Submission to KRS Working Group

Submission to KRS Working Group

Draft Urban Design Framework

City of Boroondara

Brian Walsh

KEW 3101

5^th May 2003

Note: E-mail Copy:
To extend access and clarify some References this E-mail Copy of the Submission uses Internet hyperlinks to original documentation instead of the photocopied Attachments used in the Fax Copy sent to Council. If hyperlinks have subsequently been changed the Fax Copy shall prevail.

A FAILURE OF VISION.

In my submission the Working Group should withdraw the current Draft UDF on the grounds that::

1. The UDF outcomes to date display:

Significant overdevelopment of the site;
Building hights and envelopes that are totally inappropriate and out of character with both the current use of the site and the Kew residential area as a whole;
Inadequate attention to open space; heritage values, biodiversity, and connectivity;
No apparent recognition whatsoever of the special needs and requirements of KRS residents, either now or in the future.

2. The UDF process to date has been flawed by:

A failure to provide an adequate and comprehensive community consultation process;

A failure to address the upper limit of ‘250 new homes’ on the site referred to by the Premier in his 4^th May 2001 statement; (see attached)

A failure to address the DHS publicly expressed expectation of ‘houses typical of any suburb in Melbourne’ as referred to on their website page about the KRS development proposal; (see attached)

A failure to act on and respond to the recommendations of the Group’s expert consultants who recommended over a year ago that further studies should be undertaken with respect to such matters as traffic, heritage, biodiversity, and connectivity; (see attached)

A failure to recognise the increasing importance (eg: due to the drought ) of the site as a source of food and transit for regionally significant fauna that use the adjacent Yarra Bend Park (eg: Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoos; Lorikeets, Microbats, and Grey-headed Flying-foxes.)
A failure to adequately respond to relevant Local, State, and Commonwealth Government policy developments including inter alia:

Boroondara Draft Biodiversity Strategy, January 2003 (eg Priority A. to ‘Prepare a Biodiversity Corridor Plan for Boroondara – SO2/3/4 p.17)
The Commonwealth Heritage Bill passed by the House of Representatives, November 2002, and currently before the Senate. (eg: see Woolley p.22 recommendation that Boroondara Council undertake a study of the whole Willsmere precinct as defined by its original boundaries)
Melbourne 2030 Draft Strategy, October 2002 (eg: Council to set Activity Centre boundaries); (eg: with respect to Kew Junction.)
Commonwealth Government, The Broadband Advisory Group Recommendations, January 2003 (eg: with regard to the potential social and economic benefits of broadband infrastructure sites.)
Urban and Regional Land Corporation, ‘masterplan, urban design framework and land release strategy for the Kew Residential Services site’, (see attached: URLC Annual Report 2002, p.19.
Victorian Government UDF Practice Note, September 2002; (Practices and Procedures to be addressed by UDF Working Groups, including examples of the level of detail required in UDF’s – see attached.)

B. SUMMARY

In summary I submit that, as a consequence of the above problems there has been a complete failure of the vision for this site during Stage 1, and that a new shared vision is required for Stage 2 that will address the need for consensus for action.

C. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STAGE 2.

1. A New Vision should be adopted in accord with current Government policy initiatives and priorities as follows:

"Develop the KRS site as a world leader in combining the effective use of urban open space, heritage values, and new technology to deliver outcomes in personalised healthcare, education, commerce, and government by capturing the social and economic benefits of new forms of urban connectivity and residential services."

2. Use the State Government’s September 2002 UDF Practice Note guidelines to get Stage 1 practices and procedures back on track, and to ensure appropriate expert studies and site models are completed;

3. Implement an adequate and comprehensive community consultation process, with particular regard to the needs and requirements of KRS residents. Publicly available material on the Working Group’s website should include lists of all parties who consult with the Group, and copies of all submissions.

4. Identify the roles and requirements of potential development and funding partners with regard to (1) above.

5. Redraft the UDF in accord with the DOI ‘UDF Practice Note’, and include a staged development timeframe that is first shown to be acceptable to all the current KRS residents and their advocate groups.

REFERENCES ( Online Links Sent as ATTACHMENTS in FAX COPY OF SUBMISSION)

Kew Residential Services to be Redeveloped, Media release from the Office of the Premier, May 4, 2001
Kew Residential Services, Our Organisation, DHS Website, Disabilitysite.nsf , March .2003
Extract: KRS UDF Preliminary Consultants’ Recommendations., March 2002
Extract: Boroondara Draft Biodiversity Strategy, Vision for the Future, Strategic Objectives, p.17 , January 2003
Extract: URLC Annual Report 2002, p.19.
Urban Design Frameworks, Practice Note, Department of Infrastructure, September 2002

Extract: KRS UDF Preliminary Consultants’ Recommendations., 2002 (See: ATTACHMENT 3. in Fax Copy)

1. A detailed traffic study will be required to investigate all traffic requirements and movement issues.
KRS Preliminary Site Report p.14. March 2002

2. An integrated study by the City of Boroondara of the original Lunatic Asylum Reserve should be considered…. (p.22) Further the role of this once continuous reserve is important in Melbourne’s history, and its fragmentation is unfortunate. A more detailed study of the precinct is warranted with a view to making its past as a reserve more apparent. This may mean specific strategies to reconnect separated activities and sites. (p.50)
3. Connections and links to the Yarra north of Earl Street should be identified and also pursued where possible. (p.52)
KRS Morphology Study, Leigh Woolley, May 2002