By Parker McKenzie
A hyper-local feud between Saint Elmo Street residents and a retirement village was delivered by a VCAT resolution on Friday 8 July, which rejected the proposed building permit for the two-storey development.
Not-for-profit aged care provider Glengollan Village proposed to develop an area across the road from their current facilities to house 108 aged-care residents at 2-8 Saint Elmo Street. Their current facilities were established in 1956 and can house 90 residents.
The VCAT tribunal found the principal failing of the proposal is “its inadequate response to addressing vegetation removal and the subsequent provision of new landscaping that balances the management of bushfire, landscape and waterway management on the site.”
“Based on the information before us we cannot conclude that the relevant objectives of the SLO2 and ESO3 overlays are met,” the tribunal wrote in the conclusion.
“Therefore, for the reasons set out above, the decision of the responsible authority is affirmed. No permit is granted.”
The Significant Landscape Overlay — or SLO2 —applies special controls for development and building in the area of the Dandenong Ranges foothills contained in Knox City. The Environmental Significant Overlay Schedule 3 — or ESO3 — applies similar controls based on areas with high environmental worth.
Knox City Council rejected the planning permit on 24 May 2021 after extensive advocacy work from the local community resulted in 463 objections from 385 objectors. Glengollan Village subsequently appealed the decision with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
Local resident Stephen Herbut said there were a lot of people in the community who understandably thought winning at VCAT would be a hard thing to do.
“The bulk of the work was community driven. There were five, nearly six, full hearing days in VCAT in April,” he said.
“The tribunal members, of which there were two, came out and inspected the property and then they requested some additional information.”
In response to the VCAT decision, Glengollan Village President Neville Sanders said the tribunal was “supportive of the development in terms of building form and scale, landscaping around the building, amenity impacts, traffic and car parking and location.”
“The area that required more planning was the area at the rear of the property which will provide a visual aspect for residents of the home however will not be utilised for any other purpose,” he said.
“Glengollan Village is considering its options for the way forward.”
In November 2021, Transport Matters Party MP Rodney Barton visited the site at the request of local residents, before tabling a petition against the development in parliament.
“This will send a very powerful message back to the developer, there’s going to be a strong community resistance to anything which is inappropriate for that area,” Mr Barton said.
“I’m very proud of the way they’ve gone about it. The community has acted very professionally, very diligently and worked together. It’s a great outcome.”
Mr Herbut said he hopes if Glengollan still plans to further develop the site, they’ll consult more closely with the community.
“We don’t have any concerns per se with Glengollan Village, who have been in this area for 56 years and offer a valuable service,” he said.
“My dad built some of the original units when he was a builder and I used to play on the site when I was five years old. They offer fantastic services, it’s just that this particular proposal was unsuitable.”
