Another disappointing VCAT decision for 33-35 Belsize Avenue Carnegie. This consolidated site runs across both the GRZ and RGZ (ie 3 and 4 storey) current zoning. The applicant got his permit for these heights and 29 dwellings.
Council’s draft structure plans featured this area south of Neerim Road as being ‘downgraded’ to double storey. This decision is simply another nail in the coffin for council’s plans – exacerbated even further by the request for another year’s extension on structure planning and the interim height guidelines. By 2019, we can only speculate as to how many other such developments will occur in these streets!
Below is what the member had to say about council’s plans and their current ‘value’.
Source: http://www7.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VCAT//2017/1399.html
There has been some recent attempt by Council to manage this rate of change including the introduction of interim height controls and the preparation of a draft concept plan. I was provided with a copy of the Carnegie Draft Concept Plans and Carnegie Background Report-Building Transition Plan both dated July 2017. These documents propose side-by-side townhouse style development of 1-2 storey scale for all of Belsize Avenue and surrounds, other than along Neerim Road where terrace/ townhouse development of 2-3 storeys is contemplated. The document states that:
Carnegie has experienced a significant transformation in recent years with apartment developments being constructed in traditionally low scale areas. Current policy supports dense apartment developments with little consideration for the area’s existing character. The scale, rate of change and quality of new building stock are all issues that have been raised through consultation.
The Building Transition Plan looks to limit the amount of four storey apartment buildings in the long residential streets of established homes in Carnegie.
Ms Maude expressed concern that if the future changes set out above are implemented that the proposal before me will stand in complete contrast to the new planning framework. I find this strategic work is in its very early stages and cannot be given weight as a seriously entertained planning proposal. I cannot speculate as to future changes in planning policy and must apply the current planning scheme that seeks increased development throughout the urban village with the scale and intensity generally guided by the differentiation between the zones. I must apply the planning scheme as I find it.
Glen Eira Debates 
October 19, 2017 at 9:09 AM
Interim height controls are not the answer. We need state government to work with GE council to set rules in place that VCAT has to use to stop inappropriate development in Glen Eira. Consultation by Glen Eira council with residents is controlled and simply an exercise in how not to listen to residents. Using language such as “village”. Really we don’t live in villages nor will these suburbs have a village feel with massive high rise development happening everywhere. GE council seem to be incompetent. Requesting another 12 months to do a job that should have been done at least 4 years ago. The item .9.3 on last Tuesdays agenda left me in no doubt that they have no idea what they are doing. Of course we all know they are discretionary.
1. Revises their adopted timeframes for the Carnegie, Bentleigh and Elsternwick Structure. Plan program to extend consultation to a 6 week process between 30 October and11 December 2017.
2. Revises the adopted timeframes for the East Village Structure Plan program to begin a 4 week consultation process between 18 November and 18 December 2017.
3. Receives a report for consideration of adoption of these four structure plans along with Quality Design Guidelines in February 2018.
4. Requests the Minister for Planning to approve a 12 month extension of the Carnegie and Bentleigh interim height controls in accordance with Section 20(A) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
October 19, 2017 at 2:49 PM
All stops should have been pulled out to finalise at least Carnegie by the end of the year. Why they all need to be done at the same time is questionable. More questionable is why we’ve got 4 weeks consultation on the biggest project ever to hit Glen Eira in the east Village and 6 weeks for something that’s been allegedly consulted on for nearly a year. Population figures from 2016 have been out for months as has plenty of other data from the census. Council produced glossy pamphlets and still insisted on 2011 numbers. It’s no good admitting now that they’ve mucked things up and should have done better. Too late. Changing the zones should have been the first priority and not the last if they were fair dinkum.
October 19, 2017 at 10:06 PM
VCAT is full of shit. Just as a responsible authority can refuse to grant a permit on any ground it thinks fit, the Tribunal after hearing an application for review may direct that a permit must not be granted. From the Planning Scheme: “Because a permit can be granted does not imply that a permit should or will be granted”.
There is a whole bunch of stuff VCAT putatively must consider [but rarely does] before making its decision. The “decision guidelines” themselves provide very little guidance, leaving considerable freedom to the members of the development industry that constitute the Tribunal to do as they want regardless of what a Planning Scheme says. Nowhere does the Scheme say that a permit must be granted to a development that is built to the maximum permissible building envelope.
The best we as individuals can do is keep lobbying for reform, and turfing the turds responsible for imposing such a lousy system upon us.
October 20, 2017 at 7:05 PM
The Age reported earlier this week on the development industry’s rejection of Whitehorse Council’s attempt to place height limits on the towers mushrooming up in Box Hill Metropolitan Activity Centre. It is a timely warning of what could happen to Glen Eira. Typical nonsense from the Panel about Whitehorse’s proposal lacking “strategic rigour”, as if anything that Panels, VCAT, or the Minister do have “strategic rigour”. There was a time when I regularly shopped in Box Hill but now I avoid it. Walking in permanent shadow is unpleasant. Plus there’s the diabolically badly-designed “transport interchange” on the site of the former Box Hill railway station.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/dont-box-me-in-no-limit-on-box-hills-towers-after-councils-cap-shot-down-20171017-gz2f9l.html
October 21, 2017 at 2:36 PM
This is just another example of Chinese money speaking volumes through their ventriloquism labor partly dummies Not unlike like that gutless Labor politician Sam Dastyari who was sent out by his Chinese masters to hold a press conference supporting their position which was contrary to labor policy, and he did what he was told. In another time and place this type of behavior would be called treason, now it’s just called doing business.