PlanningAlerts

10 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. Terrific sounding development, although I haven't seen the plans the community would hope that the design has integrity and merit, unlike the eyesore allowed at 423-431 Spencer Street, and I'm sure the community would welcome the competition of another supermarket in the area, as well as other retail providing an 'active street frontage', but.

   - Developers and the Planning Department need to be aware that the existing residents already have very limited available parking in the area with the existing housing stock.
   
   - All new multi-residential developments MUST provide and their residents with onsite parking.

   - The excavation for such parking MUST be budgeted as part of their overall costs, as for all developments in West Melbourne.

   - Everyone knows that parking increases the value of property in inner city Melbourne, so it makes financial sense to include it.

   - The existing owners have a loading bay and it seems peculiar to think a supermarket on a main arterial into the city could exist without one in this new proposal

   - Developers and Planners need to have a realistic understanding of how communities live. These new residents will have family and friends visiting. On top of the existing parking issues, where do they think these visitors will be parking in an area where the parking is already limited. No one wants West Melbourne turning into another Richmond!

2. A good supermarket would be welcome, but it needs loading bays and parking. This development should not have any reduction in the parking requirements as it would negatively impact everyone, parking is already problematic and getting worse.

3. A great idea to have a supermarket in the area, but agree with the others, it needs parking and a loading bay.

   I have not seen any detailed plans yet, but would strongly object if it exceeds the 4 storey requirement of the area. It needs to remain at the same street heights that are in this corner of the suburb.

4. Residents welcome redevelopment of this site however not at a cost of overshadowing, loss of on street car parking, loss of open space and a build height that is inconsistent with the current surrounding built form and heritage of West Melbourne.

   No resident who lives within the area surrounding the proposal site has as of yet seen any of the proposals nor have any residents been advised as to the build height that the developer plans on building at 512-542 & 544 Spencer Street WEST MELBOURNE.

   Will a consultation meeting in relation to the proposed building application be held and if so what is that date and location?

   North and West Melbourne has a strong residential base as well as commercial and industrial uses. Many of the area’s streetscapes and buildings have been recognised for their heritage significance.

   North and West Melbourne should provide a balance of residential and commercial uses that maintains an emphasis on local community and liveability. There should be a clear distinction in scale from the highrise Central City with higher scales of development expected located at the Central City. In all other areas, a lower scale of development that’s in harmony with the 4 to 5 storey height limit should be maintained in the mixed use zone of West Melbourne.

   We support limited residential development that maintains the low scale nature of heritage buildings and streetscapes in the Residential Zone (stable residential areas) that adjoins DDO 29.

   Built Environment and Heritage.

   1. Maintain the predominantly low scale of the Mixed Use Zone in West Melbourne, south of Hawke and Roden Streets.
   2. Maintain the predominantly low scale of residential areas and the Mixed Use Zone in
   West Melbourne.
   3. Maintain lower scale streetscapes in other parts of West Melbourne and North
   Melbourne.
   4. Ensure that development is sympathetic to the architecture, scale and heritage character of the lower scale areas.
   5. Encourage the re-use of existing warehouse and industrial buildings with efficient recycling potential where these contribute to the traditional mixed use character of the area.
   6. Ensure infill redevelopment and extensions complement the architecture, scale and heritage values of the residential area, especially where it is in a Heritage Overlay.

   Infrastructure.
   1. Support the provision of open space and recreational facilities for the local resident and working community.
   2. Support and facilitate opportunities for the creation of new open space in North and West
   Melbourne.

   SCHEDULE 29 TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY covering the Rose Office Furniture site currently.

   Design Objectives
   1. To acknowledge the transitional nature of the area.
   2. To encourage the development of a new built form character and the retention of the
   mixed use nature of the area.

   Buildings or works should not exceed the Maximum Building Height specified for DDO 29 in West Melbourne for this site being 4 storeys only.

   An application to exceed the Maximum Building Height must demonstrate how the development will continue to achieve the Design Objectives and Built Form Outcomes of this schedule and any local planning policy requirements.

   Building height is the vertical distance between the footpath or natural surface level at the centre of the site frontage and the highest point of the building, with the exception of architectural features and building services.

   DDO 29 BUILT FORM OUTCOMES
   1. Higher buildings and a new built form character.
   2. Development reflects the higher building forms in the area.
   3. Development respects the scale of, and provides a transition to, adjoining lower scale heritage buildings.

5. Unsure how a super market will unload their trucks. Is it from off the street? I think not! I had to engage council several years ago to prevent Staging Connections of 101 Roden from unloading in the centre of the road during early mornings, late evenings and 3am. The new apartment development at 101 Roden street have 30 vehicles parked out front most nights of the week. This is after having applied for a reduction in car parking requirements during the planning process. I also find it concerning that the developer of 101 Roden approached the proprietor of 97 Roden (Travellers Auto Barn) during the construction phase and asked Travellers Auto Barn to cease parking vehicles on the street as they are affecting off the plan sales due it limited on street parking. I observed Cardno's Traffic Managemnet doing a survey for the developer during Easter holidays and weekends creating a false impression there is ample on street parking. Never was a survey conducted during a football game. Currently, who is accountable for the prompt collection of countless dumped supermarket trolleys and their discarded packaging from the footpaths?

6. This post is for the sake of my neighbours who share interest in this development as I have spoken today with Kate Graft, a lovely and competent woman who is responsible for managing this application in the minister's planning office.

   1) This application was almost immediately sent back with a requirement for more information. This means that the clock stopped on the application at that point and there is no further approval happening until they receive an application in better form.

   2) They have not heard back further from the developer since then. If 3 months elapse without them hearing back, the entire application lapses and the developer will have to start afresh (with new fees etc.)

   3) The summary above is not the developer's summary but that of admin staff from the planning department, following guidelines about what to include in a very limited 'heading'. That is why it is not particularly well tailored to what the public want to know.

   4) The planning authority does have significant concerns about the massing and other aspects of the development which they would like to see improved and have told the developer such in their request for more information.

   5) It is proposed to have a medium sized supermarket (think sort of Aldi-sized), and be about 6-7 stories high.

   6) It was always intended to have a loading bay on Stanley Street after all. The 'waiver of loading bay' referred to is a cut off of 'waiver of loading bay requirements' which is applicable whenever the dimensions or scale of the loading bay does not meet exact norms.

   7) The development is not in the capital city zone that is exempt from community notice, so when a suitable application that passes initial review in the planning office is submitted, we will all hear about it, and boards will need to be put up on the site, etc.

   8) At that point, the detailed specific plans will be able to be viewed in the planning office by appointment.

   So right now we need not say anything further about this until the developer submits revised plans to the planning office.

7. I object to the proposal of a new supermarket as we already have plenty in the area (including a new Aldi which is to be built on Rosslyn St, in the West End Development).
   I am also objecting to the height of 9 levels which is proposed, and to reiterate what 'ConcernedlocalWestMelbourneresident' wrote:
   The development should:

   1. Maintain the predominantly low scale of the Mixed Use Zone in West Melbourne, south of Rosslyn st
   2. Maintain the predominantly low scale of residential areas and the Mixed Use Zone in
   West Melbourne.
   3. Maintain lower scale streetscapes in other parts of West Melbourne and North
   Melbourne.
   4. Ensure that development is sympathetic to the architecture, scale and heritage character of the lower scale areas.
   5. Encourage the re-use of existing warehouse and industrial buildings with efficient recycling potential where these contribute to the traditional mixed use character of the area.
   6. Ensure infill redevelopment and extensions complement the architecture, scale and heritage values of the residential area, especially where it is in a Heritage Overlay.

   I am also objecting to the reduction of parking requirements. The area already has a problem with parking, during business hours and on event days. If the developers can get away with this, they should also be contributing to the costs of the new tram line down Spencer st, which has been proposed in the West Melbourne structure plan to help alleviate traffic.

8. Nine storeys is too high for this location. The neighbouring apartment building on Roden Street, Illura Apartments, is four storeys on Roden Street and six storeys at rear. This was against the recommended heights for the area of four storeys. Given there is a precedent of six storeys neighbouring the property, six storeys would be acceptable. This is becoming an arms race amongst developers and the local residents suffer the consequences.

9. I object to the 9 storey development. It is far too high given the height of surrounding buildings. West Melbourne is being swamped apartments and developments. The heritage and unique character of West Melbourne will suffer at the hands of developers wanting to make a quick buck.
   And a new supermarket? There's a Coles 500m down the road on Spencer st. Iga 500m down the road on Errol. Woolies in Arden soon. Is there a need for another one?

10. It’s started! Yep! I refer to my objection regarding out of hours operation of the loading dock from five years ago. I never envisaged having a loading dock for Aldi in Stanley Street would impact residents residing in Roden street. Well yes it now does before Aldi even opens!. Last night we had a large Aldi semi trailer drive down Roden Street adding to unnecessary traffic congestion and noise at an unreasonable hour, of 10pm, Thursday, 15 September, 2022. The vehicle then proceeded into Stanley street and reversed into the Aldi loading dock without Traffic Control, creating traffic and noise disruption to neighbours with children residing across the road. The noise was extremely intrusive for these residents, and will be for new residents moving in to live above the loading dock next week.

    Note: there is no break in the parking bays between east/west bound lanes allowing for cross over traffic. This makes it more complicated for large trucks to safely enter and exit. The construction company Crema had a mandatory traffic OH&S management person control traffic for smaller and larger vehicles.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Melbourne City Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment