Go­ing flat out to de­cide

Western Suburbs Weekly - - Front Page - By JON BAS­SETT

We’re help­ing to save the leafy sub­urbs, as we are putting den­sity where it needs to be, and if they push off projects like ours there will be even more pres­sure for in­fill next to the homes they live in. - pro­po­nent ar­chi­tect and de­vel­oper Gary Baver­stock.

THE Town of Cottes­loe is head­ing for a third at­tempt to de­cide on pro­posed en­vi­ron­men­tally and aged-friendly in­fill apart­ments near Swan­bourne train sta­tion that split coun­cil­lors and ratepay­ers at a meet­ing last week.

“We’re get­ting more ad­vice and any likely spe­cial coun­cil meet­ing would have to be held be­fore Septem­ber 21,” chief ex­ec­u­tive Mat Hum­frey said.

Af­ter coun­cil­lors voted 4-4, Mayor Jo Dawkins used her cast­ing vote to al­low a mo­tion to re­verse April’s de­ci­sion to advertise for com­ment a Swan­bourne Vil­lage Trust pro­posal for a two to three-storey 13-apart­ment de­vel­op­ment dug into a slop­ing block at the Rail­way-Cong­don street in­ter­sec­tion.

These apart­ments look straight into all my liv­ing ar­eas, my back­yard and my teenage daugh­ter’s bed­room. - Windsor Street res­i­dent Mercedes El­liot, on the ef­fect of nearby in­fill.

How­ever, Mr Hum­frey sub­se­quently said the coun­cil had been ad­vised the mo­tion did not pass be­cause an ab­so­lute ma­jor­ity was not reached and the WA Plan­ning Com­mis­sion could still con­sider the apart­ments.

The apart­ment pro­posal sparked strong com­mu­nity ire, prompt­ing about 120 ratepay­ers to be at the meet­ing that heard claims of spot zon­ing, con­ges­tion and over­shad­ow­ing, re­duced pri­vacy, no con­sul­ta­tion or no­ti­fi­ca­tion, and that ar­chi­tect Garry Baver­stock al­legedly work­ing too closely with coun­cil staff.

“If you al­low this re­zon­ing it will open up the flood­gates to de­vel­op­ers to the whole of the sub­urb,” Cottes­loe Res­i­dents and Ratepay­ers As­so­ci­a­tion mem­ber Tony Rudd said.

Be­fore the meet­ing, the coun­cil’s pub­lic com­ment pe­riod had at­tracted 34 sub­mis­sions

The view (was) that the pro­posal is op­por­tunis­tic at the ex­pense of the neigh­bour­hood; be­ing de­vel­op­ment driven for eco­nomic fea­si­bil­ity and com­mer­cial gain. - coun­cil re­port, about pub­lic com­ment

in sup­port of the pro­posal and 55 against.

Pro­ject sup­port­ers, in­clud­ing 13 Vil­lage Trust mem­bers who said they wanted to tackle ur­ban sprawl and shun un­elected de­vel­op­ment as­sess­ment pan­els, were equally adamant at the meet­ing.

“It’s time the ma­jor­ity speaks up for good de­signed ar­chi­tec­ture in­stead of en­er­gy­wast­ing ‘McMan­sions’ that still dom­i­nate sub­urbs,” re­tired val­uer and Cottes­loe res­i­dent Jeremy Shellabear said.

Swan­bourne res­i­dent and trust mem­ber Les­ley Shaw said the trust’s com­mu­nity good­will in­cluded re­mov­ing wildlife be­fore the site’s de­mo­li­tion, plant­ing flow­ers to cover weeds, and beau­ti­fy­ing a fence sculp­ture.

Mr Baver­stock said yes­ter­day he would seek plan­ning ad­vice be­fore any le­gal opin­ion.

Pic­ture: Jon Bas­sett

Ar­chi­tect Garry Baver­stock says he is dev­as­tated by op­po­si­tion to his pro­posal.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.