Bass Coast Post
  • Home
    • Recent articles
  • News
    • Point of view
    • View from the chamber
  • Writers
    • Anne Davie
    • Anne Heath Mennell
    • Bob Middleton
    • Carolyn Landon
    • Catherine Watson
    • Christine Grayden
    • Dick Wettenhall
    • Ed Thexton
    • Etsuko Yasunaga
    • Frank Coldebella
    • Gayle Marien
    • Geoff Ellis
    • Gill Heal
    • Harry Freeman
    • Ian Burns
    • Joan Woods
    • John Coldebella
    • Jordan Crugnale
    • Julie Statkus
    • Kit Sleeman
    • Laura Brearley >
      • Coastal Connections
    • Lauren Burns
    • Liane Arno
    • Linda Cuttriss
    • Linda Gordon
    • Lisa Schonberg
    • Liz Low
    • Marian Quigley
    • Mark Robertson
    • Mary Whelan
    • Meryl Brown Tobin
    • Michael Whelan
    • Mikhaela Barlow
    • Miriam Strickland
    • Natasha Williams-Novak
    • Neil Daly
    • Patsy Hunt
    • Pauline Wilkinson
    • Phil Wright
    • Sally McNiece
    • Terri Allen
    • Tim Shannon
    • Zoe Geyer
  • Features
  • Arts
  • Local history
  • Environment
  • Bass Coast Prize
  • Community
    • Diary
    • Courses
    • Groups
  • Contact us

Battle of the back yards

20/7/2018

21 Comments

 
Picture
Cr Geoff Ellis throws down the gauntlet in defence of the humble battle-axe block.

THERE have been a number of meetings between council officers, community representative and high ranking officers of State Government departments to discuss our planning scheme and the future development of Bass Coast.
 
Government apparatchiks have been supportive of our resolve to protect the character and environment of Bass Coast, though the underlying message from Spring Street is that people are coming, lots of them, so live with it.
 
From within the Chamber that’s much easier said than done. At the start of our term a shire-wide community conversation informed the four-year council plan that we crafted to guide our deliberations across that term. Our mission and values are enshrined in that document.
 
When we enter the chamber, as well as acknowledging our First Nations people and our councillor commitment to fairness, transparency and equity, every council meeting agenda directly references our values in relation to each item upon which we deliberate.
 
During our term we have delivered verdicts on developments that include small, angular blocks of land. We have also voted in favour of a couple of applications for subdivision of town blocks into battle axe blocks. Those votes haven’t always been unanimous. I recognise the merit in some of the objections to battle-axe subdivisions.
These discussions are the reason we (councillors) are in that room in the first place. We are there to represent the community.
 
Just to be clear, “battle axe” refers to a block with street access via a narrow driveway that passes another block that fronts the street. There are already a lot of them in Wonthaggi and more are anticipated, At this week’s council meeting we were required to decide on another of them, this time in Inverloch’s Cuttriss Street.
 
When these applications arrive on our virtual desks there are many facets to consider. Although the overriding parameters for our judgement are set in the Bass Coast planning scheme, we also need to consider the objections that have bought them to our chamber.
 
As our population grows, we either have to increase township density or extend the township boundaries. Amongst our values, environmental protection implies retention of boundaries and liveability implies good design which we enforce through the planning scheme.
 
When I resided in the gentrified tenement terraces of South Melbourne, the only access to backyards was through the front door. (The rear lanes were locked for security reasons, sorry Cr Kent) I suspect battle axing is at least an advance on that.
 
Our mission statement includes the words "ensure equity and balance and liveability and environmental protection ... in realising the community's vision."
 
All those “ands” might be grammatically confronting but they are ours to live up to. Without prejudicing any future decisions or breaking confidentiality, I can say that discussions around battle axing are robust and centred upon amenity, local character, liveability and emergency access.
 
Personally, I see that some battles axe driveways could be improved. Twenty metres of concrete drive fenced with metal and lacking vegetation or imagination hardly inspires. We already have many such driveways around us. Which, in my increasingly less humble opinion, makes it hard to draw an equitable line in the sand and say "no more!"
 
If we could apply some sort of guideline that set parameters for materials, colours and artistic treatments I would be happy to go down that path but I suspect that application would rely on financial inducement.
 
Personally, I see battle axe subdivisions as a better alternative than four or more town houses on one small block – both have their place and most battle axe blocks at least provide a backyard that can house a swing or trampoline and provide privacy for people to sit in the sun and read library books. A cosy townhouse with great neighbours has other charms and appeal.
 
To me, well designed battle axe blocks are a way to increase density while still allowing for preservation of our precious miners’ cottages. 
 
There will always be a need for low-cost housing and battle axing is one way that folk approaching retirement can add to their savings to improve their quality of life. It's also an opportunity for someone to pay off their mortgage and achieve financial independence.
 
In short - I agree that they can be far from ideal but, like those small angular blocks that receive such scorn and derision in some quarters, they are driven by economics rather than aesthetics.
Families on tight budgets will always need small blocks. Although square blocks with high fences might not please a critical eye, as long as they meet the requirements of the planning scheme we have little option other than to abide by our commitment to make decisions that are fair, honest, open and accountable or have another go at the planning scheme.
 
No ratepayer or resident has ever asked me to completely stop battle axe blocks. 

21 Comments
ian samuel
20/7/2018 04:59:58 pm

Cr Ellis has made a very salient point.
The natural character of Phillip Island must be maintained for future generations.
As Melbourne's population grows down the South Eastern corridor, the pressure to expand the town boundries and open further rural land for development is a major threat to the Islands unique environment and green credentials.
Higher density building within existing town boundries is the only option available to meet the increasing population.
Hammer blocks are one of those strategies that enables growth without expansion and meet societies current and unfortunate trend, for smaller blocks with less outdoor maintenance.

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 08:34:13 am

Ian, you've hit the nail on the head. We need to consider all our options for managing growth and preserving our environment. Thanks for taking the time to consider my thoughts on this matter.

Reply
James
20/7/2018 05:41:14 pm

I don't think there is a solution to all the people who will move to Bass Coast in the next 20 years. Except in my case I plan to move to Coota when someone from Melbourne offers me a ridiculous sum of money for my place looking over the bay. Keep on moving East.

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 08:37:38 am

Hi James,

I escaped the Western Suburbs of Sydney a decade ago and I'm staying in Bass Coast.

Reply
Jeff Sim
20/7/2018 06:08:12 pm

Interesting front page of the Sentinel Times ,"house prices up by 14%". A few pages in, " homeless numbers on the increase". So increasing house prices are good for...who?

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 08:42:25 am

Jeff, I'm glad you mentioned homelessness, its growing too and all levels of government need to take it much more seriously do something substantial. Good question. Cheers, Geoff

Reply
Mohan de Run
20/7/2018 10:08:53 pm

Geoff Ellis defending Battle Axe Blocks shows an element of misguided thinking creeping into his normally tolerable, active although 'alternative' brain. No battle axe blocks for Inverloch - Geoff.. Any attempt to go there by any councillor will be rewarded with the battle axe falling heavily on them at the next election. Have fought this issue and won at VCAT and will fight it again if necessary to ensure it stays out of Inverloch.
We love our neighbourhood character out here. That's why lots of us left the suburbs of Melbourne. So if you are testing the water, go no further because you may not be able to swim out of the rip. Mohan de Run .

Reply
Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 08:52:26 am

Thanks Mohan, your advice is much appreciated. Sounds like I need to stop avoiding mirrors.

Reply
Frank W Schooneveldt
21/7/2018 06:19:04 am

Geoff,
As usual you write a nice reflective deflective piece to create lots of noise and to get the people of the Bass Coast off track to what are the important issues like Financial Management and Managing Growth in the Bass Coast.
One of the issues Geoff is that the State Government requires all Councils to have at least 15 years worth of residential land supply.
Can you please advise if this requirement has been met by Council and if not why not?
In last Tuesday’s SGST we were told that house prices in Wonthaggi have gone up 14.9% over the past 13 weeks.
Isn’t this huge increase in property prices due to the fact that Council has failed to meet it statutory requirements of having 15 years of residential land available?

Please advise
Cheers

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 08:31:22 am

Hi Frank,

I value your input into these ongoing discussions. My remit for this piece was to talk about the recent meeting and try to provide background to one decision.

We get regular updates about land availability.Being a Saturday morning I am on my way to a resident and ratepayers meeting where one of our senior planners is going to present about development applications in the area and I will post the exact figure for our statutory land reserve this evening.

This article is about managing growth. Noise?

I share your view about the importance of fiscal management. A few meetings back we had over two hundred people in attendance at our General Meeting, asking us to protect their neighbourhood amenity. When the next item, the budget, was mentioned, all bar a few dozen rushed for the door.

We need your help to get the general public to understand how the budget affects everything we do.
Cheers

Reply
Pete Granger
21/7/2018 08:41:12 am

Geoff, One only has to go for a Sunday drive through Cranbourne to fully appreciate the expansive blocks of land in Wonthaggi and district. In an increasingly over-populated world the latter deliver that great rarity, breathing-space. But this is about to change. Inevitably, we will compartmentalise, as well as grow up and/or out. Battle-axe blocks are perhaps inevitable. However, it is imperative the miner’s cottage streetscape is preserved.

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 08:56:21 am

Pete,

I totally agree. It would be interesting to hear what else people hold dear in our urban landscapes. And our beautiful countryside. Cheers

Reply
Peter
21/7/2018 09:51:04 am

Geoff,
I did include other (edited) comments in my reply which I hold very dear. I will attempt to be less controversial. Can you advise why the owners of the national trust listed Boys Home (Newhaven) have not secured their property. It is falling into complete disrepair. Is there any requirement for them to protect this property from vandalism, and if not, why not?

Frank W Schooneveldt
21/7/2018 08:48:42 am

Thanks Geoff for the quick response. I look forward to receiving your update this evening.
I am happy to continue to talk about the importance of Financial Management and Budgetting for managed growth.

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis link
22/7/2018 08:45:36 am

Good Morning Frank.

Sorry that I failed to post the exact figure last night, the correct answer is more complex than I assumed, which is why councillors need well qualified officers and staff to support them. For this weekend can I suffice to say that we are meeting the statutory requirement and need to focus on availability levels in the coming decade? I know that doesn't exactly answer your question or meet the commitment I made but I am trying to be 1/ accurate, 2/ honest and 3/ informative. And this is why we need to keep talking about this, and other issues. I'll update you (and the other reader) ASAP.

Reply
Frank W Schooneveldt
22/7/2018 08:59:54 am

Thank you Geoff for the update.
We look forward to receiving your more considered response when available.
Growth Is inevitable but it needs to be well managed so that we and the future generations can continue to enjoy the beautiful Bass Coast.
The older I get the more I realise that we are just minders for the next generation.
Cheers

michael whelan
21/7/2018 11:21:22 am

Geoff You have a nice conversation going here.

I share your view that increasing density is preferable to expanding town boundaries and losing the green bushland or agricultural space. But we need to consider that increasing density in the Battle axe way does grey out the settlement area.
The battle axe approach is a response to the poor way we have done subdivisions in the past and continue to do – that is a defined fenced block. I have railed at this at Council meetings and continue to hope for an enlightened approach that is not based on isolation from one’s neighbours.
I was pleased to hear that there is work being done to work on a precinct approach to redevelopment ie take a number of properties and redesign for greater living density including more green areas and open space. This of course would be harder to achieve but the outcome for the suburb would be beneficial if you value community and open space.
In respect to your point regarding it being a way for battlers to get an income lift. I doubt that one and expect that mostly they cannot afford the development costs. Rather I expect they sell off to a developer who makes the money in the transaction. I would welcome data on that point.

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
21/7/2018 05:14:49 pm

Thanks Michael,

Anecdotal: I know a few rural land holders have paid the mortgage off by battle axing ten acres into 5 plus 5 and not having to move the house. I get that urban application of battle axing is different.

As is inherent in your contribution, this is a legacy issue compounded by growth, our planning scheme, the Victorian planning scheme and financially driven development.

I attended a meeting of the Coronet Bay Resident and Ratepayers association today and the planning/ development discussion went for over an hour. Issues
raised included minimum road widths, staging of developments and infrastructure and drainage, just to name a few.

I think the message from today is that we need to work with the community and I am grateful that they took the opportunity to tell us what matters.

Reply
Anne Heath Mennell
22/7/2018 01:26:46 pm

I'm coming into this discussion late but, bearing in mind that we are having to work with what we have, I would suggest that battle-axe blocks tend to allow more green open space than three or four units on a single block. Access to the natural world is vital for everyone, especially children, and what better way to do this than to have a garden right outside your house? Research is mounting to support the multiple benefits - physical, emotional, communal and even spiritual - of gardens. Perhaps we need to change our current planning schemes accordingly? If nothing changes soon our children's futures will be dire.

Reply
Cr Geoff Ellis
23/7/2018 10:10:53 am

Thanks for contributing to the conversation, Anne.

Your input about the benefits of gardens is unarguable. Comparison of aerial views of townships past and proposed would be an interesting study in the reduction of backyards.

Reply



Leave a Reply.