COUNCIL BIAS SIDELINES WINBROOK CRESCENT OWNERS
Unit developments have to be well designed, site responsive and must not adversely impact on neighbours, the surrounding environment, streetscape or existing neighbourhood character as per clause 21.05 in the Manningham Strategic Statement (MSS) of the Manningham Planning Scheme.
It seems that the Council have not taken into account a recent VCAT decision where the member Taranto ruled against a development that proposed three storey buildings on a site area of less than the mandatory minimum land size which only permitted two storeys.
“The height prescribed,
ten metres, (this development wants 10.400m) recognises the desirability of providing some flexibility for design outcomes that might include, for example, the need to accommodate varied topographical conditions that are a characteristic feature in Manningham, pitched roof forms and architectural features. Thus, I consider that the approach advocated for the applicant said to derive from a strategic imperative to fill the the building envelope by reference to its maximum height is a flawed yardstick with which to measure the acceptability of this proposal”.
Items 51 to 54 of decision in link below. VCAT member Mary-Anne Taranto
This development proposed on a land area of only 1629 Sqm fails to meet the Objectives and Standards of Precinct 2 Sub-Precinct A of Clause 21.05 (Residential) of the Manningham Planning Scheme, as the proposed three storey buildings are in excess of the two storey built form which is the desired building form sought by Sub-Precinct A where the mandatory minimum lot size of 1,800 Sqm cannot be met.
Anna Chen Koonung Ward Councillor after visiting the site area on two occasions, also raised the issue of neighbourhood character, the lack of on street parking availability and the area of subject site was less than the mandatory minimum land size requirement for three storey buildings.
The council allowed the proponent to exploit the height allowance of up to 10 metres for two storeys, which includes the one metre leeway for slope on all blocks, (plus the .400 m they had so generously approved), to achieve three storeys buildings, leaving no room for the employment of any neighbourhood character features, yet when the surplus in height became available, where only two storeys were proposed, where a pitched roof or other interesting features could have been introduced to match the local neighbourhood character, the council did nothing. The height chart above left demonstrates that the 10 metre maximum height prescribed for a two storey building provides a margin of more than four metres for a developer to incorporate an additional storey. DDO8 C 96 mss C 96
Highlight, right click, then click on videos on left for video of May Council meeting below: