22 Black Street, Brunswick VIC 3056

Construction of a building with a reduction of the car parking requirement.

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website 7 months ago. It was received by them 7 months earlier.

(Source: Moreland City Council, reference MPS/2018/274)

8 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. M J Hunt commented

    Not another one! When will this overshadowing over crowding high rise stuff stop —all concentrated in and around Black Street
    Eight stories is too high
    It doesn’t take rocket science to see all this overdevelopment is causing immense problems Re traffic, public transport, rubbish, graffiti, crime angry residents, mental health problems, road rage, and safety problems

  2. Mario Milici commented

    Yes MJ another one. Please submit your objection directly to council as advertising closed yesterday.
    I am waiting for when council is planning to do something about upgrading the storm water, sewer and electrical supply to the area. Has this even been budgeted for?

  3. Claire Plummer commented

    I wish to lodge an objection to 22 Black St proposal - it's TOO HIGH and exceeds the 19M height control.

    Moreland Councul please be reminded:

    - You have already approved four towers in the Jewell area, which gave no regard to the physical context of the low scale, single storey Victorian terraces that have a heritage overlay. The heritage overlay means these terraces are unlikely to experience any significant redevelopment.

    - Many residents have lived in these terraces well before the commercial zoning and heritage overlay was applied, so it’s unreasonable to expect residents should’ve known Moreland would develop a strong strategic direction that would destroy their existing amenity. Your approvals are creating a canyon effect for the heritage overlay terraces.

    Is there an annual review of your incoherent strong strategic direction? It needs to properly consider equitable outcomes for existing and future residents, rather than favouring the fortune of developers, and driving inequality in Brunswick, and our society.

    Has there been any examples where you have pivoted, switched direction, learned lessons and stop approving these inequitable plans?

  4. Claire Plummer wrote to local councillor Mark Riley

    Dear Mark,

    I work full time, so was unable to attend the council meeting last week. I object to 22 Black St proposal - it's TOO HIGH and exceeds the 19M height control.

    Please be reminded:

    - You have already approved four towers in the Jewell area, which gave no regard to the physical context of the low scale, single storey Victorian terraces that have a heritage overlay. The heritage overlay means these terraces are unlikely to experience any significant redevelopment.

    - Many residents have lived in these terraces well before the commercial zoning and heritage overlay was applied, so it’s unreasonable to expect residents should’ve known Moreland would develop a strong strategic direction that would destroy their existing amenity. Your approvals are creating a canyon effect for the heritage overlay terraces.

    Is there an annual review of your incoherent strong strategic direction? It needs to properly consider equitable outcomes for existing and future residents, rather than favouring the fortune of developers, and driving inequality in Brunswick, and our society.

    Has there been any examples where you have pivoted, switched direction, learned lessons and stopped approving these inequitable plans?

    Regards
    Claire

    Photo of Mark Riley
    Mark Riley local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Claire Plummer

    Claire,

    Thanks for your email re 22 Black St.

    I've just written to you on your other questions. I will ask the professionals to reply to your other concerns below. Once you get this response, I'd be pleased to chat further about the Councillors role and how this comes into play after you hear back from officers.

    Re your queries:

    Is there an annual review of your incoherent strong strategic direction? It needs to properly consider equitable outcomes for existing and future residents, rather than favouring the fortune of developers, and driving inequality in Brunswick, and our society.

    Our Council is working towards a more live-able city and is addressing this through plans/strategies such as Urban Forest, Urban Heat Island Effect, Greening Sydney Road, A Park Close to Home and so on. You can see our Council Plan for this 4 year term, here:
    https://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/about-us/news-and-publications/council-plan/

    You can read our policies here:
    https://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/about-us/news-and-publications/policies-and-strategies/

    Has there been any examples where you have pivoted, switched direction, learned lessons and stopped approving these inequitable plans?

    Thanks for your queries.

    Yours sincerely.

    Cr Mark Riley
    South Ward I Moreland City Council
    90 Bell Street, Coburg. 3058
    m: +61 499 807 044
    e:
    https://www.facebook.com/MarkRileyGreens/

    To make a report, complaint or request for a service to Moreland City Council Go To >
    http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/about-us/online-payments-and-services/erequests/

  5. Marion Hunt commented

    I agree with Claire
    This area is shocking and a disaster

  6. Dorothy Williams commented

    I was at the meeting, one of only 4 residents - do they deliberately hold these meetings at a time when most people are unable to attend?
    The developer's Town Planner was very reasonable in all his responses to the questions, until he tried to wrap up, saying he thought he'd addressed all the questions, when he clearly had not! The biggest question of them all, by everyone present, was in regard to the huge height discrepancy between the current 19 metre allowance and their nearly 27 metre proposal. We all quickly reminded him, needless to say!
    In short, his response was that it was inevitable that all surrounding sites would be developed to this height.
    They applauded themselves for the fact that they were not planning to build shoe box sized apartments and that they were aiming for the higher end of the market.
    I'm not sure how much difference that will make to the precinct when you no longer have any sky or natural light and the southerlies whistle down the wind tunnels of this lane!

  7. Claire Plummer wrote to local councillor Mark Riley

    Dear Mark,

    The two questions I would’ve asked had I been able to attend the meeting:

    1) What is the process for which developers can ignore the height control?

    2) Is Moreland Council committed to the height control rule?

    Are you able please advise?

    Regards
    Claire

    Photo of Mark Riley
    Mark Riley local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Claire Plummer

    Dear Claire,

    Thanks for your email. I will ask Officers to formally respond to your two questions, as I am a Councillor, and can respond from that perspective but given urban planning is quite complex and detailed, I'd like to ensure you get an authoritative professional response too.

    My responses to your two queries are below:

    1) What is the process for which developers can ignore the height control?
    http://services.land.vic.gov.au/maps/pmo.jsp

    Moreland City Council has sought, more than once, to have the Vic Planning Minister to approve height limits, but the Minister has not approved these, thus the preferred heights are the guide to developers and Planning Officers.

    Many developers/proponents do often seek to build something beyond the preferred heights. In some cases officers, under delegation may approve an application above the preferred heights, but usually refer these to the PARM - Planning and Related Matters Committee of MCC. This gives Councillors the role of deciding, with officer advice, on the application.

    I cannot say for certain, but the pattern has been, in the past two years of my time as a Councillor, that the PARM may approve a proposal above the preferred heights, but only when the other features of the development have high standards and outcomes. These may include aspects such as, high Environmental Sustainable Design (ESD) proivisions (high thermal ratings, solar passive design, water capture use/re-use, accessibility and visitiabliity, internal amenity and so on ...)

    Without specific height limits, we are not able to maintain an absolute height in any of our planning zones.

    2) Is Moreland Council committed to the height control rule?

    Re the street width and street wall height, when one stands on the street opposite the proposed building, one should not necessarily be able to see the top of the building, only the 3 or 4th level (referred to as the street wall height). There are other technical terms and principles that come into play but these are some of the major/common features that are considered by Planners when they assess proposals under Victoria's Planning system.

    I refer to this type of system, the Vic planning system, as a 'post modern' system. That is, there very few absolutes in the scheme, and hundreds of variables which can be adjusted and moved depending upon the other variables proposed.

    I hope the officers can explain this better than my attempts above Claire.

    Finally, just to alert you to the fact that, Moreland City Council does not rely upon the Planning Alerts system to communicate with our residents, as it is controlled by a third party. I would encourage you to use Council's online, public tools and access points. These are on the MCC website.

    Thanks for taking the time to get in touch.

    Yours sincerely,

    Cr Mark Riley
    South Ward I Moreland City Council
    90 Bell Street, Coburg. 3058
    m: +61 499 807 044
    e:
    https://www.facebook.com/MarkRileyGreens/

    To make a report, complaint or request for a service to Moreland City Council Go To >
    http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/about-us/online-payments-and-services/erequests/

  8. Claire Plummer commented

    Dear Planning Authority,

    The two questions I would’ve asked had I been able to attend the council meeting last week:

    1) What is the process for which developers can ignore the height control?

    2) Is Moreland Council committed to the height control rule?

    Are you able to please advise?

    Regards
    Claire

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. Who should this go to?
    One of your elected local councillors

    Your elected councillors can answer your questions and represent you in council meetings.

    Don’t worry if you don’t know who to contact. Every councillor is there to represent you so just pick someone who seems nice.
  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts