Kingborough Council will tonight vote on the controversial Mary Knoll housing proposal
Kingborough Council will tonight vote on the contentious Mary Knoll affordable housing proposal, where 56 of 57 submissions received by council were opposed to the development. Find out why this housing project has angered so many residents.
Tasmania
Don't miss out on the headlines from Tasmania. Followed categories will be added to My News.
AN updated report on a contentious affordable housing project south of Hobart will be voted on by the Kingborough Council tonight night.
The Mary Knoll site — a 3ha block of land at Blackmans Bay — has been marked for the development of multiple residential and road lots, and public open space.
Council received 57 representations on the proposed development — 56 opposed.
A 1093-signature petition against the development was also passed on to the council.
Earlier this year the council considered an application for a combined planning scheme amendment for the project.
COUNCILLORS CONDEMN ‘LACK OF COMPASSION’
Kingborough Mayor Dean Winter said the Tasmanian Planning Commission had asked that the council include more information in the Mary Knoll site report.
“The report summarises the submissions received and recommends forwarding the submissions to the Tasmanian Planning Commission for its consideration,” he said.
RESIDENTS JOIN TO STOP DEVELOPMENT
“The planning scheme amendment would see some of the Mary Knoll property rezoned from low-density residential to general residential, in line with almost the entire suburb of Blackmans Bay.”
Blackmans Bay Community Advocacy Group spokesman John Maynard said the group was worried the rezoning goes against council’s Interim Planning Scheme and against past outcomes of community consultations on Blackmans Bay Bluff.
“The group is also concerned about increased traffic congestion in the small streets, loss of biodiversity in and around the Mary Knoll site, ever-increasing run-off and the potential for worsening pollution of Blackmans Bay Beach,” he said.
Mr Maynard said the group was not against a project on the site but wanted a development more in line with area zoning and which retains the amenity of the area.
james.kitto@news.com.au