Displaying posts categorized under

High Density DD08 Zoning

Knock down and excavations have begun in Thiele and Curlew

Both 5-7 Curlew Court, and 2-6 Thiele St Doncaster develpoments have begun! No5 Curlew’s old house is gone, 7 is still there with moving trucks there this weekend. 2-6 Thiele st were cleared of the old houses over the last few weeks, and now development ( excavation,)  for the 50 apartments cars is underway. The […]

MSS and DDO8 – Small sites, restricted developments.

Some large developments are getting knocked back by council lately, it seems due to the DD08 zone, C96 Tightening of requirements. Thankyou to Amelia for sharing this. 19 August 2013 3:29:22 PM Teresa, Joe and Councillors, Can it be assumed that the grounds for refusal in items 1 and 2 of the attached page, 2 […]

Height, Storeys and setbacks across different Councils.

Manningham Council have repeatedly told the community during the DD08 high density zone review, that only height can be effectively used to define developments, and that “Storeys” was un-manageable as a definition. How ever when you compare how othe Melbourne Councils manage their developments, they do use both Height and Storeys in thier definitions.  attached […]

How could the new C96 High density rules translate to real life ?

The Planning Panel said the council should test the new  rules to see what outcomes might be… There are already examples from recent times… Some possible outcomes of the C96 changes if they get passed : The 51-53 Talford St case is a good example of how the new DDO8 will be interpreted & used […]

Are apartments going ahead in DD08 Zone?

With all the Manningham councils push for apartments in these DD08 high density zones, are they actually getting built? A check of Building Permits issued in 2012 for 10 or more units for properties within precincts A & B of DD08 was recently conducted, there were four. We were unable to ascertain how many were […]

OVERDEVELOPMENT STILL POSSIBLE ON SMALLER SITES – after C96

How safe do you think side streets are from over development? Manningham Council’s decision not to insert a condition prescribing a limit of two storey development on smaller sites, in the revised table 1 to schedule 8 document, has created a great deal of uncertainty. Whilst the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) has indicated that “high […]

APPROPRIATENESS OF MANNINGHAM’S HIGH DENSITY STRATEGY IS QUESTIONED AS DEMAND FOR APARTMENT LIVING DECLINES

“Sandman Oz” shares some thoughts on why Highrise  hasn’t ever moved in Manningham… Speculative permits, risks associated with purchasing off the plan, lack of a fixed rail infrastructure, lack of public off street parking and difficult terrain are among the factors contributing to a low demand that has stymied the progress of high density apartment […]

How Long Should We Wait – Action 2.3: Review cul de sacs and side streets within sub-precinct A of DDO8 – Council Agenda 28 May 2013

If you ask an important question of your council how long is it fair to wait ? One seasoned and concerned rate payer wanted to share this.. ++++ Original Request as sent by email +++ Now a month old… no council answers  yet. Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 12:27 PM Subject: Action 2.3: Review cul […]

Changed Provisions Of DDO8 – Recognition of Small sites

189-191 Foote Street, Templestowe.   Council  are planning to  reject this proposal because it does not meet the minimum land area of 1800sqm for a three storey development. This will apply to all developments in Precinct A. Unfortunately this welcome change in direction cannot be applied in retrospect to the Queens Avenue and Talford Street proposals. […]

PIECEMEAL PLANNING Heights & Depths

This in From Rodney, taking a look the combination of Excavation and Heights. There are so may loose ends to this amendment (C96 amendment to DD08 High Density Zones,) you have to question the wasting of resources, especially now that they foreshadow yet another amendment. If you read the attachment 4 of the minutes (not […]