Tate Papworth
Developers have hit back at the Brimbank council for again refusing to grant a planning permit for a controversial townhouse estate in Kealba.
A stalemate over the Driscolls Road development erupted last year with residents holding concerns that the proposal was excessive and would create multiple problems.
Brimbank council also had a number of issues with the proposal, however the developer decided to have the matter heard at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal before councillors could vote on the matter.
The proposal was knocked back at VCAT with a number of items needing to be addressed.
The revised application was put before councillors last month, who again rejected it.
In a lengthy blog post created for the projects, developers said there was little ground to knock back the proposal.
“As of today it is now 3 years since the land owner initiated discussions with Brimbank Council officers regarding a Development Plan application for the site,” the post read.
“At that time at an initial pre-application meeting Council’s Urban Design officer commented: “ … the more the better …” in response to preliminary ideas for a proposed yield of 240 dwellings being suggested including some low-rise (three storey) apartments. Ultimately the applicant proposed fewer numbers of dwellings without any apartments.
“In the time subsequently the applicant has assiduously followed the ‘letter of the law’ by way of the Planning and Environment Act and the Brimbank Planning Scheme including adopting the guidance of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) in its’ determination on the development plan previously proposed.”
It went on to say that the current proposal met all requirements.
“For the reasons outlined as follows this development plan is an appropriate proposal to deliver on State and Local planning policies that will provide needed housing options at affordable price points for a wide range of prospective new members of the community of Brimbank.
“It appropriately respects the existing residential neighbourhood character and is a reasonable response to the requirements of the Planning Scheme and VCAT in that regard.”
