Wingecarribee Shire Council’s decision on Wedn-esday to overrule planning staff on a contentious East Bowral subdivision matter may be contested in court.
Cr David Fairall warned “we would get belted” should the developer take legal action after the council refused his application to create 53 lots.
Developer Peter Lowry said yesterday he has sought legal advice on the resolution that the council negotiates to a maximum 40 lots.
Mr Lowry also wants an apology from Cr John Sherborne claiming he made “derogatory and misleading” statements about the application process.
For legal reasons the Southern Highland News cannot publish the open council comments which left Mr Lowry “shocked”.
“His comments were totally unfounded, bordering on defamatory and I’m going to demand an apology from him,” Mr Lowry said.
It’s understood some council staff were also offended by the remarks.
“For a man of his intelligence, his statements shocked me,” Mr Lowry said.
Wednesday’s debate started when Cr Fairall moved to reverse the council’s decision of November 14 when it rejected the 53-allotment plan and instead “enter into further negotiations”.
Mr Lowry had originally planned for almost 70 lots at an average 800m2 in size but the council’s DCP for the land permits mostly 2000m2 blocks or only about 28 lots.
However, the council’s planners concluded that 53 lots was a fair compromise, to which Mr Lowry agreed.
They recommended the DCP be varied believing the subdivision would have little environmental impact and that the DCP had been varied before for other East Bowral subdivisions.
Cr Fairall pleaded with his colleagues to stand by the planners because “they are the experts”.
He said another 53 lots in East Bowral would meet the demands of dozens of families looking to establish in the shire.
“We’ve got to look at what today’s community wants,” he said.
“I am here for what the community wants in the area ... It’s a good development and I can’t see why there’s a problem adjusting to it.”
However, Crs Sara Murray and Peter Reynolds would have none of it, arguing the council had an obligation to stick by its planning principles.
Cr Reynolds also lambasted planners, saying “I’m disappointed in the staff”.
“There would be a loss of amenity, a loss of lifestyle, a loss of everything if we don’t stick to our guns,” Cr Murray said.
Cr Murray later suggested the council afford the developer a maximum 40 lots on the basis that it fell somewhere between the 28 and 53.
“It’s a 40 per cent increase on 28 so it’s not a minor variation,” she said. Her motion won 9 votes to 2, with Crs Fairall and Rick Mandelson against.
Mayor Phil Yeo said the 40 figure would be the “parameter” for further negotiations with the developer.
Cr Fairall yesterday labelled most of his colleagues “hypocrites” for agreeing to a DCP variation anyway.
“What’s the bloody difference between their variation and what the developer was prepared to settle for,” he said.
“If they’re so hell bent on planning principles, why did they agree to 40 blocks.
“For the sake of 13 extra blocks, the whole thing is ridiculous and mate, this is headed for the courts.”
Email a friend