JOIN CAG

SmithStreet.org « CAG « News « Report: CAG Public Meeting

Report on 'Get the right development for Smith Street', Collingwood Action Groups's Public Meeting on the latest about the Banco Development Proposal for Smith Street, Collingwood/Fitzroy, Thursday 19 August 2004.

Collingwood Action Group’s public meeting at St Josephs in Collingwood on Thursday 19 August 2004 gave almost 100 people the chance to hear the latest news about the development proposal planned for Smith Street in Collingwood/Fitzroy. Banco’s proposal would demolish almost an entire block on Smith Street, transforming it into a massive nine storey building with three towers of retail, commercial and residential development and over 400 carparks.

The meeting opened with a poetic tribute to Smith Street from local identity Barry Dickens, titled 'Crumbling Wedding Cakes'. CAG representatives described the process since the planning application was formally notified to the Yarra community in April 2004, prompting 1500 objections. The presentations to the meeting – from planning experts, councilors and state MPs – are summarized here, and questions from the floor reproduced below. At the end of the meeting CAG urged people to sign a letter to the local State member Richard Wynne, seeking his support for the community.

WHO WERE THE PRESENTERS, AND WHAT DID THEY SAY?

Dr Paul Mees, Senior Lecturer, University of Melbourne’s Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning – on the Banco development proposal in the context of the State Government’s planning policy Melbourne 2030; Smith Street’s status as a Major Activity Centre; why the community must not let this development proposal go to VCAT; and what the Minister for Planning could do to help the community.

Mees said … ‘The community would be mad to let this planning application go to VCAT. You should try to get the Minister for Planning to call it in. Melbourne 2030 starts with 9 strategic directions. The general legal principle is that specific provisions prevail over general provisions. There are 120 Activity Centres across Melbourne. There are 11 Activity Centres in Melbourne, which are required to grow by a population of 80 000. Activity Centres will be the focus of major change over the next 30 years. 85% of Activity Centres are Major Activity Centres, like Smith Street. These are where large scale re-development will occur. Arguably there are no real criteria, they can be de-designated, and one Major Activity Centre has been ‘de-designated’ [Blackburn]. Melbourne 2030 also says that Councils must prepare Structure Plans. Most Councils have not, and the City of Yarra is one of these. The design guidelines for Activity Centres say nothing about neighbourhood character, heritage etc. The community will almost certainly lose if this goes to VCAT. Why should developers be the only ones to call applications in – historically the system is used by them. The Minister ought to be used as much to protect the community as the system is used by developers.’

Richard Wynne, State Member for Richmond – on the State Government’s planning framework Melbourne 2030; why we need a planning system; and his views on the development proposal.

Wynne said … ‘Planning is an issue that gives rise to great passions. Of course we have to have planning if we want to plan our city. My job is … to find a way forward. The current claim [development proposal] is an ambit claim – it is too big, and out of scale with the built form and is not respecting of heritage. The heritage buildings include the Grace Darling, the Union Building, the Old Post Office etc. It ignores directions in Melbourne 2030 to acknowledge and protect heritage. I have met with the developer and told him it is inappropriate and that I will ask the Minister to review the plan and if necessary intervene. It needs to be tested against Melbourne 2030. Melbourne 2030 is a statement of what it should be like in 30 years. The vast majority of people do accept Melbourne 2030. It does say that Activity Centres should have more dense development. It is based very much on transport nodes. The important task of this meeting is to state a clear set of principles for the potential benchmark for the City of Yarra for strip shopping and Activity Centres; three councilors working together; how councils’ aspirations marry with the local community’s. This is a benchmark development and one I’m following closely. The Minister is aware of this proposal.’

Kay Meadows, Mayor, City of Yarra – on why Yarra Council didn’t make a decision on Banco’s planning application within 60 days; on why Council pursued a ‘negotiated outcome’; and Council’s process for decision-making.

Meadows said … ‘At Yarra Council there are three councilors who are predominantly involved in this planning application. Myself, Deborah di Natale, and Judy Morton [also Chair of Council’s planning committee]. Why have we gone down this path? When this planning application first came to the attention of councilors we thought about how normal approaches were not going to be adequate. We wanted to achieve for this site an outcome that meets Council’s and residents’ aspirations. Smith Street is one of five designated Activity Centres in the City of Yarra. What happens here is also vitally important to others Activity Centres (e.g. Brunswick). We thought that a negotiated outcome was preferable to the roulette of VCAT. We are going through a series of meetings on a negotiated basis. It is an evolving process and has a one month timeline. Council has engaged its own independent experts to provide advice. These consultants are involved in discussions and will help form their final advice to Council. Council hasn’t made a decision – the reason is because we didn’t want to refuse. Section 79 gives the right for applicant to refer an application to VCAT if it hasn’t been determined within 60 days. It is normal for a large application [for a council] not to make a decision within 60 days. This is no threat to Council’s decision making process at this time. Once discussions close [with the Applicant] Council will make a decision. There are some unknowns. A report will be written with a recommendation. The report will be available on Council’s website the Thursday before the Council meeting. The Planning Committee will also take submissions from the community for the final report. At the moment we’re in a process but a decision will be made.’

Ted Bailleau, Shadow Minister for Planning – on why the State Government’s planning framework is flawed; how it over-rides local controls; new planning provisions; and whether there is a process to designate Activity Centres.

Bailleau said … ‘Melbourne 2030 is a dud. The government is adding a new regime – ‘Priority Development Zones’ – which will add new powers that over-ride councils’ planning controls. We should be very cautious about the way that Melbourne 2030 is proceeding. … structure planning can be ignored. There have been Activity Centres that have been designated since by the Minister – these decisions are totally arbitrary. There is no way to appeal.’

SPEECHES AND QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR

A message for the politicians from the floor … ‘My family has lived in this area for 100 years. My family fought against pulling down buildings in the 1960s. Development doesn’t always do the right things. We have a flawed system. There are two pollies [Richard Wynne and Ted Bailleau] up front tonight who should do something about it. The system is flawed. The community has no power. The message has to get through to the pollies – we will vote them out.’

And questions from the floor:

‘How is it possible to have long term planning with a haphazard planning system?’

‘There is a lot of talk about framework plans, structure plans, but what is reasonable development? No one really knows. How can a development like this get to this stage?’

‘How much weight does the community have in this process? Will it make any difference?’

‘Because the ‘negotiation’ process appears to have been handed to a community group, will the Council help the resource the community?’

‘Is it acceptable to the local member [Richard Wynne] that a voluntary body is doing this work?’

‘Will Council look at remunerating professionals involved in this process?’

‘Does Smith Street really qualify as a Major Activity Centre?’

‘Could the State Government rescind Smith Street’s status as a Major Activity Centre?’

‘Given the rate that this State Government is calling developments in, why doesn’t it call in this one?’

‘Under Melbourne 2030 one of the promises is that proposed developments are discussed with the community. Is the Council going to legally protect those individuals involved in this process?’

‘At what stage are Council’s structure plans?’

‘Why couldn’t Council engage in this process in the pre-application stage?’