CITY of Greater Bendigo councillors have refused to allow a developer to build two two-storey houses at the back of a Bendigo miner’s cottage, which was also planned to have a two-storey extension added to its side.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The plan involved removing weatherboard extensions to reveal the original facade of the cottage on Hill Street, and to restore the brickwork, chimney, windows and gable before adding the extension.
The two dwellings at the rear of the property were proposed to have two and three bedrooms respectively. They were to be located on a downward slope, minimising impact on neighbours.
Council officers recommended granting a permit, but councillors had reservations about the impact on the heritage value of the property.
The cottage is part of a heritage overlay, but the council’s heritage department had no objection to the plan. The weatherboard extensions to be removed were not considered to have heritage value.
The cottage itself was to act as a master bedroom for the residence at the front of the property.
The plan received five objections, including concerns that the extension on the side would impair street views of the cottage.
Councillor Julie Hoskin said cottages such as this were “significant” for Bendigo’s history, and formed part of the story of when Bendigo was one of the richest cities in the world.
“We can’t keep eroding our heritage as has happened in past years,” she said.
Councillor Jennifer Alden said the proposal was an “unreasonable amenity outcome” and it was not in accordance with aspects of the heritage overlay.
But Councillor James Williams said the original cottage would be maintained and restored, and the plan was in line with council’s priority on in-fill development to create more housing.
“It’s a far better outcome than to see it sit there on an untidy and unwelcome sort of a block,” he said.
“It’s providing three dwellings in an area where there was previously one.
“It’s an area where we do desire to see in-fill.”
Councillor Rod Fyffe agreed, and said the heritage cottage was not going to removed, but would be incorporated into the design.
Councillors voted 5-3 to reject the development.