Since the issue of heritage in Glen Eira is now firmly on the agenda, readers may be interested in a recent VCAT decision. The following extracts are cited verbatim. Please note that once again it appears as if the right hand (ie council’s heritage advisor) and the planning department are poles apart! Even more strange is the fact that council’s delegate is arguing against its proposed Amendment C149!
Source: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2017/1492.html
- There is nothing in the Heritage local planning policy or the reference documents that provide any real guidance as to what is an acceptable degree of visibility for a first floor addition in this heritage precinct. Mr Raworth (for applicant) has considered the proposed new Heritage local planning policy in Amendment C149. I agree with the Council that this new policy cannot be considered as a seriously entertained planning proposal because it still has a way to go in its consideration through the planning scheme amendment process. This draft new Heritage policy is nevertheless useful in providing insight into the approach that the Council is anticipating that it will take in assessing the impact of visibility of new first floor additions.
- The draft new Heritage policy encourages additions that are visually recessive and read as a secondary element to the heritage place. The policy states first floor additions should be centrally sited and massed behind the principal visible roof forms, with its visibility minimised from the street. The policy contains a series of sightline drawings from the opposite side of a street for differing building types. The Council and Mr Raworth agree none of these are reflective of the situation in this heritage precinct where the houses have a low pitched roof. Hence, as Mr Raworth points out, a subjective decision needs to be made about whether the design has gone far enough to achieve the first floor appearing as a secondary element. This decision is particularly important in this case as there are limited examples of first floor additions in the precinct at present.
- The two dimensional and eyeline streetscape views contained in Sheet 6 of the planning application drawings demonstrate the visibility of the first floor from the street. As the roof form is hipped and low pitched, each side of the first floor will have greater visibility than the central section. Given this, it is understandable that Council’s Heritage Advisor was seeking a narrowing of the first floor footprint. However, that is not what Council granted planning permission for, so the width of the first floor is not an aspect of the design that is before me for consideration. It is the proximity of the southwest corner of the front of the first floor addition to the pitch of the roof and visibility of it in the streetscape that I must consider.
September 23, 2017 at 1:14 PM
149 won’t do too much. The big one involves a full review and that won’t happen until sometime in 2018. There will be a panel report and then sending off to the minister. If we’re lucky could be finished by mid 2019 or even later. Plenty of time for more heritage to go to the dogs.
September 23, 2017 at 4:13 PM
It appears the fact is; there is no visible evidence of brain power within the Glen Eira planning dept. If I were to consider the width and depth of the brians before us, I would have to conclude there is no-one home to switch the lights on or off. I find it hard to comprehend that the best brains in the Glen Eira planning dept. can have width and depth and height but appear to have no mass and therefore no visible or useful function outside of your Town Hall. These issues may be not solvable at a planning tribunal; and at a considerable personal risk of offering advice outside of my field of expertises I recommend some form of recessive brain surgery.
September 24, 2017 at 9:22 AM
With this type of situation, owners will knock their heritage houses down before the policy is finalised. There are many many examples of first floor developments on heritage houses in the municipality. Look for practical solutions, work with community, as one example allow first floor developments but guide character as happens in many other areas such as Hampton. They look great and respectful to the character, simple solution.
September 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM
The Planning Application Register doesn’t make clear who made the original decision. There has long been a problem with transparency and accountability if decisions are made via delegated authority.
Amendment C149 as mentioned in the VCAT Decision doesn’t [yet] meet the criteria for a “seriously entertained proposal”. Even where something is “seriously entertained” Council and VCAT have been known to ignore it.
Section 22.01-3 Figure 1 “Potential Building Envelopes for Various Roof Forms” attempts to make intent clearer, which is that you shouldn’t be able to see the rear additions when standing on other side of the road front-on, but the diagrams are side-elevations only. That leaves ambiguous the extent to which visible extensions are acceptable. We’re regularly told about amendments providing “clarity” and “certainty”, but it rarely happens.
The entire planning system is built on vague ambiguous underspecified criteria, which unelected and unrepresentive individuals interpret in ways favorable to their continued employment by the State Government.
September 24, 2017 at 11:18 AM
You nailed it, basically the system is totally corrupted by self interested individuals and politicians, and who knows what sums of cash pass under the table to achieve these “vague ambiguous underspecified criteria” usually described as loopholes. We know one past Minister called Guy has been trotting around town selling himself to developers for peanuts.
September 24, 2017 at 10:18 PM
I’m sad to say that Jack Campbell passed away recently, anyone who knew Jack well would testify he was a rare person of great dignity and decency.
Jack really did serve our community, back when you didn’t get paid to do so. His commitment and personal politics was commendable and has become such a rarity these days. RIP Jack.
September 25, 2017 at 10:43 AM
We fully endorse these sentiments. A wonderful man and always a gentle man. Our condolences to his family. He will be missed.
September 25, 2017 at 3:28 PM
Such a gentleman, old school with a very modern outlook