Marvellous Melbourne aims to encourage people to be informed about issues related to urban development in Melbourne.

Public Transport versus Car use

Depends where you live so what nonsense that areas with no public transport could be been called Activity Centres under Melb 2030, which said use public transport Mary Car use has mushroomed since the figures below were released back in October 2007. 

The chart below showed; Manningham East and surrounding areas as third behind Mornington Peninsular and Geelong as the least users of public transport, Manningham East and surrounding areas as equal third among the highest car users, Despite all the promotional material of our shared bike/pedestrian routes, Manningham and surrounding areas were the second least likely to ride bicycles or walk, behind Melton/Wyndham

The steep gradients are an impediment to both walking and cycling, particularly in areas around Doncaster Hill which vary between 6 to 12%. Page 12, GTA Doncaster Hill Study, September 2002 attached

Australian Referendum on Local Government - 14 September 2013 - Jack Roach BRAG

The main purpose for this referendum is mainly to provide clear constitutional power to the Federal Government to directly fund local councils for a significant number of programs that have been put in jeopardy by two High Court decisions handed down in recent years.

East West ? ..... or the Rest

Here is a graphical representation of what Melbourne could get for $14 Billion rather than the East-West Tollroad, i.e. a dramatic upgrade of public transport for the entire Melbourne network.

Asian built apartments "are not very good" says planner

TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. FIRST ATTACHMENT IS FROM THE FIN REVIEW WHERE PLANNER MARCUS SPILLAR IS QUOTED AND FOR ONCE WE HAVE TO AGREE WITH HIM.

WE ARE GETTING SHONKY APARTMENTS IN MELBOURNE. THEN THE OTHER ATTACHMENTS ARE WHAT JACK ROACH PUT ONTO HIS BRAG WEBSITE AND IT SPELLS IT OUT WELL.

AS JULIANNE BELL PUTS IN HALLO HONGKONG AND GOODBYE MARVELLOUS MELBOURNE.

http://www.afr.com/p/home/we_can_dictate_terms_to_asian_property_yekhSoJ...

Melbourne is under attack by greedy developers.

They dont care about ruining Melbourne but only about how much money they can make at our expense.

HOWEVER this is one that wont be built.

Planning Minister Matthew Guy has stepped in and has said NO this is not going to happen.

A feeling of relief spreading across Melbourne. More results like this would be welcome.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/tower-plan-could-doom-iconic-music-ven...

Reformed Residential Zones.

 PLANNING BACKLASH has been lobbying the Minister for Planning to protect our residential areas from unacceptable and opportunistic development and to return planning powers to our local councils.

We have worked with the Minister on these reforms and last Friday the Minister made a formal announcement on the subject (Refer to attached media release). In broad terms, the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ) and General Residential zone (GRZ) will require new constructions to meet Council identified neighbourhood character requirements with mandatory height limits .

The chart shows details of all the new zones.

Melbourne population increase

TIME TO SLOW IMMIGRATION DOWN , IT IS RUINING THE LIVEABILITY OF MELBOURNE AND FOR WHAT?

At this rate we will double in 40 years, is that what you want 8 million?. Planning and development will be a disaster.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/mini-baby-boom-and-mass-immigr...

Dr Mees dies following battle with cancer

THIS IS SAD NEWS FOR US ALL.

PAUL MEES WAS A GREAT MAN AND WILL BE SINCERELY MISSED. HIS DEATH IS A GREAT LOSS FOR MELBOURNE

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/mees-dies-following-battle-with-cancer...

MELBOURNE METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY - DISCUSSION PAPER

MELBOURNE METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY - DISCUSSION PAPER: MELBOURNE, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE FUTURE SUBMISSION BY LIZ BURTON

Time for Victoria to get moving - where ??

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-features/time-for-victoria-to-g...

The link above is to the Herald Sun and they have a huge part of the paper taken up by Agenda Victoria a call by a coalition of prominent business men. What they say is of course true, they say what we have been saying about our infrastructure which is overstretched to breaking point. They say it must be built, which we agree with. However not once do they mention the cause of it, which is the excessive increase of population we have been drowning under for at least 10 years. Fine to now try to catch infrastructure up but remember that each new person is estimated to cost $200,000 for infrastructure. The way we are going we will never catch up, meantime we keep building up and we keep building out and we keep being unhappy as we see our Marvellous Melbourne being damaged.

We are growing faster than even India

Here is the population news - we are growing faster than even India, we are growing faster than any other developed country at 1.7 percent ie 1048 a day and 60% of that are migrants. NO need to wonder why they keep building houses and why our roads and trains and hospitals are overcrowded and our lifestyle being crowded out.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/australia-23-million-and-counting-2013...

23 MILLION MILESTONE NOTHING TO CELEBRATE

SUSTAINABLE POPULATION AUSTRALIA MEDIA RELEASE THIS FOLLOWS ON THE STORY ABOUT REACHING 23 MILLION SEE WHAT TREASURY SECRETARY HAS TO SAY ABOUT IT

http://www.population.org.au/articles/2013-04-23/mr-23-million-milestone...

FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL EXHIBITION BUILDING AND CARLTON GARDENS

On Sunday the 21st April the Museum Management and the Residents of the Cities of Yarra and Melbourne gathered at the Museum for the launch of

FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL EXHIBITION BUILDING AND CARLTON GARDENS ‘YOUR WORLD HERITAGE SITE”

If you want to become a foundation member visit the website WWW.frebcg.com.au for more information or Email frebcg@outlook.com.

Crikey.com speaks out on population

TIME TO SPEAK UP ON THIS - NOT A HOPE OF GETTING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHT WITH THIS SITUATION, LET ALONE ROADS AND TRAINS AND SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS ETC, APART FROM THE ENVIRONMENT

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/04/19/population-v-environment-the-problems-with-a-big-australia/

Arithmetic Population and Energy

Dr Albert Bartlett of the Department of Physics at the University of Colorado USA speaks on Arithmetic Population and Energy listen on youtube.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umFnrvcS6AQ

Interview with Financial Review

Sydney is having real pain as democracy is whittled away and soon people will have no control about what happens to next door as 80% of development will be as of right. By comparison Melbourne is democratic and Marvellous.

See what the President of SOS Sydney says below and in the FinReview.

ROADS TRAINS AND POPULATION IN THE AGE AND MY RESPONSE

http://theage.drive.com.au/roads-and-traffic/city-roads-crowded-with-sol...

Link to the Age article on the road and train overcrowding and the statement that it is the population increase. Remember what Bob Birrell of Monash says - every 2 more people is 1 more car. Then here is my letter to the Age in response but true to form the Age bosses wont touch population, I think they want the increase to keep on going.

Social housing standards review could 'worsen rabbit-hutch Britain'

This below was just sent to me by the Guardian in England

We are not the only country suffering overcrowding - but then they are swamped with migrants too. People there also are crying out to have the doors shut and bolted. Have you thought about whether some of our blocks of tiny flats here in Melbourne are substandard too?

As MPs vote on loosening planning rules for private homes, Riba warns social housing review could result in people living without enough space or light

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/16/social-housing-standards-r...

Metro Planning - more responses sought

Tthe metro planning strategy survey continues and today it takes up a whole page in the Sunday Age. You can fill it in and mail it for free or you can do it online if you haven’t already done so.

Interesting that this is still being promoted after the 28th march closing date - maybe they didn’t like the responses from community group surveysand are seeking differnt answers to counter balance the very large number of our responses ?

http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1200676/mps-phase-3-community-survey-copy-...

Big Plans to increase the population in the regions.

Maybe Geelong is happy, but it sounds as though many surrounding farming areas are very distressed about the implications for them. The basic issue is the huge increase of population being forced on us by the Federal Government . Time to speak up and tell them to reduce immigration and to improve the overloaded infrastructure. Mary

The G21 Regional Growth Plan has been released to guide the growth and change of the Geelong region for the next 30-40 years.

Metro Strategy - A defence by the author

Roz Hansen, author of the Metro Strategy defending her position.
Most of us have made it crystal clear that we don't agree with her vision for Melbourne and now we have to make sure that we are listened to. We will get another chance to comment on the next round, but we want to make sure that the next document has changed according to our wishes.
Here is the link
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/hauling-in-the--sprawl-20130325-2gq0q.html

EPA Guidelines - Buffer distances

The new and extraordinarily weak EPA guidelines for separation of amenity-reducing uses is critically important, it has the potential to affect everyone. These are the requirements for separation of industrial and sensitive uses that the ‘buffer’ distances in the planning schemes at Clause 52.10 are based on. NOTE: It is not clear whether these new ones will automatically be put into planning schemes, or whether they will be modified beforehand.

Key features:

IMPORTANT: These guidelines are based ONLY on off-site residual odour and dust emissions. The separation distances are those required only for these issues.

NOT INCLUDED are impacts relating to “noise, vibration and hazardous air pollutants”. “While some odorous substances are also ambient or hazardous air pollutants, this guideline only considers these substances in relation to their odorous impact, and only for off-site residual odour and dust emissions” (page 3) Possible translation: smell but not noise or hazard

Many uses in the current Clause 52.10 are not addressed in these new guidelines, for example it appears (from a quick comparison) that rural industry, dry cleaners, freezing and cool storage and specific waste management and composting uses aren’t included (these also happen to be some of the uses being allowed or more easily allowed in the draft State rural zones). Many existing uses with separation distances of 100 or 200 metres are deleted, or said to have insufficient potential impact (for odour or dust only) as to not require separation (e.g. it appears panel beating – where noise is a key impact – seems to no longer be included).

There seems to be some ‘rounding’ of separation distances, with 200m going to 250 but 300m also going to 250, which suggests the distances are more uniform but aren’t necessarily reflecting the actual potential for impact. More rarely, some distances are increased, but that distance now applies for specified production levels, and may also include different elements of a use.

There are new qualifiers on many uses – for example the existing separation requirement applies to any amount, but the new ones say the existing separation distance only applies if certain volumes are produced. Many of the existing Note 1 and Note 2 requirements are deleted. Oddly, several uses which have current Codes of Practice (eg piggery) are newly included but referred back to the Code. Seems duplication, so not sure why.

If these new requirements are put into Clause 52.10 as is, Councils will be required to consider the matters not addressed in these ‘buffer’ distances, such as noise, vibration and hazardous substances. I think we all know how that would work…

The limitations of what these distances address makes you wonder why they’ve been issued at all. Is there any point in separation distances that don’t reflect all of the amenity (and health) reducing impacts of a use?

Syndicate content