Alex de Vos
Jan Juc households will pay an average $414 for new footpaths after Surf Coast councillors watered down a controversial special charge scheme this week.
Council’s Wednesday night meeting also rejected a $4 million redevelopment of Jan Juc’s Beach Hotel, including installation of 30 gaming machines.
Footpath objectors shunned the meeting, while pokies opponents welcomed the hotel knock-back.
Council had planned to slug residents hundreds of dollars more each for footpaths but slashed the plan amid widespread objections.
Councillors accepted an officers’ recommendation to “modify the scope of the scheme…generally to the main north-south feeder roads”.
The recommendation cut the project by 40 per cent, leaving affected residents to share a charge of $991,650. Council would contribute $416,570 to the total project cost of $1.41 million.
The officers’ report noted the revised charge was “the maximum levy chargeable”.
Cr Brian McKiterick said the community must “bite the bullet to get this project up and running”.
Cr Simon Northeast, the only councillor to vote against the revised scheme, argued it should go before the community first.
Residents fought the footpaths charge for around six months.
Council would have had to drop the scheme if more than half of affected residents objected in writing during the submissions period. Objectors fell short of their 934-submission target when the shire closed the period saying it had received 881 submissions.
The Independent later revealed the shire rejected late submissions despite earlier indicating to Department of Planning and Community Development it would accept them. The department had written to the shire raising residents’ concerns about the submissions period running through the peak holiday season when many objectors might be away.
Councillors’ rejection of the Beach Hotel application left a door open for pokies in Jan Juc’s shopping centre.
Councillors accepted an officers’ recommendation to “undertake a community opinion survey” on gaming machines in the centre.
Council received 52 objections to the redevelopment, mostly against the pokies component.
Resident Jeremy Ham was “delighted” with council’s vote.
Mr Ham believed the “ridiculous” redevelopment would fail if the applicant appealed to the state planning tribunal.
In the Independent late last year Beach Hotel manager Lee Greening labelled the pokies “a small part” of the project.
Mr Greening said the machines would return $30,000 to community projects each year.