By Luke Voogt
An online petition to stop a development near Bells Beach has gathered thousands of signatures ahead of a state planning tribunal hearing next month.
Surfriders Foundation branch president John Foss said the petition showed the community’s opposition to the development, which the Surf Coast Shire rejected earlier this year.
“The fact it’s clocking up hundreds of signatures every hour shows people really do care about Bells and want it left alone.”
The foundation created the petition this week to save the “surfing nirvana” from a “dangerous precedent”.
Mr Foss said the proposal, while “relatively modest”, could pave the way for further development.
“It’s about trying to keep Bells as natural and untouched as possible.”
The landowner applied for a planning permit for accommodation on the hinterland near the beach earlier this year.
“When it came onto the radar, we were all really shocked to read the plans,” Mr Foss said.
He said the proposal would still lead to more cars, people and vegetation loss. Bushfire regulations and emergency accesses would mean further habitat destruction, he said.
“It will just detract from the experience of surfing at Bells.”
Mr Foss said the proposal was unnecessary, as there were already “plenty of wonderful places” to stay in Torquay and Jan Juc.
“They are just not right on the backdoor of Bells.”
All nine Surf Coast Shire councillors voted to reject the proposal at a meeting on 26 April, following 17 objections and opposition from local preservation groups.
Councillor Margot Smith said the shire made the decision to protect the beauty of the beach.
“Once you allow a project like this to go forward you open the floodgates.”
However, following the decision the land owner made an appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which will hear the matter beginning 24 October.
Mr Foss said “raw natural energy” of Bells Beach made it an international icon and a few people were “trying to exploit that”.
“People would pay top dollar for accommodation so close to Bells. But the (developers would) be flying in the face of the community – it’s a real shame the land owner hasn’t got that message.”
The Indy contacted James Deans and Associates Architects, the company which submitted the original application to council, for comment.
