Green light for St Kilda tower
A TWENTY-SIX storey apartment tower has been controversially approved by Planning Minister Matthew Guy on St Kilda Road despite the local council strongly opposing the application.
Mr Guy has approved the new tower at 3-5 St Kilda Road because he said the ”development is well-suited to this area on St Kilda Road where there are buildings of similar height in close proximity” and ”there is easy access to major roads and public transport, business and retail in the immediate area”.
He said it was government policy to concentrate high density developments in areas like 3-5 St Kilda Road ”to take pressure off development in neighbouring residential streets”. But Port Phillip Council is furious Mr Guy called in the apartment application from Victoria’s planning tribunal and the council opposed the application at a subsequent hearing with the department of planning.
Port Phillip mayor Rachel Powning said ”it is a 26-storey building in an area where there are predominantly four-storey buildings, there are a couple of exceptions to that, but it is not designated as a high-growth area,” she said. ”What is most concerning to us as a council is this goes against the minister’s commitment to return local government autonomy in relation to planning control,” she said.
Opposition planning spokesman Brian Tee accused Mr Guy of ”riding roughshod over the local community” and setting a precedent for ”wall to wall high rises along St Kilda Road”.
In January Mr Guy controversially blocked a proposal for a new 88-metre apartment tower off St Kilda Road at 35 Albert Street 10 days before it was due to be heard by Victoria’s planning tribunal. The proposal was blocked when Mr Guy introduced a 60-metre height limit for the area to protect vistas of the Shrine.
The tower proposal received a large number of objections from residents at the nearby Domain building at 1 Albert Road, including from Lloyd Williams, Lindsay Fox and Ron Walker (either individually or through a mutual body corporate) and from the household of senior Baillieu government MP Andrea Coote.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/green-light-for-st-kilda-tower-20110825-1jcq4.html#ixzz1W3JjHgap
Glen Eira Debates 
August 26, 2011 at 12:48 PM
Once again no agenda is published on the Council website for Tuesday’s meeting – perhaps Council could talk to GlenEira about managing their site. It really is embarrassingly below par.
August 26, 2011 at 1:09 PM
What’s below par is the secrecy. Hard copies are not sitting there out in full public view at libraries. You have to actually ask for them. People don’t know because they can’t see them so few would ask. What a fabulous way of communicating and informing. If I was running the show I’d have huge signs put up at counters “Free to all interested residents. Find out what your council is doing at next meeting”. But hey, that’s not the way Newton wants things done. Christ, can you imagine what might happen if people actually knew the machinations that went on and how each vote could affect them.
August 26, 2011 at 12:55 PM
There’s only a 1000 people working there so how can you expect efficiency. They need 2000!
August 26, 2011 at 1:06 PM
Two meetings ago, the issue of the website not having updated public notices from May was asked – unfortunately Cr Hyams could not grasp the question and even by the next meeting was unable to provide a response. Why set protocols if you cannot meet them, or is this in contravention to the Local Government Act? Either way, it is poor form and yet another thing that needs to change in this Council.
August 26, 2011 at 6:51 PM
The online version of the agenda items is missing the Audit Report. It’s in the hard copy since I made the effort to go and physically get one. This isn’t the first time that sloppy work characterises this supposedly efficient and streamlined organisation. I imagine it’s Paul Burke who oversees the release of the agenda and minutes. Mistakes can happen, but when they occur frequently residents need to start asking questions. Or is the omission of something as important as the audit report (which happened to include a visit by 2 members of the Auditor General’s department) been deliberately left out. Strikes me as most unusual to have two bods “visiting”. Maybe they’re also investigating something that isn’t quite right. Of course, the public will never know.