Knox City Council has approved a permit for the construction of a research and development centre for microbiological testing and associated manufacturing at 5 William Street, Ferntree Gully at a council meeting on Monday 24 October.
Cr Meagan Baker, who moved the motion, said after reading the correspondence, receiving briefings from council officers and visiting the site and surrounding streets, she supports the approval of the research and development centre.
“The proposal is consistent with the purpose of the industrial one zone by providing a specialist industrial use within an established industrial zone, which does not affect the safety and immediate local communities,” she said.
“The proposal provides an opportunity for new investment focus on advanced manufacturing, offers a diversity of employment, promotes technology within Knox and also increases local school development.”
The application received three objections before being referred to Knox City Council’s health officer, waste officer, building officer and Environment Protection Authority Victoria, who raised no concerns.
Mayor Susan Laukens spoke to the motion as it was within Friberg Ward and said she supports the motion.
“That is something that will bring obviously some economic development and some employment to our area which is what we actually are seeking,” she said.
The motion was passed unanimously before two questions regarding the development were put to the council during public question time.
A nearby resident of the development said they were “displayed by the report and outline the following concerns.”
“If a permit is issued as proposed, there will be no control over what substances may be bought into produced or handled by the facility in the future,” the resident said.
“If the lessor lessee were to change their intended use, or occupancy was taken up by an alternative tenant, what would limit their use to ensure it pose no risk to the surrounding area?”
Knox City Director of City Livability Matt Kelleher said the EPA referral response showed that the proposal is consistent with the planning scheme and appropriate for the site.
“I understand the inference in your question that the proposal would be less offensive to you or would provide greater certainty if any permit was tied to the current perspective lease,” he said.
“I advise is such an outcome is not considered legal or appropriate and therefore has not formed part of the council decision and consideration.
“I would draw your attention to your rights to appeal any Council decision on this matter at VCAT.”
A second question from the same resident asked if the council “truly cares about the well-being and safety of our family,” because the referral to the EPA didn’t identify the family home directly neighbouring the proposed facility.
Director Kelleher said he would have expected the EPA’s response would have considered land uses surrounding the site when accessing the proposal.
“In addition, EPA recommendations indicate that before the use or development commences the permit holder must ensure any obligations or duties that arise under the Environment Protection Act 2017 are met,” he said.
“Given the EPA’s assessment that the use is considered to be at low risk and the EPA is satisfied that the application can be supported.”
