Action from the developer is about to start up again. More on that shortly
In the meantime we need to marshal resources for neighbourhood letterbox dropping.
Does anyone have time Thursday or Friday to walk the streets putting flyers into letterboxes?
If so, please email admin@protectnewport.com
Also seeking expressions of interest from people who can give time for additional activities over the next few months.
Although not officially advertised for objections, the Timber Yard developer’s latest application is now available for viewing.
It seems he is failing to listen to VCAT and residents, and has submitted fundamentally-the-same application again. He has completely missed the opportunity to submit a different proposal that will integrate into our neighbourhood (and it’s character) without dominating it.
Resident consultation farce.
The developer is requesting Council to… “conduct a consultative meeting with residents as discussed which could be in the form of an information evening either prior to, during, or after the formal advertising period.”
Council are considering the developer’s request.
It is clear by the developer’s indifference of the timing of any consultative meeting, he is not really interested in in incorporating residents’ feedback into his design.
Why Déjà vu? The previous two consultative efforts resulted in the developer suspending meetings, not incorporating resident feedback and submitting his plans anyway.
What’s the new design like?
Summary:
Why Déjà vu? There has been no attempt to reduce the dominance, density, and incongruous design.
View from Paint and Crawford Street intersection.
Paine St elevation.
Crawford St elevation.
What happens now?
We wait to see what Council will do with the developer’s request; and for the advertising period to start so residents can object as necessary.
The Application.
The developer’s application PA1226036 is now on Greenlight, with a copy of the documents below.
Covering Letter
Document register
Town Planning Submission
Plan Cover Sheet
Ground Floor Plans
First Floor Plan
Second floor plan
Roof Plan
Elevations Plan
Sections Plan
Sections and elevations
Key Plan
Traffic Report
Waste Management Plan
Streetscape Plan
Shadow Diagrams
After a meeting with the timber yard developer, we were expecting a response about ideas put forward on behalf of residents to resolve current issues. This was expected to happen prior to the developer making the permit application to Council.
The developer has decided to make the planning application to Council first, then undertake Council and community consultation process.
The developer contacted an objector representative to discussion the issues of the Timber Yard development and try to come up with a design that may be acceptable to the community, Council and VCAT.
Progress update:
Hopefully this process will result in a re-design that deals with community, Council and VCAT concerns; and enables the site to be developed in a way acceptable to all parties.
Representatives of resident objectors are in discussions with the developer, Domain Hill, regarding revised plans for the Timber Yard site.
Although we have seen sketches of the revised form, we are waiting on additional style and materials details. We will then begin a formal cycle of receiving community feedback.
The developer has also met and continuing discussions with Council’s planning department.
The Hobsons Bay Leader had a brief article regarding current events, read full article here.
Last weekends sausage sizzle to celebrate our VCAT win was great – and a good chance to catch up socially with neighbours before the silly season is upon us.
A big thank you to everyone who brought along a donation, we hit our target and have now covered our fighting fund shortfall… all bills are paid in full.
Thanks also to Ted for contributing the food and Scott for bringing and manning the BBQ.
At the Timber Yard Development VCAT hearing, VCAT did not grant a permit to the developer to build the proposed design.
So we’re celebrating with a… Sausage Sizzle
(Armstrong Reserve this Sunday)
Sausages are free, but bring anything else you want and your drinks.
SUNDAY 28th Oct 2:30pm to after dinner.
DONATIONS ACCEPTED towards the fighting fund shortfall. Or donate at by clicking here.
The Age today reports on Planning Minister Matthew Guys on-air comment… “The volume of objections to new developments should be taken into account when considering planning applications”.
This comment was made in relation and Armadale development where Stonnington Council is challenging the recent VCAT decision in the Supreme Court. Stonnington argues the tribunal “failed to give due regard to significant community input and has made a decision that is not supported by the local community or council”. More than 600 objections to the application were filed to the council, more than 440 objections were submitted to the tribunal.
With respect to the Newport Timber Yard development, the last application received 360 resident objections. It will be interesting to see how Stonnington Council fares in the Supreme Court.
A group be celebrating our victory at the Prince Albert hotel (cnr Douglas Pde and Albert St) tonight at 7pm.
Come on down and join us – it would be great to catch up with everyone who can make it.
We have just received the decision – VCAT have upheld the Council’s decision to not grant a permit to the applicant.
Further analysis and a summary to follow, but you can read the decision document here…
P27 2012 Raio v Hobsons Bay CC _md 051012
Well done everybody.
Conclusion statement from decision document…
1. The review site provides a good opportunity to introduce a more intense and diverse form of housing into the location. Given its attributes, the use of the land is appropriate. However, for the above reasons, we find that in this location, the design fails to respond acceptably to the built form of the heritage protected neighbourhood and we do not consider that the amendments made to the previous proposal are an acceptable response to the previous Tribunal decision.
2. For these reasons, the decision of the Responsible Authority is affirmed. No permit is granted.