Perth Voice Interactive

PENSIONER Catherine Caporn says her hot water bills have soared by $200 every eight weeks because of new two-storey developments next door.

The 88-year-old says it’s because the new buildings put her solar panels in shade several hours a day over autumn and winter.

The Dianella resident says Stirling council didn’t pay enough attention to the impact the three buildings would have on her panels, and she says she wasn’t contacted before building was approved in 2013.

“I just feel like no-one cares,” Ms Caporn says. “I want them to recognise what they’ve done because it’s unfair and wrong. But there are no apologies—no nothing.

“I have been living on this property for 58 years and the frustration I have had with the ‘bad luck, nothing we can do about it’ from the City of Stirling is causing me much stress.”

In a statement the council told the Voice the development complies with overshadowing provisions in residential design codes.

Approvals manager Greg Bowering says the council therefore has no obligation to assist Ms Caporn.

The bigger picture

TOWN planning consultant Greg Smith says the rubber-stamping of high-rise may be a ”potential landmine of an issue” for residents with solar panels.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if it causes fights between neighbours,” the former council executive says.

“Sustainability can go completely ignored.”

Mr Smith’s colleague at Curtin University, Professor Peter Newman, suggests there should be guidelines for developers, steering them in the right direction in terms of sustainability.

He says solar access should be a factor when considering a development application, “but not the sole factor”. “Solar can often be shifted on the roof,” he notes, suggesting that developers likely to shade a neighbour’s property should be asked to pay the costs of relocating panels.

by EMMIE DOWLING