VCAT rejects Portarlington development

A PROPOSED mixed-use development in Portarlington’s main street has again been knocked back, with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) siding with the City of Greater Geelong.

The Portarlington Community Association (PCA) has hailed the refusal of a planning permit, saying the decision justified the PCA’s long-running opposition.

Plans to develop the site with residential and retail elements were first lodged in 2019 but ultimately failed after they were called in by the state government and rejected by an independent advisory committee.

The city received amended plans on the same site in late 2022 to create a four-storey building with ground-floor retail spaces and 10 apartments plus an underground car park.

Proponents appealed in May of this year to have the matter heard at VCAT due to the city not providing a decision in time, and the hearing began on September 4.

According to the ruling handed down by VCAT members Michael Kelthorpe and Ann Keddie on September 25, the city did not support the planning application, and gave three reasons:

• Not adequately responding to the advisory committee’s report
• Not meeting state planning policy for urban design and for the Distinctive Area and Landscape of the Bellarine Peninsula, and
• Not satisfying the design requirements of the local design and development overlay as the upper levels are visually obtrusive in views from the Portarlington public foreshore.

Developers 49 Newcombe Street Pty Ltd disagreed, stating “the proposal strikes an acceptable balance between policies that encourage growth in the Portarlington town centre and policies that protect the town’s scenic landscape values”.

In their decision, Mr Kelthorpe and Ms Kedder confirmed the city’s decision, finding “this is a repeat appeal and that the fatal flaws in the previous proposal have not been adequately addressed”.

“Separately, we find that the building would be visually obtrusive when viewed from the foreshore reserve and that critical aspects of its design are not high-quality.”

PCA president Geoff Fary said the association felt its stance had been vindicated.

“The PCA undertook extensive consultation with the people of Portarlington and we were aware of the broad swell of opposition to this type of building in that location.

“This decision adds strength to the argument that development must protect and enhance the characteristics which make Portarlington unique.”

He thanked the pro bono support of law firm Harwood Andrews in the appeal.

“A small community like ours would have little chance to challenge unsuitable developments without this generous expert legal representation,” he said.

“We felt that Amara Coleman of the law firm listened carefully to the community’s concerns and presented them at VCAT in the best possible way.”

Mr Fary said the PCA would keep campaigning to have 49 Newcombe Street – which was previously Crown land and the site of Portarlington’s post office – returned to its former status as a park.

“The association accepts the developer should be entitled to fair and reasonable compensation should it return to public ownership.”