COUNCILLORS have claimed they were kept in the dark about the Deakin Avenue housing project.
While Mildura Rural City Council staff did have the opportunity to comment on the State Government’s proposal in its early stages, it is unknown, according to Federal Member for Mallee John Forrest, what comments were made.
“We can’t even establish at this stage what the department allegedly received from council, and that’s a bit of a worry,” Mr Forrest said yesterday.
Cr Max Thorburn agreed it was difficult to determine what comment had been submitted to the State Government about the project because the planning manager involved in discussions had since left the position.
“We can only presume that the planning department didn’t have any problems with it and then just signed off on it and sent the information back to Melbourne, that’s what I assume happened, but it certainly is a real worry,” Cr Thorburn said.
“There were some people obviously that knew about it.
“I think it did come to a (council) forum, but it was only talked about in the terms of what it was, there were never any plans at all.
“The mayor of the day raised the question of the units not having air-conditioning but I think his answer was that there was nothing we could do about having air-conditioning in the building.”
Mayor John Arnold has also said that councillors knew nothing about the development until a later date when the units’ lack of air-conditioning was questioned.
“Council officers may well have provided some advice that was requested by the planning authority, but at the end of the day the planning authority – the State Government – was responsible for notifying adjoining property owners about the development,” he said.
Minister Wendy Lovell recently told Sunraysia Daily that council’s coments had referred to issues associated with the width of car spaces and road crossovers, stormwater/drainage and waste management.
Council chief executive officer Mark Henderson recently said the Director of Housing had project control and that the Department of Planning and Community Development was the planning authority responsible for amenity issues and urban design outcomes.
“Council staff commented on the project as a referral authority, ie: what was necessary to satisfy council requirements for access and servicing,” he said.
“These problems may never have occurred if normal planning process, that informs neighbours of proposed development had been followed.”
Mr Henderson said he did not believe the building was well designed.
“There are plenty of attractive double story apartment and unit developments being built in regional centres but by fully enclosing this building with a metal cage the architect has thrown away the good design guide, probably to meet a limited public housing budget,” he said.
Encasing the building with a metal exterior, he believes, was a response to council’s criticism of the structure’s lack of air-conditioning.
Mr Henderson met Mr Forrest and representatives of residents yesterday afternoon to discuss privacy issues.
“Council will now seek to have further discussions with the Director of Housing to see if some remedial works can be undertaken to better protect the backyard privacy of neighbouring properties,” Mr Henderson said.
He acknowledged the housing development was permitted within the zone but said it was unlikely the final built form would have been approved if MRCC had been the planning authority.
“The building itself meets set back requirements and any double story building on the site would potentially pose the same problems.
“Council supports public housing projects but does not support bypassing good planning process that notifies neighbours and ensures they are aware of projects at an early stage.
“With a bit more thought on design and screening the privacy of neighbours would have been addressed.”
This article appeared in Friday's Sunraysia Daily 3-2-2012.
Email a friend