For years now the question of how to protect residents living in Minimal Change Areas that just happen to be near, or abutting activity or neighbourhood centres has been occupying the minds of many ratepayers – if not all councillors and planners! Listed for decision this coming Tuesday is the latest version of  Council’s vision for ‘transition zones’. We urge all readers interested in how this Council approaches planning to pay particular attention to this Item and to ask themselves whether the proposed ‘prescriptive guidance’ will achieve any positive outcomes for residents living in both Minimal Change Areas and in residential areas within Activity Centres.

We’ve received one email on this matter already and publish an edited version of it below:

“The new guidance applies very narrowly and specifically to properties on the Housing Diversity side of a transition boundary. It doesn’t address all the single-storey dwellings inside Housing Diversity areas who are repeatedly having their amenity trashed. It is (to me) blatantly unfair to expect these people to have their amenity trashed by allowing non-compliant developments next them that Council and VCAT refuse to allow elsewhere. In the spirit of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 s8 “Recognition and equality before the law”, protections of amenity should be more equal than that. “All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” [Not saying developers are animals mind you…]

Council really should be more explicit in saying what the minimum standards of protection are for *all* dwellings in Housing Diversity areas, and publicly justify why lesser protection is appropriate for people who inconveniently get in the way of developers’ profits. I’d go further and include explicit words in the document to make it clear that there are universal human rights and that Council’s policy is for all people to be treated equally–that relaxation of standards are dependent on a development not being sited next to an existing low-rise dwelling. These dwellings provide sensitive interfaces too.

If I was a Councillor I would be looking for a summary covering each proposed development of what standards are being violated, and an explanation provided of why it is appropriate. Helping a developer make more money isn’t good enough … I’d love to hear Councillors explain why the protection proposed is not appropriate for properties inside but not on the transition boundary.”