22-7-08

Design not optimal says VCAT, but still approves development.
After a long wait VCAT has effectively rubber stamped the Coles Supermarket proposal with minimal changes to the Developers Application. Despite the approval VCAT have acknowledged in the 43 page report that the design is by no means optimal for the site.

Community concerns in relation to the scale, aesthetic, and function of the proposal were barely considered in the report and ultimately given no weight in the outcome.

The revised conditions that the Alpine Shire negotiated with the Developers during the VCAT process were a mirror of the final outcome. None of these revised plans have yet been released to the public, which means we don’t know what we would end up with if the development were to be built.

Despite not releasing any information during the process, the Alpine Shire has been quick to supply press releases to media outlets before many objectors had even received official notification of the decision.

Key Points:

1. -Amenity: The majority of retail frontage will not face the street. Despite referring to the Bright Futures document regularly in the report which clearly recommends “active street frontages,” VCAT chose to ignore the amenity issue in Star Rd altogether. The largest interface is on Star Rd, which will feature the loading bay and rubbish collection facilities. VCAT has taken the developers word that the walls “vary” from 5m high. According to the plans submitted they are closer to 9m. 
   

2. -Gaming: The building will be joined to and share a carpark with a gaming venue. There are specific clauses in the planning scheme preventing gaming venues from being located in strip shopping. The same clause was used (and upheld at VCAT) recently by the Alpine Shire when trying to prevent the gaming operator from obtaining more machines.
   

3. -Economics: VCAT accepted the Developers evidence that the proposal would have little impact on the local economy as it would capture escape spending. Despite needing over $16 million/pa to break even and no actual evidence being available, VCAT accepted the Developers projections. VCAT also stated that the development could even provide a reason for tourists to visit.
   

4. -Traffic: The report has imposed rules on delivery times for both the Hotel and the Supermarket but is light on detail as to who will police this. Trucks delivering outside these times will have to queue. It is unclear where. It also unclear as to how it will be guaranteed that delivery vehicles will adhere to the 35 tonne load limit applied to Star Road bridge.
   

Local Engineer Nick Malkin believes that if we had a more robust set of development guidelines - as the community has been calling for - we may well have achieved an outcome that would have pleased all sections of the community.

“It’s disappointing and unexpected. VCAT acknowledged in their decision that the proposed design isn’t optimal for the site. So for a site that possesses such strategic value, unfortunately we are going to end up with a second or third best planning solution.

The proposal fails to positively activate the Star Road frontage - active retail frontages are a requirement of the Bright Future policy framework. VCAT have not adequately explained how situating the back of house loading bay and waste collection facilities along Star Rd constitutes an appropriate design response in this context.”

No Councilors attended the hearing on any day, despite this being the biggest development proposal Bright has seen.

It is unclear which capital works have been signed off on and how much the bill to ratepayers will be should construction proceed.

The full report can be read Here

30-6-08
VCAT decision due out soon.

The VCAT decision on the proposed Coles development should be announced soon following a slight delay due to the illness of the presiding panel member.

16-5-08
Safeway knocked back in Mt Evelyn.

A recent decision by VCAT to refuse planning permission for a Safeway Supermarket in Mt Evelyn has given new hope that objectors concerns will be recognised in the impending VCAT decision.

In contrast to the proposed Coles Development in Bright, the Yarra Ranges Shire Council refused to grant a permit for the development and fought the application alongside the community at VCAT.

Local Civil Engineer, Nick Malkin believes that there are parallels between the Mt Evelyn development and the Coles proposal.

“Basically they’ve knocked it back on amenity, scale and bulk, and failing to blend in with town character, which is exactly the arguments we’ve been putting forward from day one. It’s just commonsense really. Bright is unique, and all new development should enhance the town rather than detract from it - as the proposal in its current form would.”

The conclusions are listed below and the full document is available HERE.

Conclusion

1           It follows from the above that the decision of the Council should be affirmed. A permit should not be granted for this development, based on the plans before us. We consider that the built form and design of this supermarket development is not appropriate for Mount Evelyn, due to the impact it will have on the prevailing village character of the town. The scale suggests an overdevelopment, having regard to the attributes and constraints of the site.

2           We believe that simply tinkering with design elements such as articulation, roof treatments and design, use of mock window glazing, timber battens and screening walls, would not be sufficient to mask the overall size, height and bulk of the proposed building for this site. This is not therefore a matter where we might have considered seeking further amended plans as a basis for approval. The whole proposal in our view needs a complete re-think.

3           During the course of the hearing, we repeatedly asked questions of parties about alternative options or visions for the site. As we indicated, this was not because we have any jurisdiction to consider such alternatives; rather, we wished to get a sense of the scale of development that was within the reasonable expectation of the various parties – particularly how the site may best interface with Snowball Avenue and the residential area. As we have indicated, we believe that the DDO2 is not helpful in setting a vision for the town centre and the difficulty is exacerbated by the absence of a structure plan.

4           We are concerned that several objectors seem to be of the view that the recently introduced DDO means that there will now be very limited scale development on the site, and that it might revert to a medium density residential use without any significant retail development. This is in our view naïve, and we believe many objectors have an unrealistic expectation of the likely change that needs to be managed in this area (in planning terms) in coming years, and the type and scale of development that might ultimately be approved – including perhaps a smaller scale supermarket. It is not apparent to us that the Council has yet addressed these expectations.

5           Just as an overdevelopment of the site ought to be avoided, as in this case, so too should good planning prevent the underdevelopment of this important site. The land is in a Business 1 Zone, and represents a substantial undeveloped part of a relatively small town centre. Traffic and parking, and site vegetation and landscaping, are all capable of being resolved, and in our view should not represent primary grounds for refusal. If this site is not developed to its reasonable planning potential, we believe it would represent a lost opportunity for Mount Evelyn. It could lead to further fragmentation of the activity centre, possible further rezoning or commercial incursion into other surrounding areas, and thus affect the longer-term vitality and viability of the balance of the centre.

6           The key planning challenge, as evident in our discussion of the planning application before us, lies in appropriate scale and good design.

22-4-08
Coles Conditions Backflip

The Alpine Shire has backed down on a majority of the conditions placed on the granting of the permit for a Coles Supermarket and specialty shops in Bright.

The Alpine Shire Councillors passed the application over twelve months ago with more than 107 conditions in order to appease Community concern.  Only one month ago the Alpine Shire had stood by its conditions in a presentation to VCAT.

Councillors contacted by Save Bright had no knowledge of the changes saying only that they had been told it had been condensed. No mention was made of the changes at the last Alpine Shire Council meeting.

Both the Developers and Objectors are contesting the application at VCAT.

Save Bright  believes that the Development Application has changed so much in both design and substance since approval, and without public scrutiny, that the community has no idea what it will be getting.

Below are links to the Alpine Shires original submission to VCAT and the amendments after a meeting with the developer.

Alpine shire comments on conditions 12 3 08.pdf

8.4.08 Revised conditions, Gavan St, Bright.pdf

Original Shires Recommendation June 2007.pdf

Save Bright rebuttal to recommendation.pdf

Articles:

http://smallbusiness.theage.com.au/growing/finance/supermarket-chains-dominate-908988182.html