‘Lack of understanding’: Ability of Geelong councillors questioned by Balmoral Quay developer

The group behind the contentious Balmoral Quay development has questioned whether City Hall understands its own strategies. HAVE YOUR SAY.

An artist impression of the revised stage five development proposal for Balmoral Quay as seen from Rippleside Park. Some of the top floors of the complex are not visible due to a significant setback. Picture: Supplied.

Geelong council’s unwillingness to accept expert advice will push investors elsewhere, according to the group behind the Balmoral Quay development that City Hall has sensationally rejected.

Councillors have unanimously sided with Rippleside residents who vehemently opposed the project’s expansion, in the process turning their back on an independent panel’s recommendation.

There were euphoric scenes in the immediate aftermath of the vote at Tuesday night’s meeting in Mount Duneed.

Members of the crowd cheered, clapped and thanked councillors as they departed with a significant spring in their step.

Some sought out former Geelong mayor Keith Fagg, who was in the public gallery, for thanks after he led the lobbying effort against the proposal that would’ve seen stage five of the development increase from four storeys and 40 apartments to seven storeys and 84 apartments.

The building’s height would have doubled to 27m, but due to the topography of the site, its peak would sit at a similar level to neighbouring properties.

In strange scenes, councillor Ron Nelson approached a clearly ecstatic Mr Fagg with a smile straight after the vote and asked: “Is that all right?”

Mr Nelson later said he wanted to check if Mr Fagg, whom he served on council with previously, was happy with the result.

Mr Fagg said he could not recall the comment.

The panel’s recommendation to approve the development was disregarded at the outset of the debate, despite council referring the matter to it in December.

Brownbill ward councillor Peter Murrihy introduced an alternative motion that abandoned the amendment that would have allowed the higher density proposal to proceed.

Mr Murrihy, who had earlier said council should not be the “decision making authority” on the matter, said the amendment had the potential to destroy the neighbourhood’s character.

“The height, scale and sheer bulk of the proposal is totally out of character with the surrounding Rippleside neighbourhood,” he said.

“You get a feel for things when you’ve been on council long enough.

“You get a feel of what the people of Geelong really want, and I don’t think a 27m seven-storey apartment block in Rippleside is one of those.”

The view over the Balmoral Quay development, taking in Corio Bay and the Geelong city skyline.

Balmoral Quay development director Theo Axarlis, a senior executive of Gersh Investment Partners, said he was “deeply disappointed” with the outcome.

“Council’s staff of skilled town planners, urban designers and engineers have invested collaborative effort to advance this project over the past four years, at a cost to ratepayers,” he said.

“We are dismayed that their expertise and recommendations have been rejected, along with the expert independent panel, appointed by the councillors.”

The panel, which conducted a four-day hearing in February, dismissed almost all of the residents’ concerns, which included the development’s density, overshadowing, and the impact on views.

Mr Axarlis said the decision flew in the face of council’s own planning and growth strategies.

“It clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding by the current group of councillors,” he said.

“Their decision has worsened the local housing crisis and serves to discourage future investment in the Geelong region.”

Geelong councillors Bruce Harwood and Peter Murrihy. Photo: Christian Benci

State Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny and her department have the power to override council’s decision and green-light the project.

Councillor Bruce Harwood was strongest in his comments again the proposal.

“I cannot support what I would call ‘greedy growth’,” he said.

“I think this is a real statement by this particular council, albeit one of our last statements because we are up for election in the near future.

“I will be supporting the alternative recommendation because, it’s a bit like, enough is enough, and this is enough.”

Mayor Trent Sullivan and Belinda Moloney were the only councillors not to speak on the issue.

Councillors Eddy Kontelj and Anthony Aitken did not participate in the vote as both have family members who own property either within the development or adjacent to it.

Analysis

A merry-go-round is usually reserved for the circus, and some may say the Balmoral Quay decision making process is akin to that.

Certainly, there was a carnival-like atmosphere following council’s unanimous verdict on Tuesday night where the concept of “neighbourhood character” was discussed, but not clearly defined.

It was more a case of, you know, the vibe.

The merry-go-round kicked into gear in December, when all councillors agreed it was best to ask planning minister Sonya Kilkenny to appoint an independent expert panel to advise on the matter.

“I don’t believe council should be the decision making authority in this,” Peter Murrihy said at the time.

Fellow councillor Jim Mason added that it was “most appropriate to delegate this to get an independent and expert panel”.

Following four days of evidence, the panel reported that while larger than what was originally planned, the expanded stage five proposal was a “high quality architectural response with appropriate building articulation, variation, modulation and setbacks”.

It dismissed almost all of the residents’ concerns in the process.

Seemingly spooked by a well co-ordinated community campaign three months out from local government elections, the council ignored the advice they sought and emphatically rejected both the panel’s advice, as well as that of city officers.

The campaign was led by former mayor Keith Fagg, who owns a Rippleside property.

It’s clear his lobbying had an impact.

Mr Murrihy, in voicing his opposition, mirrored an argument Mr Fagg made in a June 22 opinion piece for the Addy: “The height, scale and sheer bulk of the proposal is totally out of character with the surrounding Rippleside neighbourhood.”

Now the final decision lies with Ms Kilkenny, who can use her power to ignore council and enact the recommendation of the panel.

And round and round it goes.

Earlier: Future of contentious waterfront project front and centre

A long-running community campaign to halt a multimillion-dollar waterfront development will come to a head on Tuesday night as councillors cast their vote on whether they will back the recommendation of a government-appointed independent panel.

The developers of the contentious Balmoral Quay project at Rippleside want to amend a planning permit that was granted almost 20 years ago.

The changes, if approved, would see 84 apartments constructed across seven storeys.

The building’s approved height would double to 27m, but due to the topography of the site, the structure’s peak would be at a similar level to neighbouring properties.

The panel, which conducted a four-day hearing in February, heard evidence from a number of concerned residents.

Former Geelong mayor Keith Fagg, who is opposed to the project, was among those to give evidence.

Their concerns revolve largely around the development’s density, a lack of carparking, overshadowing, and the impact on views.

However, the panel ultimately recommended that the amendment be granted, subject to minor conditions that include improved pedestrian access within the Balmoral Crescent car park.

Julie Hannan-Smith has been a vocal opponent and helped raise $30,000 to fund an alternative town planning report.

She remains confident councillors will side with residents.

“We think councillors will vote with their heads and hearts against this proposed permit and amendment based on truly listening to their constituents’ issues,” she said.

Rippleside residents Julie Hannan-Smith and Peter Jager are among those opposed to the stage five development of Balmoral Quay. Picture: Brad Fleet.

The panel said the proposed building, while larger than what was originally planned, was a “high quality architectural response with appropriate building articulation, variation, modulation and setbacks”.

“The overall height of seven storeys is appropriate and can comfortably sit within the surrounding context, particularly given the topography of the subject land,” its report stated.

“There is no mechanism in the planning scheme to protect views and there is no legal right to a view.”

Councillors Eddy Kontelj and Anthony Aitken won’t participate in the vote as both have family members who own property either within the development or nearby.

In December, councillors unanimously voted for planning minister Sonya Kilkenny to appoint the independent panel.

At the time, Ron Nelson said: “I certainly wouldn’t want to live in Rippleside and have a 27m monolith blocking my sunrise.”

Fellow councillor Peter Murrihy said he didn’t believe “council should be the decision making authority in this”.

It is understood that at least six of the nine councillors who will vote on Tuesday night have personally inspected the site in recent weeks.

Property Council boss Cath Evans urged council to adopt the amendment, which she said was consistent with local housing policies.

Stages 1-4 of the Balmoral Quay development have been completed.

“With Geelong’s ambitious draft housing targets in mind, adopting this amendment will not only lay the groundwork for responsible development and investment, but also establish an important precedent for the city’s future,” she said.

he company behind the project is Balmoral Quay Pty Ltd, which is backed by the Bangkok-based Supalai group.

Supalai chairman and chief executive Prateep Tangmatitham is a director, as is Supalai board member Prateep Tangmatitham.

Rounding out Balmoral Quay’s directorship is Richard Herman, who is chief financial officer of Gersh Investment Partners.

The company’s listed address is the South Yarra base of Gersh, according to Australian Securities and Investments Commission documents.

If council knocks back the amendment, it is understood Ms Kilenny could overrule the decision given the panel’s recommendation.

The state government last month set a target of 139,800 new homes within the City of Greater Geelong by 2051.

That equates to almost 5200 new homes a year, or 14 every day.

Originally published as ‘Lack of understanding’: Ability of Geelong councillors questioned by Balmoral Quay developer