MARIBYRNONG > Footscray, Maribyrnong, Edgewater etc...

[Melb_aviator]

Originally Posted by mia won

I believe that Wests road proposal will become a role model to direct the rest of development in future.

we should design the environment not just simply add the cool features or gadgets of sustainability in the buildings. architect have to become more than designer, 2d facade or 3d architectural object. Architect need to become Eco designer with all resources, integrate and consumption live over for the nature environment. the fact is that residents want to maintain their existing sustainable lifestyle. However, this proposal are fail to integrate and make a consumption on it. Are we ready to afford to be hedonistic sustainability? It is the main question that this architect afraid to speak up in front of resident to answer all their queries or let developer to make a decision dominantly. They all know that the design is bad. The question is why they want to be architect.

All well and good to have such ideas of grandeur, but in the real world architects design buildings to their clients needs.

If the client says deliver me A an architect won't give them B. It needs to stack up financially and meet the clients brief. Expecting anything else shows a real lack of understanding of the process.

[mia won]

in real world, architect could not think of design and present it...!!? it would be end up their business soon. Sorry for this group of professional, some of them are changing their career in order to pay their bills and expenses.

But stlll, there have couple of young, talent and emerging architect and passion about doing the best stuff for our community. Not easy but at least they all speak loud in front of audience to judge and listen their mind of thoughts. They are expert in design and they know the best and try all big effort to integrate our society and community better. Have a vision for now and future. I called them "Architect" and glad to see their building firm on ground. This project is a footstep of using the oldies process and listen the brief (as you said). it is end up, flight, flight and flight again. Nothing improved itself. The worst part is bullying for community and people again, again and over again.Time to change!

[mia won]

There is a big problem. People don't have to give up some of their standard of living in order to live sustainably. Architect should help to improve and progress and resolve the project better. They want to see the progress for improvement. Again, developer start the argument with local residents, community, council and people. They have been making all argument but nothing for improvement....what an architect profession!

We note that the developers have listed 6 expert witnesses. Council must be able to match this and give residents the most effective and strong representation as possible. The decision has to be made before 3rd August."

Details click this link................http://mravic.asn.au/

Unfortunately it doesn’t really apply to the decision makers and developers who build buildings and determine what cities will look like. Their standard of living is already absurdly high and it’s subsidized by wasteful polluting energy sources, the wars we fight over them, the industries that subsidize those sectors, the exploitation of workers, the exploitation and ruination of land and climate and the disaster capitalism that profits from it, the list goes on and on, etc.

While it’s true that average people’s lifestyles would probably be overall better (more healthy and enjoyable) if sustainability were more common, the rich people who build buildings and who run our planet would have to sacrifice a fair amount of their luxurious lifestyles (including ridiculous things they even take for granted at this point like 4th homes) in order to pay for these better buildings and better cities for the rest of us.

That’s the underlying problem. Optimism isn’t enough to change the bottom line on why things aren’t changing despite the market necessity for them to change. The people who’ve got their thumbs on the scale aren’t going to let up. They’ve made that patently obvious in conservative politics recently.

Maybe in Denmark the wealthy are willing to be better humanitarians, and that’s great, and it’s probably why they have the happiest people on the planet according to the yearly ranking. But in America, China, Germany, Australia etc… the wealthy aren’t willing to give up anything. They only want more. And they want it by forcing average people to make more sacrifices, not fewer.

We’re certainly not seeing any hint that our wealthy are seriously interested in making the lives of average people better via green buildings, cities, working conditions, etc. Why? Because it’d mean their absurdly cheap profit driven developments would have to cost more. Their investors won’t accept smaller dividends.

Some of our more liberal leaders are always advocating for a better life for the 99%, but they’re overwhelmed by the number of wealthy people in America who are just callous and corrupt and wasteful, and became rich precisely because they were callous and corrupt and wasteful.

[Melb_aviator]

ummm.. Are you going to go on and on about it??

Sorry, but your point has been heard but most understand the reality of development. Your ideological stance is all well and good, but it doesn't change the reality, as much as you seem to suggest otherwise.

[melburn21]

is anyone else imagining mia won's accent while reading his posts? in my mind i read in his accent lol...

[mia won]

design does not need to make a "Protestant" sacrifice in order to be ecologically or socially attuned. seriously the first sight of this design was shock,and feel disappointed. But when it come to detail, this design seriously not very practical. The parking at the bottom part was full of omission. It is just very student work. In fact, I noticed that most of units plans are a copy of Willow-park development. Can't wait to see more from this outcome.

[Grollo]

The Westst Road site is a disused industrial site loacted adjacent to a tram line and surrounded by roads on three sides.

It is the prefect location for a high density residential development.

The proposal satisfies all of the requirements of the planning scheme and the only grounds of refusal are that it will be an 'overdevelopment' and will not fit into the charater of the area (the site is currently occupide by disused industrial buildings).

This is a pure example of Not In My Backyard. Why should the City of Marybyrnong spend ratepayers money so that a select few residents don't have to see an apartment building in the distance.

[John_Proctor]

especailyl when the City of Maribyrnong recently had a Councillor suggest that their rate base was too small and they should consider merging with an adjoining council!!

[mia won]

It is incorrect that "The proposal satisfies all of the requirements of the planning scheme".

There have a big problem in planning scheme and guideline on this proposal. There have a set of planning submission on council's website. Please refer on it if anyone have a doubt. Developer also amended their proposal after few days rejected their proposal. She post on http://mravic.asn.au/ to put an Art shop at the corner....!!???

Their consultants team need to improve and resolve it those planning scheme. Councils also need to resolve their planning overlay and guideline issue. Architects and developers need to follow the standard and code to propose their car-parking spaces according to the number of proposed residents, visitors, disable, bike and services. If they adopt to use such sustainable walking or bike, road path must be widen and sideline with the existing nature strip. It is incorrect to propose 2 more blocks on plans. It is incorrect to block the continuous pedestrian path on site. The increasing development would be appealed over-crowded in Maidstone and wests road in future. Thus, Traffic officer must be widen the road network before heading to traffic congestion disaster in future. Keep it in mind, it is a mid-density residential zone, school and elderly nursing-home behind. Also, a key road access to High-point.

Nonetheless, It is offensive to over-shadowing 100% to family houses. It showed on their planning submission. It is an insult and offensive to see those drawings and appealed it to public and it is major and serious issue against planning guidelines.

Quote: "A duty of care is an obligation not to cause harm to someone else. Growing number of inappropriate development, "people who may suffer loss or damage as a result of errors or omissions". Can't wait if someone would propose something "WOW" or developer should swap the architect.

[Grollo]

Did you read the Planning officers report presented to Council???

Just a few quotes:

The proposal provides adequate carparking to cater for residents and
visitors in accordance with the requirements of Clause 52.06. A permit is not being sought
for any reduction to carparking requirements. Grounds of objection relating to the adequacy
of parking therefore cannot be substantiated.

The applicant’s traffic engineer (GTA) has undertaken traffic counts within the surrounding
road network and has determined that the proposed development is not expected to
compromise the safety or function of the these roads. Council’s Transport department
supports this conclusion. Vicroads did not object to the proposal.

With regard to overshadowing, shadow diagrams prepared by the applicant demonstrate
that while at 9am there is some shadow cast over a small section of the Waterford Green
Estate, by 10am, the shadow has almost completely moved away from the estate.
Overshadowing over the property to the south is minimal, and will have no significant
impact on amenity.

[mia won]

http://www.jmcgroup.com.au/wp-conten...EVELOPMENT.pdf

Developer quote on their report after rejection:
Their report states: "Creates strong communities and contributes to the wellbeing of its residents
• Is inclusive and fair
• Is creative and promotes and supports arts and culture
• Embraces community pride and heritage
• Provides services and facilities that cater for all life cycle needs, backgrounds
and abilities
• Creates public spaces that are accessible to all
• Makes decisions in collaboration with the entire community


JMC is committed to supporting the Highpoint Activity Centre's goal of improving access
by walking, cycling and public transport to local services.
As testament to this commitment, JMC has had preliminary meetings with the GPT
Group, owners of Highpoint and presented its proposed development plans.
Ultimately, the development at 62 Wests Road will support Council’s key strategic
objectives for the Highpoint Activity Centre:
• to foster sustainable travel
• to enhance the public realm
• to address housing needs; and
• to increase regional employment."

Again, improving their proposal "JMC is aware of local residents’ desire for upgraded transport. JMC and Places Victoria .....working together with other relevant agencies including Council, Public Transport Victoria (formerly the Department of Transport) and VicRoads on transport plans for the region."


as their conclusion:

"JMC is aware of the residents’ desire for upgraded public transport
infrastructure, and acknowledges this proposed development is unlikely to provide the
sole impetus to governments to do so. And JMC is committed to working with interested stakeholders to continue lobbying all levels of government to improve public transport infrastructure.

This proposed high-density development located within the Highpoint Activity Centre,
located close to public transport, will reduce car dependency and encouraging a more
sustainable city. It will also assist in the long-term viability of a revitalised Highpoint.

the proposed development at 62 Wests Road would represent an exemplary development for the locality, creating a precedence and helping to inform future developments in the area in terms of scale, materiality and quality in construction. "

Can't wait to see their outcome!!! how developer would "Makes decisions in collaboration with the entire community"

[mia won]

http://www.maribyrnong.vic.gov.au/fi...ed_Minutes.pdf dated 26 June 2012.

The proposal fails to comply with Clauses 11.04-2, 16.01-3 and 21.11-2 of the Maribyrnong Planning Scheme as the overall scale is out of context for the area and will result in an overlay prominent development for its surrounding area.

The proposal fails to provide an appropriate transition in scale to the Waterford Green Estate.

[mia won]

Please feel to join the blog and leave your opinion. Our Maribyrnong resident and communities would assist and discuss your concern.

Maribyrnong Residents Association
If you wish to contact the association, you can reach us via the following methods;

www.mravic.asn.au

E-Mail: info@mravic.asn.au

Telephone: (03) 9317 7732

Traditional Mail

Maribyrnong Residents Association Inc
c/o 2 Warrs Road,
MARIBYRNONG, VIC 3032

[Dockside]

Enough already. We get your point, you are against development more than 3 levels in height.

[John_Proctor]

I know which of these I'd be more inclined to believe on the merits of this application with respect to planning:

Before the meeting:

Originally Posted by a planning professional with no personal benefit to make from teh decision on 62 Wests Road

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
That City Development Special Committee issues a Notice of Decision to Grant a
Permit for the construction of multi level building for the purpose of dwellings, the
creation of access to a Road Zone Category 1, use of the land for a convenience
shop, and the removal of native vegetation at 62 Wests Road, Maribyrnong, subject
to conditions contained in Attachment 1.

After the meeting:

Originally Posted by a group of non-experts whose self interest is not in the best interests of the community but in pandering to their preferences against development to get re-elected in 2 months time

http://www.maribyrnong.vic.gov.au/fi...ed_Minutes.pdf dated 26 June 2012.

The proposal fails to comply with Clauses 11.04-2, 16.01-3 and 21.11-2 of the Maribyrnong Planning Scheme as the overall scale is out of context for the area and will result in an overlay prominent development for its surrounding area.

The proposal fails to provide an appropriate transition in scale to the Waterford Green Estate.

[mia won]

General speaking about the public liability. Negligence is actionable carelessness. Torts are civil wrongs. They need to negotiate and resolve the major issues and get it right at this early planning stage. Glad to see JMC(developer) is acceptable tolerance and adjust their brief to reach the core issues of residents and councils' key objectives (as JMC report stated). Can't wait to see that they put all efforts into truly creating something that the community can be proud of...

[Dean]

Originally Posted by mia won

Can't wait to see that they put all efforts into truly creating something that the community can be proud of...

I believe what you're trying to say is 'creating something you and other NIMBY's who don't represent the actual community can be proud of'.

[mia won]

to name few local designer company. They do good stuff.

http://www.wilsonarchitects.com.au/architecture
http://sixdegrees.com.au/?&_suid=826
http://www.woodsbagot.com/
http://www.johnwardlearchitects.com/about/
http://www.maynardarchitects.com/Site/splash.html
http://chrofi.com/
http://www.dentoncorkermarshall.com/

local young architect in melbourne...amazing creativity...
http://www.hometrendesign.com/creati...ard-architects

also, Ken Yeang, eco and sustainable high rise architects.

I believe that design can be playful and creativity help to resolve lots of major issue. Furthermore, Developers should engage more young and emerging designers with passion to contribute into our community and society. Designer should learn to think as Louis Kahn. http://pinterest.com/pin/274438171013719685/

"The Sun never knew how wonderful it was until it fell on the wall of a building." Louis Kahn, Architect. Again, Thank you for leaving your comments and Good Luck!

[Grollo]

[Drunkill]

Those companies tend to have a bit of prestige, meaning they generally don't work for peanuts that smaller projects like this tend to offer.

Edit: ^ Good looking design, the street front around that corner is interesting, thanks for the post Grollo.