fgm_c49_

Home / fgm_c49_
On April 07, 2018November 10, 2020
0
By

 

The Mayor and Councillors

Bayside City Council

PO Box
27

SANDRINGHAM
VIC 3191

 

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

 

Proposed
Amendment C49 to Bayside Planning Scheme: Beaumaris
Concourse Activity Centre

 

Preliminary Remarks:
BCS
Inc. takes exception to the prevalent response in
Attachment 1 “Summary
of Submissions” (Pages 71-87 of Agenda for General
Committee Meeting of
18th July 2006), which refers throughout to the
absence of certain
objections being raised at the Working Group on the
Concourse Structure
Plan. BCS Inc. was represented on that Working Group
by a single
representative, whereas the written objections that
BCS Inc. as a body
has provided in its later submission of
27th March 2006 relate to the separate and
distinct proposal for a
Planning Scheme Amendment and are our major and
considered compendium
of objections to the actual final proposal on which judgement is now to be passed
by the Council.

 

Recommendations to
General
Committee Meeting: BCS Inc. considers that the
stock wording in the
responses to our objections and most others in the
“Response” column in
the above Attachment 1 has been to issue a flat
denial, and not to
provide any argument, case or persuasion as to why the
objection should
not be sustained. BCS Inc. therefore maintains the
position it took in
its submission of 27th March
2006, particularly in relation to:

  • objection to more than
    two storeys,
  • objection to
    substantial
    increase in car parking proposed,
  • objection
    to failure to consider a PPRZ zoning for the
    Concourse Bushland,
    between Agnes
    Street     and Moyseys
    Run.

 

Beaumaris Concourse Parking Precinct Plan August
2005: BCS Inc.
considers that it is neither credible nor acceptable
for a “plan” such
as this to be silent about where the substantial
increase in car
parking provision is to actually occur.

 

BCS Inc. has already stated in its
submission of 27th March 2006 that it considers the
idea of CPI
indexation rather than actual purchase and securing of
land as a
condition of approval is naïve, and fails to allow for
the wide
disparity between CPI rate of price increase and the
typical rate of
increase of Bayside commercial land prices. See
article “Your rates and
valuations” on Page 11 of Bayside City Council’s
magazine, Bayside
News, Issue 23,
2006.
The March
2006
Melbourne CPI annual increase is 2.8%,
whereas the article
quotes a mean of 9.3% per annum for Bayside commercial
properties.

 

Further Modification in
Recommendation: BCS Inc. further objects to the
proposed
modification of the advertised Amendment that would
allow Council
discretion to consider a waiver of parking spaces for
the expansion of
a retail use within the Beaumaris
Concourse.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Adrian Cerbasi

President