PS: a new application has just gone in for a 7 storey, 24 dwellings in Centre Road, Bentleigh. A few doors away from the 9 storey application on the old Broadbent’s site. Because they can – THEY WILL as long as the planning scheme is without direction, without clear policy, and without any review!
Adding more insult to injury, it appears that ratepayers are now footing the bill to fix up the mess that developers leave as a result of their constructions. In response to a public question asked at last council meeting on who is paying for road reconstruction at 2 Morton Avenue, Carnegie, the response was:
In recent years, property development in the street has resulted in various utilities
excavating the road pavement to access underground services. On each occasion,
the utilities repaired the road, most likely at the developers cost to Council
standards. The end result of all this work, however, was a patchwork of repairs. In
addition to the repairs, sections of the road pavement had begun to fail due to
general wear and tear. To address the patchwork of repairs and to remedy the
failed sections of pavement, Council recently removed the road surface in the
affected area and applied a uniform patch. These final works were undertaken by Council’s Asphalt Crew at Council’s cost.
++++++++
Speaking of cost, here is another example of how to waste money defending the indefensible. Councillors responded to Wynne’s kick up the backside letter by ordering more ‘investigations’ into VCAT decisions. How many hours of officer’s time will be devoted to this? How much will this little exercise in futility cost? And why can’t this time be spent in drawing up worthwhile amendments to the planning scheme so that VCAT has some real guidance on planning applications? Thus, more ratepayer funds wasted on maintaining the illusion that all blame can be laid a the door of VCAT instead of council’s planning failures.
December 1, 2015 at 10:16 AM
How council can talk about “council standards” and in the very next sentence admit to allowing a “patchwork of repairs” is beyond me. They don’t even know who paid for what – the “most likely” bit of the sentence. That would mean that residents probably also paid for this earlier series of “patchwork repairs”. Developers are allowed to ruin the streets, park wherever they like, and now are getting off scot free in paying for the damage they’ve caused. No wonder that Glen Eira is every developer’s dream.
December 1, 2015 at 12:55 PM
They shouldn’t be looking for mistakes in vcat decisions but looking at all decisions and the reasons why vcat overturned what council wanted. From there they should take the lessons and put them into the planning scheme. That’s what a review is supposed to be all about. Find out where you’re going wrong and then fix it. Not in Glen Eira though. It’s much better to blame vcat
December 1, 2015 at 3:08 PM
Repair “at Council’s cost”??? That would mean WE are paying for the damage done by the developments at 9, 6, 4 and 2 Morton Av. Either the damage was repaired to “Council standards” [not that it has any] so work was unnecessary, or it wasn’t and developers should pay for the remedial work. Once again Council has decided we should subsidize developers. In the words of Neil Pilling, “this is what Council is trying to achieve”.
There ARE dodgy VCAT decisions. Absolutely. VCAT should never have been given the extraordinary freedom it has in planning matters. Doesn’t excuse Council for failing to use the controls available to it to specify accurately the outcomes it seeks for each area. Nor does it excuse Council for extending permits way beyond the 2 years developers generally have to start their developments when circumstances have changed, such as the zoning.
Which of Council and VCAT feels like taking credit for the 5-storey development currently being built in Minimal Change / NRZ? Why is a director of a company whose primary market is the development industry an appropriate choice for VCAT Member? Perhaps Richard Wynne would oblige with a photo op, saying “this is what I stand for”.
December 1, 2015 at 7:00 PM
Richard Wynn is carrying a can of worms handed to him by Mathew Guy, zones architected by Hyams and the planners and personally presented to Guy. Haste is waste and destruction of people’s houses, amenities etc Labors hard work come next elections will be focussed on these mad zones and underground trains will not have much value compared to the loss of enjoyment of their homes. Hyams will target Wynn so that he can say look even Wynn believes how wonderful his zones are. Ha ha ha
December 1, 2015 at 4:16 PM
Maybe Cr Deal Willing is the bagman
December 1, 2015 at 4:16 PM
Desperately needed in Glen Eira
http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/commission-of-inquiry-appointed-to-geelong/
December 1, 2015 at 7:00 PM
Let’s see if council can get this application looked at in 60 days.
December 1, 2015 at 7:23 PM
Another useless set of statistics provided by council when they state that the number of vcat appeals has doubled from the 2013/14 year. Developers have had a year to acquaint themselves with the generosity of councils new zoning and are testing this to the limit. Then there is the fact that council is rejecting applications out of hand at an inordinate rate. Of course developers then seek redress at vcat. There is also an increased resident resentment to what is happening so more resident objections. Plus, if you have more applications streaming in, then of course there is the probability you will get more appeals to vcat – particularly when council imposes ridiculous conditions, or rejects them outright. These statistics do not prove a single thing and certainly not that vcat is at fault.
December 1, 2015 at 8:17 PM
Good article in Leader. Pity that no Glen Eira residents were quoted to support Woods.
December 2, 2015 at 1:00 AM
Funnily enough generally VCAT Appeals have generally declined but in the case of our once beautiful area the appps have increased. one wonders why!!!!!!!
December 2, 2015 at 7:44 AM
wow a combined christian / jewish festival on our public land. Has anyone told them that half the fences in Queens Avenue have blown down so security won’t be great?
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/inner-south/jewish-chanukah-event-to-go-ahead-at-caulfield-racecourse-after-terrorist-fears/news-story/c1c821973b75fbe841c557e2f105ca90
December 2, 2015 at 8:05 AM
Actually, I’d be more concerned about holding it there than out in an open area. Getting out of the racecourse into and out the racecourse ain’t easy, even if you know your way around. At least out in the open you aren’t a sitting duck
December 2, 2015 at 10:07 PM
What address/location is the Centre Rd 7 storey development application? What are the timeframes for objections?
December 2, 2015 at 10:13 PM
It is on the corner of Mavho and Centre Road. Address: 342-344 Centre Road and zoned Commercial 1.
It has not been advertised as yet. The application went in on the 27th November and the blurb reads as – “To construct a seven storey building comprising a shop and 24 dwellings, reduced visitor parking, waiver of loading bay requirements”.
December 3, 2015 at 9:50 AM
Any other applications in for Centre Road Bentleigh that you are aware of?
December 3, 2015 at 10:09 AM
Most recent applications are either amendments seeking to reduce car parking requirements, create new exits onto Centre Road or creating warehouses and getting liquour licenses for cafes. A permit granted in April is for 348-352 Centre Road for 4 storeys and 20 apartments.
Council is legally obliged to have what is known as an online planning register. If you go to the website, then click on planning, you will find a link to this. Mind, the register is quite often totally uninformative – ie it has some descriptions for applications as ‘multi-unit development’!!!!!!!