillor Ned Jeffrey said he supported Cr Evans ‘firmly’, saying that he ‘was speaking the word of the people’.
Cr Clark said that the debate had gone off the rails, and that having no plan would lead to disastrous outcomes.
Meantime, Cr Andrea Pace said she was also torn, like many councillors in the room.
“I’m really on the fence with this one. It’s not the type of growth that we want to see within a town, but we’ve also got planning decisions that were made beforehand that said this can happen in our town. At the end of the day, it’s going to cost us $10,000 plus to go to VCAT, if we say no. They’re going to say yes,” she said.
“We have to work out the only way we can take a stand is for people not to buy these houses. If they don’t buy the houses, then the developers are not going to build them. If there’s a need for the houses, they’re going to sell. I can’t throw away tens of thousands of dollars for an outcome that VCAT’s going to approve.”
Eventually, the debate centred on a vote, which was carried 5-4, with Councillors Clark, Cornish, Humm, James and Pace voting for the proposal, while Crs Dougall, Evans, Hanson and Jeffrey voted against it.