Lake homes on rise

Councillors were split over a proposed 17 home development at Lakeisde. 107107_05

By NICOLE WILLIAMS

A SEVENTEEN home development had Cardinia shire councillors debating the neighbourhood character of Pakenham’s Lakeside on Monday night.
Councillors were split on an application for a development, including 10 double storey and seven triple storey homes on the corner of Arbour Rise and Botanic Drive, Pakenham.
Councillors debated whether the proposal was an overdevelopment of the site or a continuation of the townhouse-style homes already located around the lake.
Councillor Kate Lempriere moved to approve the development, saying it was consistent with other dwellings in the area and was designed to fit the existing neighbourhood character.
“If I was unhappy about it everyone would know about it,” Cr Lempriere said in summing up her argument.
“I can not find one reason for this not to continue.”
Cr Jodie Owen, who lives in a similar home, said three-storey home were already located around the lake.
“It is a better development than paltry single story homes,” she said.
“It is keeping with the theme of the area.”
Cr Collin Ross and Cr Graeme Moore argued in opposition to the development, believing three storey homes were an overdevelopment of the residential area – highlighting the highest roof point of nearly 10 metres.
“We have to ask ourselves what does the community want and what do we want in the growth corridor?” Cr Ross said.
“Is this setting a precedence? Pakenham and the growth corridor is not inner-Melbourne.”
Insufficient car parking, particularly for visitors, was the main concern raised by Cr Moore.
“It is an overdevelopment of the site,” he said.
“Parking is already a problem in Lakeside and I think this will cause problems.”
Nine objections were received to the development, including a 30-signature petition, which were concerned with neighbourhood character, car parking and overdevelopment.
The application was approved, with four councillors voting in favour.
Mayor Brett Owen was excluded from the discussion and vote because of a conflict of interest.