Council Meeting 11th March - Tenement Controls & The Olinda Pool

Posted by Unknown at Saturday, March 08, 2014 | 1 comments

Tuesday's meeting "11th" will see 2 issues within my ward of which are of public interest.
 
1: Application for a dwelling in Kalorama - Tenement Controls
2: The Olinda Pool
 
The first is an application for a dwelling and water tank in the hilly suburb of Kalorama. However this application has been recommended for refusal because the property itself has a "Tenement" control.
 
"What is a Tenement control"? you ask?, well let me tell you.


Tenement controls operate by restricting development within groups of lots known to have been in the same ownership (tenement holding) on a specific date, which was known as the “effective date”. By limiting the amount of dwellings that can be constructed to a specified number per holding (usually just one), as opposed to one per lot. In the past tenement controls had largely been applied to farming areas or the urban fringe, however the RSP was being applied over areas previously zoned residential, such as the northern half of mount Dandenong and weren't being used as a permit trigger but an outright prohibition on development as was its intent in previous planning schemes.  Concerns were raised as to the potential for the control to be eroded due to the fact that 60% of refusals for 2^nd dwellings on tenement controls were overturned in the Melbourne and Metropolitan Planning Scheme by the then Administrative Appeal Tribunal. Despite this they were expanded in the Yarra Ranges & Dandenong Ranges.

Now, this application must meet ALL 9 of the Tenement "anomalies" Set out in Clause 53 of the Planning Scheme: They are:

Clause 53 (Upper Yarra Valley & Dandenong Ranges Regional Provisions)
  
Under Clause 53.01-2 (Use of Land- Tenement Controls), a planning permit can be sought for the use and development of additional dwellings within a tenement holding (ie development of individual vacant lots), provided that it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the responsible authority that: 
The development will not prejudice the primary purpose of the zone and local planning policies applying to the land.

The wider objectives of the tenement provisions are protected from incremental erosion and are maintained as a legitimate means of protecting the areas identified from inappropriate development. 

Services such as constructed roads, reticulated water supply and reticulated sewerage are available, without additional substantial costs to the Council and servicing authorities, and the provision of these and other utility installations will have minimal impact on the environment or landscape of the area.

 If reticulated sewerage is not available, the site is of sufficient size to enable proper onsite treatment of all wastes and retention of effluent. 

If the land is in an area identified as having a high risk of wildfire hazard, appropriate building design measures will be undertaken to provide an acceptable level of protection. 

The development will be consistent with the provision of any Environmental Significance Overlay, Heritage Overlay, Erosion Management Overlay or Land Subject to Inundation Overlay that applies to the land. 

 There will be no detriment to the ecology of any stream or watercourse on or near the site by virtue of the development. 

The development can be considered to be infill in an area which is substantially built up. 

Removal of native vegetation is minimised.


Council Officers are recommending refusal because 2 of the anomalies cant be met # 2 and # 8

 The wider objectives of the tenement provisions are protected from incremental erosion and are maintained as a legitimate means of protecting the areas identified from inappropriate development. 

There will be no detriment to the ecology of any stream or watercourse on or near the site by virtue of the development.

I will arguing the case that they do and that this application should be approved.

There will be some talk about "infill development" and "inappropriate development" both of which do not apply to this application. Unfortunately this "Tenement" provision ultimately "bans" any further development within the hills in certain areas. You will see that this application isn't a large development, it fits in with the local character of the hills, ALL risk aspects of the application have been met: Bushfire, Erosion, and Sewerage!

This provision is well hidden within the hills and does take some time and money to establish whether you have a tenement control or not and this concerns me. An antiquated planning control that has seen its day and was well used (in the 1970s). That amount of development and expansion does not exist now and into the future.


The second issue is the Olinda Pool, the report states:

"At the time of preparing this report, the final structural engineering assessment was yet to be received.  This report will be distributed separately to councillors. 

Considerable community interest has been experienced in relation to the structural issues identified with the Olinda pool.  Council’s Aquatic Facilities Strategy recommends closing the Olinda Pool and exploring alternatives once the Monbulk Aquatic Centre is redeveloped and opened. 

As a result of the recent identification of structural damage to the Olinda pool, it is recommended that Council undertake an extensive community engagement process that reviews short and long term options for the Olinda pool site, including options that would allow for continued enjoyment of the site well into the future.  It is further recommended that Council is provided with an update on the progress of community engagement to ensure that consideration can be given to options for the site well prior to the 2014/15 summer season."

 
RECOMMENDATION 
That: 
1. Consultation occur with the broader community on future options for the Olinda Pool as recommended in Council’s Aquatic Facilities Strategy.
2. Further report(s) be provided to Council on the progress of community engagement well prior to the 2014/15 summer season.

At this point I haven't seen the final engineers report so at this stage I will reserve my opinion on this. I will say this though:

"I support the Olinda and the wider Hills community to have a water recreational facility and if this means the "wider community" supports a pool, then I will support it."

We now need to understand what the community wants to see in this space. Ultimately the pool itself is damaged beyond repair, after serving its community for 50 years, it played an integral role in the social and wellbeing of all within the Hills community. I want to see something that will now continue this legacy into the next 50 years!

Lets make sure we get this one right! Lets make sure we develop something so ALL can enjoy!