Council continues on its merry way of destroying Elsternwick by recommending a 12 storey permit for Horne Street (Daily Planet site). We remind readers that this area sits alongside single and double storey dwellings, even though the latter (Ross Street) is zoned RGZ (four storeys). Council therefore sees no problems with a 12 storey building backing onto dwellings of this size.
The application was for 14 storeys and true to form we get a recommendation to lop off a couple of storeys. There is much in this officer’s report that is highly questionable if not straight out farcical.
In this post we will simply concentrate on the draft permit and what the recommendations allow. We quote from the report.
The building height to be reduced to not more than 46.30m above natural ground level comprising not more than 12 storeys, with no architectural features,services, stairs, lift overruns or masts higher than 50.30m above natural ground level.
COMMENT: Amendment C157 has as the ‘maximum building height’ 43.0 metres (discretionary). Thus, even though council might be reducing the number of storeys, the overall height of the building itself will be even greater than the structure plan suggests. Plus with masts up to 50.30 metres the building will definitely reach for the skies. The adopted C157 Amendment only allows a 4 metre extra height for masts, telecommunications, lift overruns, etc. So now we have the absolutely ludicrous situation where council first wanted 8 storeys and with ‘community benefit’ maybe 12. Now they are okaying extra height for both building and its masts, both in opposition to its own planning scheme!
The owner will maintain the shared space side laneway for not less than 5 years after the date of its completion to the satisfaction of Glen Eira City Council.
COMMENT: This is the only time that the phrase ‘not less than 5 years’ is included in the officer’s report. It is only to be found in the pages upon pages of the ‘conditions’ and not in the body of the report itself. Instead we find this contradictory statement in the rest of the report
A Section 173 Agreement should be entered into for the permit holder to provide and maintain the shared space side laneway for the life of the building and to secure the office floor space for the life of the building.
Which is it? Or is the above comment intended to camouflage what the Section 173 agreement will state? Surely the ‘life of the building’ is more than the 5 years stipulated in the conditions for the permit? Secondly, why only 5 years? Does this mean that in the 6th year the costs of maintenance will now fall upon council and hence ratepayers?
The front (north-eastern) setback of the tower element (third floor and above) to Horne Street increased to a minimum of 4.0m.
COMMENT: We have to ask, what’s the point of having a structure plan if it ends up being ignored. The recommended setbacks are the perfect example of this. Amendment C157 included a requirement (preferred) of a 5 metre setback. The original urban designs for our activity centres had featured a 6 metre setback but council changed this to 5 without any real explanation. Even so, how on earth is it now considered appropriate that this be even further reduced? Why bother with structure plans at all when council itself decides it can ignore what it so loudly championed?
As to what constitutes ‘community benefit’ we get the rubbish of widening a laneway by a few metres as proof of this, plus the creation of ‘passing areas’ because otherwise cars won’t get through.Creation of offices is nothing more than pie in the sky at this stage as well.
We have also had a good laugh at this sentence Over time, the character of Elsternwick will change as buildings, consistent with the planning controls are constructed. One must question how many of these past high rises and now this one can be seen to be ‘consistent with the planning controls’?
We can only speculate as to why council would recommend a permit of this height? Our suspicion is that it is merely another nail in the coffin for low rise along Nepean Highway. Council is determined that Elsternwick becomes the high rise capitol of Glen Eira. Granting a permit for one more eyesore makes it a lot easier to have 12 storeys along all of Nepean Highway, regardless of whether this is needed or not!
Well done council. At least you are consistent in your appalling planning decisions!
Glen Eira Debates 
March 15, 2019 at 6:32 PM
To be fair, Council hasn’t [yet] made a decision on this application. The recommendation comes from council officers, who are certainly not members of Council. I doubt any councillor will ask officers to explain publicly why they are recommending something that doesn’t comply with key elements of the planning scheme. If councillors do undermine their structure planning then they’ll find it hard to defend at a Panel.
March 15, 2019 at 6:48 PM
You’re right and it will be interesting to see if councillors follow the lead of officers on this one. Caught between a rock and a hard place I’d say because if they refuse then that undermines the structure plan that they approved for twelve stories on Nepean Highway.
March 16, 2019 at 9:13 AM
Does not matter how they vote. This will end up at vcat and they know that and will probably get the permit for 12. Good excuse to keep blaming vcat instead of a rotten planning scheme.
March 15, 2019 at 7:53 PM
Points are very well made. Structure plans ignored completely. Bending over backwards to allow high rise.
March 16, 2019 at 8:02 AM
More Council smoke and mirrors to allow the developer to get what they want.
March 17, 2019 at 4:54 PM
The 12 storey height limit backing onto single storey houses barely metres away is ludicrous to start with. 12 storeys is supposed to only be allowed if they provide some additional community benefit, they are proposing to widen a lane which will only need widening if this high rise is built. That’s not community benefit, that is just compensating for the mess this ridiculous development would cause.
The council has every intention of allowing high rise throughout the whole area West of the railway line and plenty of other locations besides. There are many ways this is revealed but just to mention one, in the Urban Design Analysis Report for the Elsternwick South Masterplan (Jan 2019) on page 22 they model residential interfaces – in this modelling it is assumed that there will be 12 storey developments on Nepean Hwy between Alexandra Ave and the point where the railway line intersects Nepean Hwy. Clearly there is no intent from the council to prevent high rise along Nepean Hwy, giving lie to the claimed 4-6 storey height limit between Alexandra Ave and Oak Ave in the Structure Plan.
Further adding to this, take a look at the visual analysis of 12 storey apartment blocks on page 23. All the photos on that page are unbelievable, but one example will suffice: look at the example taken from the backyard of 7 Oak Ave – apparently a 12 storey apartment block will be about 2.5 times the height of the rear buildings of the car yard which are maybe 1.5 storeys high, yeah right. Those visual analysis photos are an attempt to portray the visual impact of high rise as far less than it will actually be.
The attempt to limit high rise to one area of Elsternwick (itself a misguided and silly policy) has already failed. Already high rise is being built and yet more proposals for high rise appear at least every month. 14 storeys in Selwyn St, 12 storeys in Horne St, 11 storeys already built on Glenhuntly Rd, 7 storeys going up on the Coles site.
The council needs to listen to residents and act. When I look over the highway to Bayside I don’t see highrise going up because their council actually did some planning and already has height limits in place.
Unless developments next to residential housing are limited to 4 storeys the whole area will be wrecked. Now if only we can convince the council to represent residents we might have some chance of saving Elsternwick, but it seems an impossible task.
March 17, 2019 at 6:55 PM
The high rise across the highway in Bayside is coming thanks to the Andrews Government redevelopment of the Ministry of Housing site tucked in their. The rort is it will be done by their private enterprise mates that donated to their election campaign slush fund.