Shire of Collie votes to adopt new laneways planning policy to encourage infill housing despite contention

The Shire of Collie has approved changes to its planning policy to encourage infill housing, despite concerns from some community members. Elected members voted 6-2 at last week’s meeting to approve changes to the council’s local planning policy to encourage homes to be built facing the town’s laneways. The changes are designed to complement increased density limits implemented in 2021, which will allow more homes to be built on properties close to the Collie town centre. Shire president Ian Miffling said the council was updating an existing policy to bring it up to contemporary standards. “Collie like everywhere has got a housing crisis and the council sees this as an opportunity for people who have got large blocks to tap into part of their block which is already serviced with utilities,” he said. “By utilising the back lanes, they would be able to then put a second dwelling on the property without going through a whole greenfield subdivision process.” Property owners will be required to give up the first one metre next to the laneway if they develop their land, down from the original 1.5 metres. The changes will also scrap the requirement for landowners to pay contributions towards laneway upgrades. The policy would be triggered if a property owner required planning approval for a structure including a new shed, though Cr Miffling said the move was more about providing advice. “The point of it is if somebody wanted to put a new shed off the back of their property that abuts the laneway, then they would be advised at the council they would need to have the proper clearance so they don’t impede their own progress in the future or somebody else’s if they sold the property,” he said. During the public consultation period, 130 submissions were received with almost all objecting to the proposal. A petition containing 164 signatures against the changes was also received by the shire before the meeting. Cr Miffling said a lot of community members thought the council was trying to “pinch their land”. “We just kept saying ‘look, it’s not a compulsory thing, it’s up to you’,” he said. Council documents note a public workshop was held on the proposal in November, though no members of the public attended.