COMMUNITY campaigners say they’re “overwhelmingly relieved” after a City of Greater Geelong planning panel rejected a St Albans Park subdivision proposal following a lengthy planning battle.<\/p>\n
Councillors refused a permit for a two-lot subdivision at 7-8 Oakwood Ridge, St Albans Park last week, which objectors feared it would threaten archaeological remains buried under the property’s “Phar Lap tree” and undermine a covenant protecting low-density living in the area.<\/p>\n
Concerns regarding integrity due to the identity of the proponent \u2013 City of Greater Geelong city services director Guy Wilson-Browne \u2013 and neighbourhood character ultimately led to the unanimous decision against the subdivision.<\/p>\n
St Albans Park resident Kevin Neville, who lives at a neighbouring property, had spearheaded a community push against the plan when it returned for a council decision earlier this year.<\/p>\n
“We hope it’s over, and that the landowner listens to what the council has unanimously decided on,” he said.<\/p>\n
“It was overwhelming relief for everyone that’s put in time for the neighbourhood, and the team that’s put in a lot of work.<\/p>\n
“The councillors listened to the community’s concerns\u2026 and in the end made a decision that the neighbourhood was seeking.”<\/p>\n
Geelong real estate advocate Renay McIntyre had supported the campaign this year and said she was pleasantly surprised with the council decision.<\/p>\n
“I think that it’s a good outcome for all the parties concerned to have it moved to a different arena. That’s showing council are being open and transparent.<\/p>\n
“We’re very grateful that the council, especially to councillors [Stephanie] Asher and [Belinda] Moloney, had the integrity to see it was a clear conflict of interest and had the openness to dismiss it.<\/p>\n
“I’d hoped for that outcome, but I didn’t expect it.”<\/p>\n
Council officers had recommended approving the subdivision ahead of last Thursday’s meeting, but Cr Asher moved an alternate motion to reject it based on its difference with surrounding neighbourhood character.<\/p>\n
Officers also insisted the city had followed due process in assessing the application despite the identity of its applicant following questions during the meeting, especially from Cr Moloney.<\/p>\n
Councillors said the proposal largely satisfied planning rules but indicated the decision should be made at arm’s length \u2013 such as by the state planning tribunal.<\/p>\n
“I’m particularly uncomfortable with perceptions of transparency, or lack of transparency,” Cr Asher said.<\/p>\n
“I’m not convinced anything inappropriate has happened here, but there are a number of factors that have raised concerns, clearly enough to raise passion among the objectors.”<\/p>\n
The decision marks the end of the city’s involvement in the matter, which returned to prominence this year after being presented and withdrawn in 2019.<\/p>\n
Campaigners successfully lobbied for recognition of the site’s historical significance from Heritage Victoria earlier this year, due to likely burials of famous racehorses including Phar Lap stablemates and former Melbourne Cup winners dating back to the land’s former use as part of the St Albans Park horse stud.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
COMMUNITY campaigners say they’re “overwhelmingly relieved” after a City of Greater Geelong planning panel rejected a St Albans Park subdivision proposal following a lengthy planning battle. Councillors refused a permit for a two-lot subdivision at 7-8 Oakwood Ridge, St Albans Park last week, which objectors feared it would threaten archaeological remains buried under the property’s […]<\/p>\n