Hobart City Council planning committee votes on unpopular 20-dwelling housing proposal in Sandy Bay

A 20-dwelling development comprising two- and three-storey houses received hundreds of objections from local ratepayers – and now the council’s planning committee has sealed its fate. FULL DECISION >>

HOBART City Council has rejected plans for a Sandy Bay housing development that Alderman Marti Zucco claimed was the worst project he’d seen in 30 years.

The 20-dwelling development at Enterprise Rd was recommended for rejection by planning officers because of concerns over traffic.

The council received 213 representations objecting to the proposal, which included a mixture of two- and three-level houses.

Those objecting said they were concerned about the high-density development they said would “significantly alter the nature of housing in Enterprise Rd and surrounding streets”.

It was the second time the applicant had tried to get a development application through council. A previous similar application was withdrawn in October 2020 after 123 people objected to the development.

The council on Monday night unanimously rejected the proposal.

The view from Enterprise Rd in Sandy Bay.

Alderman Zucco said he was a pro-development elected member who had always pushed the barrow of increasing density.

“When you get down to the nitty gritty of the planning scheme and the site … it’s a way overdevelopment of the site,” he said.

“I cannot understand why some developers just don’t get it.”

Alderman Simon Behrakis said while he too preferred to be pro-development, he found these plans to be “completely over the top”.

The site is a large steeply sloping vacant lot within the General Residential Zone.

The council raised questions about the accuracy of some of the data provided but was unable to ascertain additional information due to the applicant refusing an extension of time for discussion.

Speaking at the special planning committee, the applicant, Brian Richardson, expressed frustration at how long council officers had taken to provide information on the application and said that was why they refused to grant an extension of time for discussion.

“This development proposal has taken nearly three years to go through the process,” Mr Richardson said.

“This is the second application as the first was withdrawn by the developer on advice of the council and we’ve come up with a second design.

“(We have) been held up by council staff and in particular engineering.”

Lord Mayor Anna Reynolds said the plans had caused a lot of angst for neighbours and that she believed the site has the wrong zoning.