Questions for Knox City Council Meeting - 28-10-08

Tonight at 5.30pm two questions for tonight’s council meeting were faxed to Knox City Council Offices, but somehow they were lost, misplaced or pigeon-holed due to their controversial nature. The fax machine from which they were sent provided a message stating they had been sent successfully.

These are the questions:

QUESTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING 28-10-08

1.

Knoxfield residents congratulated council on the action taken in the budget to study the unique character of Knoxfield’s indigenous canopy trees. I’m seriously concerned, though, that if the felling of trees by developers continues as in No 75 Kathryn Road, there will not be any trees left to study.

Eleven indigenous Eucalyptus cephalocarpa (mealy stringybark ) canopy trees were removed. Only one tree was retained a grevillea robusta (native of northern Australia).

A moratorium on granting planning/building permits needs to be instigated immediately to save existing indigenous canopy trees.

Shaun Leane, MP, recently wrote to the CEO, concerning a moratorium and stated,

“I have been advised that in keeping with the Planning Act, the protocol is a formal request in writing from the council is required if council deems it appropriate to involve the Minister.”

A precedent exists for the Minister to grant a moratorium, as witnessed in Seaspray recently,

Therefore, following advice to council by Shaun Leane, MP, does the Knox City Council intend to request the Minister for Planning that a moratorium on granting planning/building permits be imposed in Knoxfield until the study into its unique indigenous canopy trees is completed?

2.

Following my question to the May council meeting requesting traffic count figures for Kathryn Road, I was unhappy with the Director of Engineering and Infrastructure’s response, as he stated that according to traffic counts development had little impact on the most recent traffic count.

I followed this up with correspondence and the Director’s response to Knoxfield residents and to me dated 13^th June 2008, was that the most recent traffic count for 2008 was 2,980 vehicles per day and stated this was a reduction on the previous year of 3,383 vehicles.

This statement inferred that traffic on Kathryn Road was not a problem and could cope with further development.

In actual fact figures provided to Cr Field by the Traffic Engineer indicate the traffic count taken in May had increased by 630 vehicles on the Director’s figures.

Therefore, would the Director of Engineering and Infrastructure explain what the actual traffic count was for Kathryn Road in May this year, as he has stated they were 2980 vehicles, while 3610 vehicles were released by the Traffic Engineer to Cr Field and if these recent figures are correct will the Director agree that development in Knoxfield has an impact on traffic flows on Kathryn Road?

Ian Simpson

The No 72 Anne Road & 61 Kathryn Road Development goes to VCAT

Objectors to the development for application for Nos 72 Anne & 61 Kathryn Road has gone to VCAT. The developer is contesting all grounds of refusal by the Knox City Council. The 123 residents that objected to this development should  have received notification from the developer that he is taking the matter to VCAT. All objectors now have the opportunity to lodge their objections to the development on VCAT Form B “Statement of Grounds”. Assume that VCAT knows nothing about the development and stress your concerns for this overdevelopment opposite the Anne Road shops.

If you are having trouble completing the form, seek help from David and Valerie on 9753 4243 or Ian and Maree on 9763 6226. Please remember that a copy of the form also needs to be forwarded to the developer “Planning Vision” and Knox City Council.

We need your help. Many people have expressed their frustration with the process and feel that they are being worn down by the developers. This is exactly what they want you to feel. We must remain strong and continue the fight.

FW: Journal article

 

 

For those that don’t get the Knox Journal, here’s an article from last week’s issue.

 

 Libs put suburb growth concerns on the agenda

BY WINSTON TAN

15/10/2008 12:49:00 PM

KNOXFIELD residents have met Liberal MPs in their latest move to prevent overdevelopment in their suburb.

The residents, Scoresby MP Kim Wells and Opposition planning spokesman Matthew Guy discussed their concerns this month about the State Government's Melbourne 2030 plan.

Resident Ian Simpson said a petition to Parliament was "in the pipeline" as a catalyst for a discussion of overdevelopment issues.

"Matthew Guy will be asking questions in Parliament pertinent to Knoxfield.

"That might get us greater publicity, and the more publicity we can get, the less the developers are likely to come in there."

Labor MP Shaun Leane said a 'moratorium' on overdevelopment in Knoxfield was still on his agenda. He said progress had been made in discussions with Planning Minister Justin Madden.

"It is predominantly a Knox Council issue, but I fully understand where the residents and councillors come from."

Mr Leane said he fully supported the council if it decided on a moratorium on planning permits until a study into trees in Knoxfield was done.

Mr Simpson said attempts to contact Mr Leane about the progress of his discussions had been unsuccessful.

"No one's been able to contact him. I've rung his office and been assured I'd get a call back and that hasn't happened. I've emailed him and didn't get a reply.

"Other people have tried to contact him too."

However, Mr Leane assured Knoxfield residents that he was still working on the matter.

 

Knoxfield planning issues

This week Matthew Guy, opposition planning spokesperson asked the following question of Justin Madden, Minister of Planning on Tuesday. To date he has not received a reply.

 

                                                                     

 

 

Tonight  I  raise  an  issue  for  the  Minister  for  Planning  concerning

development  occurring  in  the  city  of Knox in Melbourne's outer eastern

suburbs.  Recently I was alerted to an interesting newspaper article in the

Knox  Leader  of  23  September where I noted a member representing Eastern

Metropolitan  Region, Mr Leane, calling for a moratorium on all development

in  the suburb of Knoxfield until neighbourhood character studies have been

completed by the council.

 

 

Development  moratoriums  are  an  interesting  topic  particularly here in

Gippsland  where the minister has recently placed one at the request of the

Wellington  Shire on areas along the Ninety-Mile Beach. This is despite the

moratorium  closing  off  the  rights of local people to build on their own

land, even something as small as a garden shed.

 

 

But Knox is suffering what many people across the metropolitan area are now

dealing  with  --  that  is, a complete change in urban character thanks to

Melbourne  2030.  Melbourne  2030  has  forced  high-density development in

smaller  streets, such as Kathryn Road, developments that are very much out

of character with the existing urban and street character of the suburb.

 

 

It  is  only when listening to the concerns of local residents, and viewing

maps that give an indication of the change that is happening to some of the

smaller  streets  in  Knox,  that you can appreciate the concerns that many

locals  have  with  such  enforced change and a one-size-fits-all Melbourne

2030  policy  and what it has brought to those local communities. But worse

--  and what I fear more is planned for Knox -- is development that will be

out  of  step  with  this  urban  character that is planned through the new

residential zones (NRZ) document.

 

 

The  government's  NRZ  plan  will destroy the semblance of urban character

that  the  suburb  has  through  the  mandating  of high-rise, high-density

dwellings  with  no  corresponding  upgrades  in road, rail, water or power

infrastructure. The NRZ plan will change the way the suburb looks. The plan

contains  three  new  zones, two of which mandate high-rise. This plan will

devastate  many areas of Victoria. It will devastate Knoxfield. Leafy urban

areas  that are such a drawcard for people to live in Melbourne's east will

be a thing of the past.

 

 

Tonight I ask the Minister for Planning to listen to the people of Knox, to

listen  to  the  local  residents and to local members on both sides of the

house  who  understand  that  inappropriate  development  in this suburb is

getting way out of control, and to do one good thing for the people of Knox

-- that is, to scrap the planned new residential zones document.

 

 

 

 

THE VCAT COMMUNITY FORUM

 

TO ALL GROUPS

 

Wonderful to see so many of the groups represented.   I believe that if it were not for us, they would have had about 4 people there.

What was wonderful and came out very clearly was the spread of Melbourne we represented.   including but not complete     Broadmeadows, Darebin, Carlton, Southbank, Maribyrnong, Seddon, Hobsons Bay, Bayside, Stonnington, Malvern East,  Carnegie, Boroondara, Whitehorse, Doncaster, Kingston,  Mt Eliza, Camperdown, Daylesford and others.     That is quite a spread.  Others were registered but could not show up for various reasons.

 

Congratulations to all who came in spite of the bad timing.  I know others did not come because they feel so disillusioned with VCAT, or because the timing did not suit them or because they are just too busy.

 

Most of those mentioned spoke and spoke extremely well.    From different angles but the same stories.

 

The chairs of the meeting were VCAT President Justice Kevin Bell (still a Supreme Court Judge I understand) and Deputy President Helen Gibson.

Eventually she was pushed into letting people speak.

 

Many issues were raised for eg.

The unfairness of the developers being able to afford top barristers and these expert witnesses and so many councils not able to keep funding these fights.  There were 2 suggestions about this  1 -    that there be a blind bank of experts   set up and you take who is available  2 -   that the barristers and experts   be cut out completely  and return to a level playing field and the developer speaks for himself and the council speak for them selves and so do the residents.    Instead of Justice only for the rich.

 

 

When the scandal of Brookland Greens in Casey was raised, Justice Bell said we are not here to discuss individual items. (Nice way to hide from a discussion about it) 

 

Malvern East told how they had written a number of issues to be raised and were told they were not suitable  items.    They had then written to Justice Bell asking what would be suitable and   he actually admitted that he had not replied.       What was interesting was that all those forbidden  subjects were brought up by others.

 

Seddon raised the fact that VCAT only use the policies from M2030  that support development and ignore the policies that protect neighbourhood character.

 

It was raised in various ways that VCAT should not be a planning authority but just a review board to make sure that councils follow their own policies.

 

It was raised that if a developer brings amended plans to VCAT they should be told to take them back to council to be looked at again.  (VCAT responded that they were trying to save councils time and money)

 

It was raised that the 60 days is abused by developers and they delay getting info to councils and then rush off the VCAT b ecause they know they have a better chance of getting it approved by VCAT.

 

VCAT were told they are unelected and unaccountable and the community has lost all respect for the system. 

 

It was raised that councils often pass an inappropriate development because they say VCAT will approve it so we are wasting time and money to oppose it  so many things that are bad dont even get to VCAT,  because councils have no confidence in it.

It was raised that the local people and local councils usually know better about their area than VCAT, yet they are overruled.

 

This is getting long.  I am sure I have missed many  great points.  

If you want something passed around do get back to me.

 

Who knows if those VCAT people listened or actually heard.    As an optimist I hope so, as a realist, I doubt it.

They have heard from the community and as usual ignore it.

 

But I felt  proud to be there with so many really great people who are trying to keep the Marvellous in Melbourne, as well as coast and country.

Mary 

 

 

                    

  

VCAT Community Forum on the 13th October

I attended this forum on behalf of the Save Knoxfield and Friends of Egan Lee Group.

For VCAT Justice Kevin Bell President of the Tribunal (appointed in April) and Mrs Helen Gibson Deputy President.

There was not a huge attendance but enough very interesting and qualified people from the Melbourne area. (There was also one from Camperdown and one from Daylesford.)

This forum was part of a Review of VCAT by Justice Bell. There will be notices in the newspapers later asking for written submissions.

It was clearly stated by all there that the people were not being heard at VCAT.

That where VCAT suggested changes to the Council's Planning Scheme to stop inappropriate development they were not being accepted at Government level.

That only certain clauses were being given weight where as others, that would protect the environment and neighbourhood character, were largely being ignored.

That some VCAT members and Councils were not aware of all the facts or if they were they were being ignored.

The importance of considering neighbouring properties in the decision (which we know is not done in Knox). There was a case where a development had a brick wall on the plan and the one next door to it had balconies facing this wall. Eventually someone (VCAT) woke up and it was fixed.

Expert witnesses are a big problem at VCAT as far as the average person is concerned. (I am sure none of them slept well last night.)

The need to have the plans (as amended) available online and not hidden in Council Planning departments.

The Forum went over time so that everyone who attended could be heard. I was most impressed with this fairness and I am sure others were as well. Mrs Gibson answered questions after it concluded.

After the forum, what also came to light in discussions with the attendees was the number of people calling trying to get help with planning, VCAT and Council matters and most Groups said they didn't have the resources to help.

Neighbourhood character and its importance was also mentioned both during and after.

Ian will be back on Thursday and he, David and myself are off to the EDO VCAT seminar.

More later.


Irene M. Fullarton.

Further Meetings with local Politicians

 On Tuesday, Irene Kelly, Iren Fullerton, David Chaney and Ian Simpson ventured to Parliament to meet with Kim Wells, MP for Scoresby and Matthew Guy, Opposition Spokesperson on Planning. Both agreed that Knoxfield is under attack like much of Melbourne from developers, as a result of Melbourne’s 2030 Planning Policy.

Action decided upon at the meeting included

·    Questions being asked in Parliament of the Minister for Planning, and

·    Another petition being circulated to enable Kim Wells to present it to Parliament and enabling him to address the issues confronting Knoxfield residents from developers.

Both agreed that the Opposition, if they gain Government at the next election, would disband Melbourne’s 2030 Planning Policy and encourage development in areas of the city most suitable for medium/high development. They also warned that from January 2009 when new Planning Laws will be implanted that ONLY immediate neighboring residents to developments will be able to object to that development. This is taking away our rights as citizens in a democratic society to express ourselves when a grievance arises. If you are concerned by this action email, write or ring the Premier and Minister for Planning and inform them of your objection to this removal of democratic rights.

 

Email of Support for the Save Knoxfield Campaign

Well talk about taking my words out of my mouth - tonight I attended the Friends of Koolunga 15th Anniversary Celebration.  Amongst the many volunteers and Council staff attending (it was agood night) was a Planning Officer who sought me out as she knew of my association with Save Knoxfield.  She wanted to let me know how very important the lobbying and pressure being applied by Knoxfield residents re the developments and developers.  Apparently there was some reluctance on behalf of the developer of No. 75 to carry out the net gain required by Knox Council re that property but Plannning Officers were able to add pressure on him by saying the "local people" were very passionate about the environment and were very active and no doubt would be watching.  The officer wanted me to let the group know how much the officers appreciate their efforts as she is very aware that at times it can seem very difficult and thankless for community groups who can feel they are getting nowhere but she wanted us to be aware how effective this type of pro active behaviour can be.

 

 

Cheers and well done

 

 

No 44 Kathryn Road VCAT Notice

 

Tonight a BBQ was held for objectors to No 44 Kathryn Road development to inform them of how to respond to the VCAT notice received last week. To our surprise we discovered that some objectors have NOT received  information from the developer re his VCAT Application, as is his duty, under VCAT rules. If you were an objector to No 44 Kathryn Road (2 double storey townhouses and 8 single storey) and did not receive information from the developer please inform either David and Valerie Chaney or Ian and Maree Simpson immediately. All applications to lodge an abjection to VCAT must be in by the end of next week.

 

Computer Expertise

 

If anyone has computer expertise, has time to spare and is willing to help spruce up this Blogpage with the added ability to forward email petitions and make it more interesting please contact

 

saveknoxfield@ozemail.com.au

 

 

 

 

Update on Developments in Knoxfield

No 44 Kathryn Road

Today objectors to the development at No 44 Kathryn Road of 2 double storey houses and eight single houses would have received notification that the developer has appealed the process to VCAT. The developer has appealed against the time taken by Knox City Council to make a decision on this matter. Councils must make a decision within 60 days of the close of the advertising period of the application. The developer has taken no notice of the reasons for the development being refused by council. The reasons being:

            1. The development is contrary to Clause 19.03 and 21 (State Planning Policy Framework) and Clause 22.10 (Local Planning Policy Framework - Housing Policy) of the Knox Planning Scheme in the following instances:

               (a) The site is not within a preferred location for new housing being outside an Activity Centre, Principal Public Transport Network and not an identified Strategic Redevelopment Site and is not consistent with the neighbourhood character of the area.

               (b) The development does not comprise a range of dwelling size and type.

            2. The development will detract from the garden character of the neighbourhood due to the extensive hard surface areas and is contrary to Clause 22.07 – Neighbourhood Character Local Planning Policy.

            3. The development provides insufficient private open space to Dwellings 2 and 9, contrary to Standard B29 of ResCode.

            4. The development (Dwellings 1 and 2) will unreasonably overlook adjoining properties contrary to Standard B22 of ResCode.

It seems that anyone that wishes to appear before VCAT to lodge an objection needs to complete the Form B Statement of Grounds, to appear at the hearing. We must lodge our objections again to VCAT.

VCAT has assured us that this application will not be heard until January 2009. Keep watching this page for updates.

 

No 72 Anne Road & No 61 Kathryn Road

Now objectors to this development might be surprised that this application has been refused by the Knox City Council planners without it going to a council meeting. Presumedly this action is to beat the 60 day rule. Why then couldn’t the planners for the No 44 development have taken the same action? In reading the report for No 44 Kathryn Road, which was presented to council at its September meeting, one would assume it was passed until you read the last paragraph. There are some serious questions that need to be asked about the action taken in the case of No 44 Kathryn.

The reasons for No 72 Anne Road & 61 Kathryn Road are:

 

VCAT Action

All this action seems to be taking place either in the lead up to Christmas or just after when people are on annual holidays. Is this surprising that it makes it easier for the developer to get a favorable decision.

We must stand firm and keep on objecting otherwise our appeals to Knox City Council mean nothing.

Keep checking this page for further updates. A meeting of objectors is being planned for a date in the following week. Notices will be delivered shortly.