<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>North and West Melbourne Association &#187; Development</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nwma.org.au/news/topics/development/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nwma.org.au</link>
	<description>North and West Melbourne Association information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 01:35:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>State breaks promise on urban sprawl-PPL</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/state-breaks-promise-on-urban-sprawl-ppl</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/state-breaks-promise-on-urban-sprawl-ppl#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 01:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public transport]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=692</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><strong><em>Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.</em></strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>MEDIA RELEASE 29 JULY 2010</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>PLANNING CATASTOPHE FOR MELBOURNE AS VC 68 PASSES PARLIAMENT</strong></p>
<p>This morning Planning Minister Madden’s revised Planning Amendment, now re-badged VC 68, was fast tracked through Parliament&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p><strong><em>Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.</em></strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>MEDIA RELEASE 29 JULY 2010</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>PLANNING CATASTOPHE FOR MELBOURNE AS VC 68 PASSES PARLIAMENT</strong></p>
<p>This morning Planning Minister Madden’s revised Planning Amendment, now re-badged VC 68, was fast tracked through Parliament with the support of the coalition  &#8211; Liberals and Nationals – who had,  over the past year,  held out against inducements to approve this toxic planning amendment. (Only the Greens and DLP MP’s stood firm.)  This represents a catastrophe for Melbourne as it will see rezoning of land from rural to residential on the City’s fringe and so extend our notorious urban sprawl. </p>
<p>Brian Walters SC, President of Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc. comments:</p>
<p><em>”</em><em> </em><em>The community opposes these changes. Extension of the urban growth boundary will destroy green wedges, the lungs of Melbourne.  This amendment will take 43,600 hectares out of the western, northern and Cranbourne South green wedges for housing development, freeways and freight terminals. The losses include: 5,000 hectares of environmentally significant Western Basalt Plains grasslands; the grassy woodlands of the Maribyrnong and Merri Creek catchments, with their magnificent red gums; and 4,000 hectares of the South East food-bowl, where highly productive market gardens using recycled water double as Southern Brown Bandicoot habitat.  Our Green Wedges have been sacrosanct for generations. There was no mandate from the people to dispose of this legacy.”  </em><em></em></p>
<p>Julianne Bell Secretary of PPL VIC: points out :</p>
<p><em>“It is also forecast that e</em><em>xtension of the urban growth boundary will result in the creation of numbers of </em><em>“dormitory” settlements without advance provision of infrastructure and services.  It will greatly increase car dependency with people needing several cars per family and so worsen Victoria’s greenhouse gas emissions.  (This is ironic given the Brumby Government&#8217;s recent announcement of work to control carbon emissions by the part closure of Hazelwood power station.) Monash University Centre of Population and Social Research forecast that from 1.97 million cars registered in Melbourne in 2006 there will be over 3 million by 2036.  Our city will then be in permanent traffic gridlock.” </em></p>
<p>Community groups are now waiting for another bombshell from Planning Minister Madden – he is reported to be attempting to put through another planning amendment which will approve high rise (22 stories plus) along tram, bus and light rail routes as a means of accommodating the expected 1.5 million more people in Melbourne by  2036.  This will result in further congestion of the major transport routes and condemn the population of flat dwellers to ill health. (Anyone who lives within 500 metres of a main road is threatened by developing asthma and cardiac-respiratory diseases.) The Brumby Government is fast turning Melbourne into one of the great <em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">unliveable</span></em><span style="text-decoration: underline;"> </span>cities of the world. <strong></strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Inquiries:</strong> Julianne Bell Mobile 0408 022 408 Brian Walters SC Mobile 0411 020 967</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/state-breaks-promise-on-urban-sprawl-ppl/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TPM-2010-15  Zagame &#8211;  Corner Roden and King through to Stanley Street.</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/tpm-2010-15-zagame-corner-roden-and-king-through-to-stanley-street</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/tpm-2010-15-zagame-corner-roden-and-king-through-to-stanley-street#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 03:54:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Council reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Traffic and access]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=689</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>West Melbourne has been jolted into the reality of planning politics in the twenty-first century with official support for the ten storey development on the Zagame site in King Street by both the State Government and the Melbourne City&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>West Melbourne has been jolted into the reality of planning politics in the twenty-first century with official support for the ten storey development on the Zagame site in King Street by both the State Government and the Melbourne City Council.  If approved, this project establishes a precedent for wholesale high rise redevelopment of West Melbourne and North Melbourne, at heights and shapes that were not possible under previous planning regimes.  It introduces all that is ugly, intrusive and inefficient in building form and will do little to raise overall standards of amenity for inner city residents.  Look at Docklands and Southbank as the models.</p>
<p>Around thirty local residents of this Roden Street vicinity attended a briefing meeting in the Zagame showroom on Monday, 26 July at 6.00pm.  The meeting, hosted by the Zagame Family and their advisors, outlined the details of their application for the residential development of their very large 5000m site – Remember;  large sites equal extra large developments. The application has been made to the State Department of Planning as the project is over 25000m2 in size.</p>
<p>The project features 259 units             -           119 one bedroom</p>
<p>                                                                        118 two bedroom</p>
<p>                                                                        8 three bedroom</p>
<p>                                                                        Plus a number of multi-storey units facing the streets.</p>
<p>The boundary units are the only part of the development which conforms with the current Design and Development Overlay(DDO) over this area in that they are not over 14 m(4 Stories) in height.  Unfortunately, the main body of units are part of a ten storey ‘boomerang’ spine that stretches from close to the Roden King Streets corner to the middle of the site on the south west boundary ( allowing for a 5m setback) and then parallel with that boundary toward Stanley Street.  It is this ten storey development that is of most concern to the residents.  It is completely out of kilter with the heights that have been traditionally part of this area.  We do not need this sort of Docklands style development in West Melbourne.</p>
<p>Other concerns that come immediately to mind.</p>
<p>1                    If we believe the developers, and we do not have much reason not to, they were strongly encouraged, by both the Council and the State Department of Planning to develop this site to this level of density and height, and possibly even more.  This is our State Government and our Council, so democratic in their image,  that are so clearly working against us as residents.  The up-coming State election in November provides us with the opportunity to test the responsiveness of all candidates, and especially the incumbent ALP, on these matters.  As for the Council, we have been dudded by both the Kennett and Bracks/Brumby Governments who ensured that the Council does not represent us as resident ratepayers.</p>
<p>2                    The developers seem to believe that resident objections are only based on their loss of lines of sight toward the City.  Our concerns are broader than that.  Privacy and overlooking are certainly part of this, but this was trivialised by the developers at the meeting.  We are also concerned that we do not need the shadows cast by these towers denying broad areas to the south access to the sun.  The designers thrive in a planning environment that stipulates all shadow diagrams should be done at the equinox and ignore the rights of others who are overshadowed badly through the winter months around the June solstice.  This project shows commendable commitment to using solar energy on its rooves.  However,</p>
<ul>
<li>How many other sites are they disadvantaging through the shadows that they create, unless they go higher and higher. </li>
<li>How many lines of sight will also be lost by this wasteful competition?</li>
<li>And what about aesthetics?  What ugliness and bulk do we have to look at on a daily basis! </li>
<li>What congestion do we have to tolerate on the streets and in the shops?  There are not enough car parks on site for one for each unit.</li>
</ul>
<p>3                    When placed under some resistance to their plan, the developers threatened to ignore the residents and plough ahead with the support of the Department of Planning and the Council.  They claimed they did not have to brief us.  They did not concede that this proposal would have benefitted, had they consulted with residents before the plans were prepared.  When questioned, they stated that they would not compromise on height.</p>
<ul>
<li> When will the locals have some constructive say in the future development of the ‘community’ in which they live?</li>
</ul>
<p> </p>
<p>4    The orientation of the high rise does not utilise the northerly aspect in an efficient way.</p>
<p><strong>Where to Now?</strong></p>
<p>The developers agreed to inform all participants who provided their email and postal addresses of where they could access a copy of the plans.</p>
<p><strong>Future Action</strong></p>
<p>1        We have a list of email addresses to form the basis of future communication</p>
<p>2        We need to clarify the right to object and the process we must follow with the Department of Planning.</p>
<p>3        We need to maximise the number of objections and letters to the press and appropriate authorities.</p>
<p>4        We need to work on the Minister’s process for making a decision and try to make it transparent, in terms of how and where the decision is made and the criteria on which it might be based.</p>
<p>5        Do we want to appeal the Department of Planning decision to VCAT, should it go against us, as it may well do?  We will not have the Council’s back to ride on as we did with 87-101 Roden Street.</p>
<p>6        Our activities do need to have as much support as we can generate. Every one must be prepared to pull their weight and provide funds, if necessary.</p>
<p>7        Do we need to exert political pressure especially on Bronwyn Pike as our local member and a senior Minister in the Government that allowed these projects to be taken out of the hands of the Council?</p>
<p>8        Do we wish to organise some public protest meeting/s to let the politicians know what we think of their planning scheme?</p>
<p>9         We also need to consider the future impact on our area of the Council’s new Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) It has the potential to make the planning of this area between Roden Street and Dudley Street much worse in terms of allowing height limits to increase and towers to proliferate.  The developers made indirect reference to these proposed changes in justifying the project.</p>
<p>10    Dare I suggest a meeting to consider these issues?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/tpm-2010-15-zagame-corner-roden-and-king-through-to-stanley-street/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Municipal Strategic Statement Consultatiion</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/municipal-strategic-statement-consultatiion</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/municipal-strategic-statement-consultatiion#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 05:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Traffic and access]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=681</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The City of Melbourne is holding a consultation on the MSS at the Melbourne Town Hall. </p>
<p>This is a matter of great importance to the planning regime that will exist in the future for North asnd West Melbourne and&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>The City of Melbourne is holding a consultation on the MSS at the Melbourne Town Hall. </p>
<p>This is a matter of great importance to the planning regime that will exist in the future for North asnd West Melbourne and for the whole municipality. See the City of Melbourne Website  <a href="http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/BuildingandPlanning/Planning/planningschemeamendments/Pages/C162.aspx">www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/BuildingandPlanning/Planning/planningschemeamendments/Pages/C162.aspx</a></p>
<p>Information sessions</p>
<p>Information sessions will be held at the Yarra Room, Level 2, Melbourne Town Hall, 120 Swanston Street, Melbourne, on the following dates:</p>
<p>Residents</p>
<p>Wednesday 21 July</p>
<p>6pm to 7.30pm</p>
<p>RSVP by Friday 16 July to mss@melbourne.vic.gov.au</p>
<p>Planning professionals and all businesses</p>
<p>Wednesday 28 July</p>
<p>8.30am to 10am</p>
<p>RSVP by Friday 23 July to mss@melbourne.vic.gov.au</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/municipal-strategic-statement-consultatiion/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Westlink consultation displays in July.</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/westlink-consultation-displays-in-july</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/westlink-consultation-displays-in-july#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 04:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=674</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A series of public information displays is being held on the route options for WestLink.</p>
<p>It would appear that Westlink are not concerned about the despatch of 60,000 cars from the tunnel into our area and are not holding&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>A series of public information displays is being held on the route options for WestLink.</p>
<p>It would appear that Westlink are not concerned about the despatch of 60,000 cars from the tunnel into our area and are not holding a local consultation display for us.  Association members are encouraged to attend to raise these issues on our behalf.</p>
<p>Members of the community are encouraged to come and talk directly with the project team, view large maps of the route options and see an overview of the work we have done so far. The sessions are a chance to provide direct feedback into the route options:</p>
<p>Saturday 24 July 2010</p>
<p>11:00am to 3:00pm</p>
<p>Whitten Oval</p>
<p>417 Barkly Street, West Footscray</p>
<p>Sunday 25 July 2010</p>
<p>11:00am to 3:00pm</p>
<p>Sunshine Convention Centre, Victoria University</p>
<p>Gate 1, 460 Ballarat Road, Sunshine</p>
<p>Monday 26 July 2010</p>
<p>5:30pm to 8:30pm</p>
<p>Footscray Community Arts Centre</p>
<p>45 Moreland Street, Footscray</p>
<p>Wednesday 28 July 2010</p>
<p>5:30pm to 8:30pm</p>
<p>Whitten Oval</p>
<p>417 Barkly Street, West Footscray</p>
<p>Westlink website <a href="http://www.linkingmelbourne.vic.gov.au">www.linkingmelbourne.vic.gov.au</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/07/westlink-consultation-displays-in-july/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Police Blitz on Hoons</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/06/police-blitz-on-hoons</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/06/police-blitz-on-hoons#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 02:26:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=662</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The Association has been contacted by East Melbourne Police regarding a blitz that they are holding between 29 June and 10 July 2010 targeting excessive noise from hoon behaviour across the Melbourne municipality.  The contact is Senior Constable Arthur&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>The Association has been contacted by East Melbourne Police regarding a blitz that they are holding between 29 June and 10 July 2010 targeting excessive noise from hoon behaviour across the Melbourne municipality.  The contact is Senior Constable Arthur Macridis And he can be reached at 96371100.  They encourage reports of hoon behaviour that they can follow up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/06/police-blitz-on-hoons/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Road Tunnels &#8211; Leader article</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/road-tunnels-leader-article</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/road-tunnels-leader-article#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 06:31:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Traffic and access]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=645</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>We also draw your attention to an article in the Melbourne Leader indicating that the status of the East-West tunnel link between the eastern freeway and Footscray is not dead as the Government had led us to believe, but&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>We also draw your attention to an article in the Melbourne Leader indicating that the status of the East-West tunnel link between the eastern freeway and Footscray is not dead as the Government had led us to believe, but is the Stage 2 follow-on for the currently being planned Westlink project proposed to link West Footscray under the Maribyrnong River to the Port ( somewhere between Dynon and Footscray Roads). We encourage members to express their opinion on the Leader&#8217;s blog, which can be done at the end of the article.</p>
<p><a href="http://melbourne-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/funding-plea-puts-east-west-tunnel-back-on-agenda/"><em>Melbourne Leader</em>: funding plea puts east-west tunnel back on agenda/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/road-tunnels-leader-article/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>46 Villiers Street, North Melbourne</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/46-villiers-street-north-melbourne</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/46-villiers-street-north-melbourne#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 06:25:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=642</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The Committee would like to draw the members attention to a planning application for 46 Villiers Street North Melbourne for an eight storey development of 15 apartments with a 100% waiver of car-parking requirements, on a very small site.&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>The Committee would like to draw the members attention to a planning application for 46 Villiers Street North Melbourne for an eight storey development of 15 apartments with a 100% waiver of car-parking requirements, on a very small site. Note that this is alongside an A-graded heritage residence. There appears to be a pattern of over-development in this application and Latrobe Close and some other applications that are currently in the pipeline, that is of concern to the Association.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/46-villiers-street-north-melbourne/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LaTrobe Close Meeting</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/latrobe-close-meeting</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/latrobe-close-meeting#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 06:21:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=639</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ <p>Meeting of NWMA and LaTrobe Close Collective to discuss future action re LaTrobe Close.  The meeting is to be held at BRISK, 364-366 Victoria Street North Melbourne at 6 pm on Thursday 27th May 2010.</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>Meeting of NWMA and LaTrobe Close Collective to discuss future action re LaTrobe Close.  The meeting is to be held at BRISK, 364-366 Victoria Street North Melbourne at 6 pm on Thursday 27th May 2010.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/latrobe-close-meeting/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>La Trobe Close cartoon</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/la-trobe-close-cartoon</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/la-trobe-close-cartoon#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 06:24:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=634</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>198 units at 210 Chetwynd St: too dense<br />
State Labour is doing a Windsor Hotel and Federal Labour is not listening, not even to Council!</p>
<p>Have look at the cartoon to the right.  Click on cartoon to expand&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>198 units at 210 Chetwynd St: too dense<br />
State Labour is doing a Windsor Hotel and Federal Labour is not listening, not even to Council!</p>
<p>Have look at the cartoon to the right.  Click on cartoon to expand your view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/05/la-trobe-close-cartoon/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>La Trobe Close submission to Minister Richard Wynn</title>
		<link>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/02/la-trobe-close-submission-to-minister-richard-wynn</link>
		<comments>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/02/la-trobe-close-submission-to-minister-richard-wynn#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:16:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>alba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open space]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nwma.org.au/?p=614</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The NWMA&#8217;s submission sent on the 15 January 2010 to the Hon Richard Wynne, Minister for Housing on the proposed redevelopment of La Trobe Close. For readers information<br />
<em><br />
Dear Minister</em></p>
<p>Re 210-232 Chetwynd Street, 21-43 Courtney Street&#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp-jquery-lightbox, a WordPress plugin by ulfben --> <p>The NWMA&#8217;s submission sent on the 15 January 2010 to the Hon Richard Wynne, Minister for Housing on the proposed redevelopment of La Trobe Close. For readers information<br />
<em><br />
Dear Minister</p>
<p>Re 210-232 Chetwynd Street, 21-43 Courtney Street and 181-197 Howard Street, North Melbourne.<br />
We wish to make the following submission to the Minister for Housing, Richard Wynne MP, on the Government’s proposal for the Latrobe Close redevelopment on the corner of Howard, Chetwynd and Courtney Streets, North Melbourne.</p>
<p>The North and West Melbourne Association (NWMA), through its predecessor the North Melbourne Association, was established in 1967 and has operated continuously since that date.  Its substantial membership consists of residents and workers from North and West Melbourne.  The Association and its members were involved in the initial consultation with the government authorities and its consultants regarding the purchase of this site and its proposed redevelopment.  Undertakings were given at that time to the community regarding a number of issues in relation to this site, particularly child care and open space.</p>
<p>The Association became involved in this latest proposal for this site when it became public knowledge and was well advanced in government and Council processes in late November/early December, 2009.  By this time, the Local Member for Melbourne, Bronwyn Pike, had been briefed by the Department of Housing in late October 2009.  The City of Melbourne Planning officers had also had a number of meetings with Government representatives and their consultants on this redevelopment. </p>
<p>The NWMA is very concerned about the quality of the consultation, the planning process surrounding this development and the situation we now find ourselves in.  The Association believes this proposal fails every principle of good governance and proper and orderly planning of this area, apart from the provision of increased social housing in the area.</p>
<p>The concerns of the NWMA are as follows:<br />
Height and Built Form<br />
The height and built form is grossly excessive and should be no greater than 9 metres and should be consistent with the built form of the Residential 1 parts of North Melbourne.  The proposal as it stands creates an alarming precedent, should it ever be approved and constructed.  It would essentially open up most of the inner Melbourne Residential 1 zone to inappropriate high rise development.<br />
The Association also believes that the building proposed has little relationship with the surrounding streetscapes and, in fact, detracts from their value and amenity.</p>
<p>Heritage<br />
 The proposal has little or no regard for the heritage built form in the area, where it is proposed to demolish or significantly modify important heritage buildings on the site.  It is of concern to the Association that our Council did not vigorously pursue this matter with the Department.  Other submissions will deal with this issue in more detail.  The Association requests that an independent heritage advisor be consulted to assess all structures on the site and to advise on the appropriate form of any new development.</p>
<p>Sustainability.<br />
•	Due to the inadequate public consultation and lack of publicly available documentation on this development, it has not been possible for the NWMA to make an informed response to the issues around sustainability.  The NWMA is of the view that this development should not be designed using minimum standards but should be state of the art in its environmental performance standards. We also believe that the height and density and orientation of the current proposal does not promote good environmental practice.  </p>
<p>Traffic and Parking</p>
<p>The Association believes that development as proposed by the Government does not provide sufficient resident and visitor car-parking on site.  We have been advised that this development will not have access to the resident parking scheme administered by the Council.  Given that all kerbside and centre of road parking in the area is time limited, we believe that this mix is a recipe for disaster.  Where will the residents and visitors park?   This reinforces our conclusion that the proposal represents an over development, and is inappropriate for the site.  The Association is of the strong opinion that Government should be leading by example and make an informed assessment of the actual needs for parking and traffic and not rely on the minimum provisions prescribed under the planning scheme.<br />
The Association is totally opposed to any modification to centre of road medians and nature strips in the surrounding streets.</p>
<p>Current Public Housing Stock on site<br />
The Association is totally opposed to the sale of the area identified as Stage 2 in the development onto the private market.  We believe that this important family and other accommodation is of a reasonable standard to be upgraded, and retained in public ownership.</p>
<p>Child Care and Open Space<br />
When the site was purchased, amongst many other things, agreement was given for the construction of an employment and community based child care facility incorporating a shared open space component on the site of the proposed stage 1 of the development (the warehouse at 210 Chetwynd Street and the adjoining vacant land to the North).<br />
Several attempts were made by both the Community and the Council to have the proposed childcare facility and open space developed &#8211; without success.  The Association now believes that the need for quality early childhood education and care in inner Melbourne has reached a critical level and the obligation on the landowners to provide such a facility should not be allowed to lapse, as it was part of the original agreement with the community.</p>
<p>Recommendations.</p>
<p>The NWMA recommends that:<br />
1.	The staged development proposed for the entire site in its current form be abandoned.<br />
2.	In consultation with the Association and the community, a strategy be drawn up for the future use and development of the site, including<br />
a.	More appropriate built form and scale<br />
b.	Recognition of heritage issues<br />
c.	Appropriate tenancy and occupancy mix in public ownership<br />
d.	Satisfactory resolution of traffic and parking issues<br />
3.	The Government approach the Church of England Property Trust with a view to acquiring the land immediately to the South of the site fronting Queensberry and Chetwynd Streets. This will allow for an expanded site that will accommodate an appropriate social housing development with a much-needed early childhood education facility included.  We believe the process for the sale of this land within the Church is well advanced.<br />
4.	Any planning to be undertaken on this site for the provision of an early childhood education centre be subject to consultation with the Melbourne City Council in the preparation of its ‘Municipal Early Years Plan’ for families and children aged 0-12 years for the 2009-2013 period.<br />
5.	The planning and implementation of this development should incorporate the highest available standards of environmental performances and be an exemplar for buildings of this residential type in the same way as Council House 2 has been for commercial administrative buildings.<br />
6.	Consideration be given to the future of the eastern carriageway of Chetwynd Street between Courtney and Queensberry Streets for public open space.<br />
7.	The existing housing stock on the site be retained for public housing and that it be upgraded.</p>
<p>Yours sincerely,	</p>
<p>Kevin Chamberlin and Bill Cook<br />
On behalf of the North and West Melbourne Association Inc.</p>
<p></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nwma.org.au/news/2010/02/la-trobe-close-submission-to-minister-richard-wynn/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
