Proposed two-storey development in Hectorville rejected by local council’s assessment panel

Hectorville residents taking on a national construction company have enjoyed a major win in a “David vs Goliath” battle over a development dubbed an “eyesore”.

Campbelltown Council's assessment panel rejected the two-storey plan. Picture: Metricon Homes

A proposed two-storey development in Hectorville has been knocked back in a battle described by a local MP as “David vs Goliath”.

National construction company Metricon’s application to Campbelltown Council’s assessment panel to demolish three detached dwellings for three, two-storey buildings with 12 units at 5-7 Stewart Street and 42 South Street was rejected on Tuesday night.

Local residents had described the plan as an “eyesore” which was likely to “destroy” the heritage of this “iconic suburb”.

Hartley MP and former Speaker of the House Vincent Tarzia, who was also a registered opponent to the plan, told The Messenger on Wednesday it was a great victory for the local residents.

“It was a David vs Goliath battle to stop the development on Stewart and South streets at Hectorville and I’m proud to say David won,” Mr Tarzia said.

“We took on those who wanted to overdevelop our area and Campbelltown Council’s assessment panel rejected the proposal in a huge win for the people of Hectorville.

Hartley MP Vincent Tarzia said local residents had enjoyed a “David v Goliath” victory. Picture: Metricon Homes

“Residents were worried about this development and, where I can, I will always advocate for my constituents and the wider community.”

Local resident Barb Chiro said it would have been wrong to “have that number of units squashed onto that block”.

“The developer may appeal, so we’re not celebrating yet,” Mrs Chiro said.

“Carparking would have been a nightmare too, the streets are very narrow.”

Other residents felt it would “destroy the ambience and beauty of the locality”, a panel report showed.

“The proposed development is utterly devoid of character that suits the ambience of the surrounding homes,” according to the report.

Council staff said there had been a “lack of infill development” in the area, despite a 2014 Development Plan Amendement which sought to increase densities in the suburb.

It allowed residential flat buildings to be developed on blocks as small as 150sq m.

The South Street address which would have been demolished if the plan was approved. Picture: Google Maps

“(It) is a reflection of the historical establishment of the area and the fact that the relatively recent changes to the Development Plan policy are yet to manifest in similar types of developments in the immediate locality,” it read.

However, the applicant argued the average size of each dwelling “comfortably” exceeds the council’s guidelines under its development plan and there would be limited overshadowing.

“No direct overlooking will be possible from the proposed development into adjoining

dwelling habitable room windows or private open space,” the report read.

Council staff had recommended the panel to not approve the plan, believing it is an “overdevelopment” and “does not contribute to the desire character of the zone”.