JOIN CAG

SmithStreet.org « CAG « News « YARRA 'DISAPPOINTED' IN MINISTER HULLS' DECISION, SEEKS LEGAL ADVICE FOR CHALLENGE

Yarra Council seeks legal advice to challenge Hulls' decision, based on his Panel's recommendation to approve Banco's development and reject Yarra's Interim Plan

At the City of Yarra Counil meeting of Tuesday 21 February 2006 the following motion was carried. The resolution requires Council write to the Planning Minister and express its 'disappointment' about the decisions to approve Banco's development and reject Yarra's Interim Structure Plan for Smith Street. Moved by Councillor Jenny Farrar, the motion was successfully amended by Councillor Steve Jolly so Council seeks urgent legal advice. This includes looking at using local laws to modify the negative impacts of Banco'ss development and examing the procedural fairmess of Planning Minister Hulls' Priority Development Panel and its inquiry into the 'Banco' development proposal and Yarra Council's Smith Street Interim Structure Plan.

YARRA COUNCIL RESOLUTION - ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL TUESDAY 21 FEBRUARY 2006   
RE: APPLICATION PL03/1407 MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 132-172 SMITH STREET AND 63-71 LITTLE OXFORD STREET COLLINGWOOD AND AMENDMENT C76 TO THE YARRA PLANNING SCHEME - PROPOSED INTERIM CONTROL - DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 5

1. That Council notes:

(a) the decision of the Governor in Council to allow application P754/2005 for the review of Council's decision to refuse a permit for a multi storey mixed use development at 132-172 Smith Street and 63-71 Little Oxford Street, Collingwood and directing that Council issue a planning permit;

(b) the decision of the Minister for Planning to not approve at this stage Amendment C76 to the Yarra Planning Scheme which proposed to introduce interim structure plan controls over the Smith Street Precinct in the form of a Design and Development Overlay (DDO5); and

(c) the Minister's invitation for Council to consult with DSE to determine the appropriate controls that will enable Amendment C76 to be further considered.

2. That Council write to the Minister for Planning and the State MP to express Council's disappointment with regard to the recommendations of the Priority Development Panel, the determination of the Governor in Council and the Minister's decision not to approve Amendment C76 and in particular to:

(a) confirm Yarra's support for urban consolidation and limiting the ecological footprint of urban sprawl;

(b) confirm Yarra's commitment to population growth in the municipality in accordance with Melbourne 2030's population aspirations;

(c) confirm Council's support for the Inner Regional Housing Statement (IRHS) and Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) as developed by the Cities of Melbourne, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Yarra in conjunction with the State Government through the Department of Sustainability and Environment and Department of Human Services Office of Housing; and

(d) point out that the decision is contrary to the strategies identified in both the IRHS and the IMAP which provide that:

(i) the key opportunities for new residential development in the Inner Melbourne Region generally lie outside of the existing principal, major and neighbourhood activity centres in major redevelopment sites and precincts; and

(ii) housing growth and intensification be directed to the CAD and identified major redevelopment sites and precincts, with only a moderate increase in residential infill development within principal and major activity centres as guided by structure plans.

3. That Council Officers work with DSE representatives to revise Amendment C76 to the Yarra Planning Scheme to:

(a) ensure that the Design and Development Overlay is based on the relevant objectives outlined in IMAP and the IRHS, that there should only be a moderate increase in residential infill development within principal and major activity centres as guided by structure plans.

(b) ensure that there are clear linkages between the design objectives, buildings and works controls and decision guidelines included in the DDO; and

(c) include mandatory controls that better reflect the Urban Design Framework but provide for flexibility where exemplary environmentally sustainable design outcomes and social infrastructure improvements including affordable housing can be provided.

4. That Council facilitate a public meeting to be held in 2-3 weeks at the Collingwood Town Hall to update the community in regards to the PDP recommendations and the decision of the Governor in Council.

5. That Council seek urgent legal advice from Maddocks Lawyers examining:

(a) the potential to use Local Laws to modify any negative impacts of the proposed development;

(b) the legal validity or otherwise of the process followed to reach a determination and issue a planning permit;

(c) whether or not the Panel's conduct in considering the planning application prior to consideration and determination of C76 was appropriate; and

(d) whether or not the Panel's conduct in revising the plans following a meeting with the developer, represents a denial of natural justice to residents and others who were excluded from the meeting.

CARRIED