Readers will remember the saga of Claire Street, McKinnon and Magee’s crocodile tears of woe on the steps of VCAT. The street featured again at Tuesday night’s meeting with Magee jumping on the same old bandwagon – everything is VCAT’s fault rather than council policy, planning and zoning.
The only reason that the VCAT member knocked back the first Stellar application for three storeys and thirty plus units was that the developer was exceedingly greedy. No decent setbacks, and internal amenity suitable for a mole – ie subterranean apartments! Another application has now gone in for 33 units and will end up at VCAT again.
But things have now got even worse. There is another application in by the same company Steller, for 1-9 Claire Street that will see: ‘six, three storey townhouse and two three storey apartment (44 dwellings)”. Stellar has basically bought out the entire street and the sole remaining resident has decided that enough is enough and has put his property (4 Claire St) up for sale.
We have no doubt that both Stellar applications will be passed by VCAT. Not because they ‘ignore’ council policy, but because it IS COUNCIL POLICY TO ENCOURAGE 3 STOREY DEVELOPMENT ON CONSOLIDATED LOTS and the zoning is GRZ. When the VCAT member rejected the first application for 6-10 Claire St., he made it absolutely clear in his judgement that zoning and lack of preferred character statements make Claire St.(and much of McKinnon) a candidate for this kind of rampant (over)development. It is Council policy. Please note the number of times the phrase ‘policy’ or ‘planning scheme’ feature in the extracts from this judgement (below).
Magee and the other councillors can continue with their nonsense and the spurious blame game, but residents need to appreciate the truth. Any Planning Scheme Review that fails to address zoning and the limitations of the schedules is not a review – it is a whitewash!
The judgement below says it all in our view.
Source: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2015/1762.html
These local policies strongly support the development of apartment style buildings in Claire Street , McKinnon, in a manner that will result in significant levels of change. This is a deliberate and considered policy outcome sought by the Glen Eira City Council. It allows policies to also be implemented that reduce the ability for any meaningful level of medium density housing to be developed in the majority of other residential areas within the municipality. In other words, the Council has chosen to allow significant change in limited neighbourhoods, so as to preserve to a strong level the existing character of most of its other neighbourhoods.
While this individual proposal fails to address some important design matters, it is inevitable, in applying the local policies drafted by the Glen Eira City Council, that Claire Street, McKinnon will be subject to significant levels of change in the short to medium term.
Although townhouse developments of two and three double storey dwellings have started to appear in this area, the restrictions now in place over most of the municipality will act to focus more intensive development into areas such as this in McKinnon. It may not mean the whole street is filled with three storey apartment buildings but it almost certainly means that the existing single dwellings on a lot will be gradually replaced. It may take twenty or thirty years but, based on submissions and statements of grounds, I am not sure that existing residents appreciate the changes that will occur in response to development outcomes sought by the Glen Eira Planning Scheme.
In this proceeding, Mr & Mrs Menko lamented that most of the lots in Claire Street have now been purchased by developers, and are likely to be subject to forms of development like the one before me. They resist this level of change, and the likelihood that only two of the original single dwellings will remain. They also raise concerns about how this extent of development can be suitable for a dead-end street, with its only access point to McKinnon Road, and limited on-street car parking supply. They also question the ability of McKinnon Road to accommodate the additional traffic. I understand the frustrations and anger expressed by residents about the rate of change that might occur in Claire Street . However the extent of redevelopment that is likely to occur is a direct realisation of the very clear intent of the Glen Eira Planning Scheme, in particular the local policies created by the Glen Eira City Council.
That is, this form of development and rate of change, is consistent with the planning scheme that I am charged to apply. Further, it is not my role to review, on an ad-hoc basis, the suitability of this dead-end street to accommodate this level of change, nor the ability of McKinnon as a whole to accommodate additional population and traffic. The Glen Eira City Council has had the opportunity to carefully consider such matters, over an extended period of time, and has identified Claire Street McKinnon as an appropriate location for the placement of a housing diversity area, to take the additional housing demands of the municipality.
The Glen Eira Planning Scheme clearly supports substantial development in Claire Street McKinnon. This substantial development is not expected to imitate or reflect the style and form of the single dwellings that currently exist in this and other streets. Instead, a policy intent has been clearly been articulated for Claire Street by the Glen Eira City Council, that encourages more intense and more diverse housing forms. Invariably this means that apartment buildings are strongly encouraged in this neighbourhood.
It is clear, when taking into account the policy framework as whole, that apartment style development is the undeniable future for Claire Street , McKinnon, as clearly identified and articulated by the local policies contained in the Glen Eira Planning Scheme, as drafted by the Glen Eira City Council.
the apartment building is excavated below natural ground level to the rear boundary, such that the ground floor level will be around 1.3 metres below natural ground level, and the ceiling height of the ground floor apartments will be roughly matching the standard fence height on the boundary.
The residents urged upon me that a more appropriate development will consist of two storeys in scale. I agree with their submissions that the two storey apartment building at 13 Claire Street represents a more successful integration into the surrounding context. Further, for the reasons set out above I agree that this proposed three storey building is too big and bulky, with inappropriate setbacks, for the review site. However I have not been persuaded that the site is unsuitable for a three storey apartment building per se. Given the extent of policy support for a significant level of additional housing in this location, and the vast size of this consolidated site, I am not willing to conclude that it is not possible for a well designed three storey apartment building to be found to be an appropriate built form response to this context
Mr & Mrs Menko also raises a concern with the potential increase in traffic in Claire Street and their difficulties in accessing McKinnon Road. I acknowledge that this proposed development, if approved, would have increased such traffic levels, and the delays currently experienced in turning onto McKinnon Street. However the traffic impacts of the proposal were considered by Council’s traffic engineers, and in their independent and expert opinion, the surrounding road network can accommodate the expected increase in traffic.
The policy framework of the Glen Eira Planning Scheme clearly articulates a future for Claire Street McKinnon that anticipates significant change and more substantial housing developments. The Glen Eira City Council has adopted such a vision as a means of protecting much of its other residential areas from even a moderate amount of medium density housing. That is the policy framework that has been adopted and applied to this municipality for over 11 years, and is the vision that I must have regard to and implement in my decision making task.
April 7, 2016 at 8:06 AM
Isn’t amazing that we can have councillors with eight or more year experience on council, and they still do not understand or pretend not to understand our planning scheme.
The whole planning scheme needs to be simplified and made bullet proof so the profit seekers cannot undermine it.
April 7, 2016 at 10:05 AM
Vcat’s judgement is clear as a bell. Council put in the zoning, that’s what they want and now they are getting exactly what they wanted without asking residents if this is what we want. Refusing applications willy nilly is for show. If council is fair dinkum about protecting areas then they would have put up some decent amendments a long time ago. Trotting off to vcat on hopeless causes is a dead waste of ratepayers money.
April 7, 2016 at 11:26 AM
Very true
April 7, 2016 at 11:38 AM
If Council genuinely want to get community feedback on the Planning Scheme, they should conduct consultation sessions in McKinnon and Bentleigh. The fact that these are not part of the consultation plan says it all.
April 7, 2016 at 11:57 AM
The alleged councillor remarks at the last council meeting are very disappointing. Reading the post no one said a thing about the need for major changes. Half of the questions asked in the discussion paper lead nowhere or lay everything at the door of state government. I don’t buy this. There is plenty that council could and should do. A good start would be what Anon says – have meetings in the areas that are most affected and let people have a decent say by asking the right questions.
April 7, 2016 at 12:30 PM
Agree but having a say is not enough. We did that last time round and the issues we raised with council were completely ignored. What we need is an opportunity to influence the planning scheme that takes into account what residents want in there local neighbourhoods and what is a fair and reasonable amount of change. We want council to listen then act on what they hear. I for one will be attending all sessions and taking notes and getting in touch with councillors after the sessions to ask them what they intend to do with the community input.
I have to say that i enter into any process with council with absolute scepticism and no confidence at all!
April 7, 2016 at 3:50 PM
Yes, now we have Glen Eira’s Number One Liberal Party Chinese developer on council, do not be surprised if your ignored, sidelined, overruled on planning matters. The whole shebang is leaning heavily towards the foreign investors and financiers. Your children and grandchildren will be paying rent to these absentee landlords in a feudal world order, being build before your eyes NOW.
As we seen these financier will pay no tax on their huge profits, shifting their money to Panama and such places, and we the rate and taxpayer will go on footing the bills for roads, water, etc.
They are laughing through their faceless entities all the to the Virgin Island.
Be careful for who you vote for
April 7, 2016 at 4:16 PM
Dead easy. Put every single councillor standing for re-election dead last on the preference list. Put their stooges second last.
April 7, 2016 at 5:11 PM
How about details of these connections you have explained. Seems to have lots of conflicts. Who does he work for?
April 7, 2016 at 10:28 PM
Yes we are getting exactly what council wanted and it is very misleading for the councillors to now pretend to have sympathy for the residents who are remaining and have to endure the blight that is already upon us. Agree that the only hope now is to try to have the planning scheme amended to better protect the integrity of some of the remaining streets. We can only hope that the abomination that we are now witnessing in Bent St will make some of our councillors realise what a disastrous mistake they made in the existing planning scheme. It will be too late for Claire St also but perhaps they will stand as reminders to everyone when they are casting their votes at this year’s council elections.
April 8, 2016 at 6:23 PM
We are putting up this comment that was accidentally assigned to another post.
Reprobate
VCAT is wrong, yet again, but Council doesn’t help with its woefully underspecified Scheme. The purpose of GRZ is NOT substantial change. The original intention of GRZ was for it to apply generally and NRZ to be more of an exception.
The “Fact Sheet” DTPLI [now DELWP] published states GRZ’s role is to “respect and preserve urban character while enabling moderate housing growth and housing diversity”. It further claims “provided it is consistent with existing neighbourhood character”, and states the sort of housing that can be expected is “single dwellings and some medium density housing”.
VCAT’s policy however is to grant permits to the maximum extent possible under under Victoria’s “performance-based” system.
Either VCAT [and for that matter, Council] have never read the Fact Sheet or they’re wilfully ignoring it.