THE peak body for Victoria\u2019s development industry has slammed the state government for ruling out housing in the Spring Creek valley, describing it as a decision driven by \u201cmarginal seat politics\u201d.<\/p>\n
In the final Surf Coast Statement of Planning Policy (SPP), released last week, Torquay\u2019s permanent settlement boundary has been pulled back to Duffields Road.<\/p>\n
This is contrary to the wishes of the local landowners and developers who lobbied for Option 1, which would allow \u201clow density ecologically sustainable development\u201d 1km west from Duffields Road, proposed in the draft SPP.<\/p>\n
Urban Design Institute of Australia (UDIA) Victoria chief executive officer Matthew Kandelaars said the state government\u2019s decision put electoral politics ahead of proper planning for long-term growth in regional Victoria.<\/p>\n
\u201cPlanning for Victoria\u2019s long-term prosperity and allowing new homes in appropriate locations is critical to supporting housing affordability when the home ownership dream has never been further from reach. Sadly, this is too often subservient to marginal seat politics and NIMBYism.\u201d<\/p>\n
The UDIA claimed the decision would limit housing supply and drive up prices in an area where the median house price (in Torquay) was more than $1 million.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis isn\u2019t a question of whether regional Victoria remains affordable for the Melbourne tree-changer. It\u2019s the nurses, teachers, baristas and tradies who have grown up along the Surf Coast and in regional towns right across the state and dream of staying there who will be priced out of their own market,\u201d Mr Kandelaars said.<\/p>\n
Parklea and Okeland Communities are among the developers seeking to develop land in Spring Creek.<\/p>\n
Although the two developers did not respond to questions when approached this week, a spokesperson said in January 2021 that not choosing Option 1 would force development into Torquay\u2019s town centre in the short term.<\/p>\n
\u201cOption 2 doesn\u2019t change the popularity of Torquay. It just changes where the people will be housed,\u201d the spokesperson said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the politics result in no development in Spring Creek, then this will result in higher densities in the town centre. Is this what the majority want?\u201d<\/p>\n
Local community groups such as the Greater Torquay Alliance and the 3228 Residents Association have hailed the state government\u2019s final choice of Option 2.<\/p>\n
2018 South Barwon independent candidate Damien Cole, who campaigned on the issue and directed preferences to Labor candidate (and now MP) Darren Cheeseman after he pledged to stop development in the Spring Creek valley, said his first reaction to the boundary being set at Duffields Road was relief.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s something our community has needed for so long and it\u2019s been long overdue,\u201d Mr Cole said this week.<\/p>\n
\u201cProtection for a town and a community like that on the coast, it\u2019s really important to have that to ensure we can still maintain that coastal charm character.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think (the state government) have made the right decision and followed the wishes of the majority of our community.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou\u2019ve always got to try to look at both sides – I was always quite confident (Option 1) wouldn\u2019t go through, but with any campaign, you\u2019ve got to take it on from a lot of different angles and fight as if you\u2019re going to lose it, and work hard, and never let your foot off the gas.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
THE peak body for Victoria\u2019s development industry has slammed the state government for ruling out housing in the Spring Creek valley, describing it as a decision driven by \u201cmarginal seat politics\u201d. In the final Surf Coast Statement of Planning Policy (SPP), released last week, Torquay\u2019s permanent settlement boundary has been pulled back to Duffields Road. […]<\/p>\n