How to stop a highrise development

[traveller]

The local residents have been fighting a highrise development proposal for the last six months or so. The developer wanted to turn a former shoe factory site into an eight storey complex of 129 apartments :eyepop:
We are not opposed to development, but not this scale (we consistenly told the developers if they drop it down to four levels, we won't oppose it, but they want to maximize their profits :mad2:).
anyway, the council rejected the proposal and now the developer is taking the case to VCAT and have 6 expert witnesses lined up. The council will not be represented and three residents including myself will appear to represent the local residents. The odds are heavily stacked against us.
So what I want to know is can I use astronomy as a reason. You know the highrise will block out views and my right to private enjoyment of star gazing. "it's Mabo, it's the constitution, it's the VIBE of the thing" :P
Well, guess not, but probably no harm in trying...

[michaellxv]

Ask them to put a community dome on top. Does that get you above the surrounding local direct lights?

[jenchris]

The right to light is ancient and part of English law-
If you have had light, they can't build you out without compensation or your permission - You'll have to have a word with the lawyers.
Like you can't plant trees to block the light to someone else.
20 years rings a bell - if you've had the light for twenty years you have a right to keep it.

[Octane]

Astronomy would be the least of their concerns. I wouldn't even mention it.

I know it's the principle of the thing, but, I can't help but think you'd be laughed out of court if that was used as a main reason to stop a development.

Lighting along a road is one thing, but, to stop a development with that reason... something tells me it won't gel.

H

[ballaratdragons]

Having experienced fighting council about lighting, the last thing Councils, Developers, or Solicitors want to hear about is Astronomy. Nor do they care.
A Hobby is not grounds for fighting development :mad2:

And I had the support of the Mayor as she is an Amatuer Astronomer.

If your view is severely blocked that it reduces your property values extensively, or a certain percentage of direct sunlight is blocked entering your windows, the development is of a health concern, or overcrowding within a boundary, or Traffic or parking concerns, then you may (MAY) have a case.

[RobF]

I believe our company has had past building plans knocked back (by Bris city council planning) because of the shadow the proposed multilevel building would have thrown on surrounding properties.

[traveller]

I think there are two issues: overshadowing/overlooking into private open space (aka backyard) and also the test of "reasonableness" of such a development.
I certainly don't plan to use astronomy as a reason.
Safety would be another factor. The developer estimated up to 500 car trips a day will be made in and out of the complex. This is in a street with families with young children, about 6 in that street and 12 in the next street (mine).
We had a practice day hearing last week, basically the developer is not interested in mediation and wants to go to the full hearing arguing for their 8 level development proposal.

[multiweb]

As far as I know they need to provide a shadow diagram for the proposal. This means that any other nearby property that is affected by shadow casting (sun) across the whole year period have to agree in writing for the structure to be allowed to be built. The council are the ones providing the letters to all of you guys to say I approve or not. If anyone says no the building can't be built.

I had to go through the same process when I built up my second storey in 2003. I had to get approval from the 5 adjacent neighbourghs. That's the law. Bring this up to the table. If they laugh then find a precedent and there are many. They'll stop laughing.

[traveller]

Thanks Marc, yes the developers did provide a shadow diagram. However, under Vic planning law, they are only required to provide the shadow as at noon :mad2:
So while the midday shadow may look not too bad, it still means half the street will be in shadow until doubt 10 am during winter.
Bo

[multiweb]

Does it still affect anybody at noon? Winter or Summer? Any of you guys on the southern edge of the proposed structured. Remember, you only need one and the shadow diagram is your best bet.

[traveller]

The short answer is no. The development is on the north east corner of the street (adjoining a high street). Will check their submitted plans again tonight. Thanks again Marc.
Bo

[multiweb]

The shadow diagram has to be for the worst case scenario (i.e. winter) and it should span for at least one whole day. So it's the whole area that gets affected let's say the 15th of August between 7:00am and 4:00pm for example. Any property clipped in the dark needs to give approval or it's a show stopper.

[Poita]

If you have the dimensions of the building, long/lat etc. I could possibly do a basic animated shadow diagram for you if it would help.

[traveller]

Hi all, just an update on the high rise development. The Council rejected it and the developers took it to VCAT.
The developers had 3 expert witnesses and a lawyer. The defendants were the council, three local residents and myself. We all attended and each provided a formal submission. One person was an architect, and he demonstrated the inappropriateness of the proposal, overlaying it against existing mediym density apartment blocks near us. His partner was a urban heritage consultant and she set the record straight on local hisotry around the development site.
The other person was a geneticist and he demonstrated the developer's poor use of statistical analysis. My contribution was unearthing 2011 ABS data (they used 2006 data) to show they grossly underestimated car parking requirements and traffic flow.
The hearing went on for 3 days and on the final day, the tribunal members (2) did an actual site visit and witnessed first hand the congestions in traffic which we made.
The tribunal hearing wrapped up last Friday and we will find out in the next month or so what will happen. We all argued for a reduction in the development from 8 down to 4 (hoping to mediate to 5 or even 6).
Anyway, will update again once the verdict is handed down.
Cheers,
Bo

[TrevorW]

Anyone have solar power panels that is getting a rebate, because large buildings cast shadows that could diminish your ability to maximize your rebate.

I'd also site the Carbon emission footprint of high rise buildings and the affects of high density housing and the development of slums.

[ballaratdragons]

Sounds like your side put up a very good case Bo.

Also sounds like you were a very well armed group of experts.

The 'ultimate' outcome would be to have the building reduced to only 3 stories :thumbsup:

[traveller]

[QUOTE=TrevorW;847144]Anyone have solar power panels that is getting a rebate, because large buildings cast shadows that could diminish your ability to maximize your rebate.
QUOTE]

Thanks Trevor, unfortunately, solar access is not a priority, even if you have solar panels. There have been a few cases in VCAT where solar access denial to one property is overriden by the need to house others.



I hope so Ken, there have been serval nearby developments of 4-5 stories, so 3 would be dreamin' on our part.
We were armed, but not dangerous :lol:
Bo