Seven councillors voted in favour of the development, while six remained opposed, in a decision that was preceded by eight deputation speeches and, at times, animated debate among councillors.
Surrounding residents opposed the development on the grounds it overshadowed adjoining properties and was inconsistent with other single dwellings in the estate.
The City refused the application in November last year and again in March, when the application was for nine apartments. The reason provided on both occasions was the proposal�s building bulk was inconsistent with the design principles of the Residential Design Codes of WA.
This time, developer Roy Conrad, of Progressive Projects, scaled back the development to eight dwellings and increased boundary setbacks.
However, residents argued the multiple dwellings were still not compatible in the estate and reminded councillors such developments were allowed only under local government discretion in the planning scheme.
Neighbouring property owner Peter Adams said residents deserved to be heard at the State Administrative Tribunal.
�The developer, fully aware of the fact that the proposed flats did not comply with the R60 requirements relating to dwelling yield, not once but twice deliberately wasted ratepayers� money as well as council�s precious time,� he said.
�Now at last, after viewing the latest plans, it appears the developer has seen fit to at least meet the technical deeming requirements of the code.�
Mr Conrad said the two-storey development would not be dissimilar to the many double storey houses in the estate.
�We�ve spent a long time enhancing the plans to make a very good product; the arguments against it are based on emotion,� he said.