By Alana Mitchelson
THE proposed Glismann Road development plan would “checkmate” landowners rendering them unable to realise the full potential of their land, an experienced civil engineer has warned.
Cardinia Shire Council endorsed the first phase of a plan to develop 20 hectares of rural Beaconsfield in May, despite objections from a majority of residents.
Civil engineer and town planner Peter Hanning, with more than 40 years of experience in major land subdivisions and the acquisition of land for development, told the Gazette there was now “no way“ Glismann Road development could proceed.
The Upper Beaconsfield resident said that ordinarily a developer would acquire what properties they could and consolidate the land into one title.
The developer would then design a subdivided layout with any accompanying infrastructure, such as roads, while working around the properties of those residents who did not wish to sell.
“It’s a very childish and quite ignorant plan that a six-year-old could have drawn up. It really is,“ Mr Hanning said.
“If this plan goes ahead, for the next 50 years landowners won’t be able to do anything unless it complies with the masterplan the council has drawn up. It’s a great injustice.
“It’s alright to have a forward view but they’ve gone too far. They’ve taken over the developer’s role and imposed an inefficient design.
“The council is naive. They’ve got to the point where they’ve actually stopped development proceeding.“
Discussions about development at Glismann Road began in 2006, and several plans have since been drafted to rezone the land from ‘rural’ to ‘residential’ living.
The most recent plan dedicated 1.5 hectares to public open space for a park at the top of the hill, which would affect four existing properties.
One woman would lose 35 per cent of her land.
Mr Hanning said the plan would prevent existing landowners from “subdividing in the simplest manner“.
“This is not even close to a strategic plan, it is a naive proposal – unachievable and inefficient at best – which only serves to reduce the true value of residents’ land, and prevents them from subdividing their land and taking advantage of an existing road network,“ he said.
“For example, if a current landowner wants to chop their property up into three for their children, they might be told that they can’t because the masterplan says there needs to be a road going through certain areas of the property,“ he said.
“And residents who have portions of their land set aside for a reserve can’t divide it, or sell it or do anything. A developer would look at that land and think ’that’s a piece of paddock; it’s no good to me’.
“It also makes no sense to have residents – who are not developers – pay for development costs, but it could be a way for council to quadruple the rates because of the potential for subdivision, as a council in the western suburbs has done.“
Cardinia Shire Council strategic and economic development co-ordinator Andrew Pomeroy said any future development would need to be “generally in accordance“ to the plan, if successful.
He said six landowners would be reliant on their neighbours before they could proceed with development.
“The Glismann Road area is an anomaly. It’s a bit of a novelty pocket of rural land in the midst of a growth corridor,“ Mr Pomeroy said.
“The worst outcome for the future of the area would be to have Glismann Road run straight through and for cars to come flying down the hill to cut through to the highway.
“We’ve tried to minimise the potential thoroughfare and draft plans for a main connector road that meets up with Beaconsfield Primary School.“
Mr Pomeroy said that if an existing resident did not wish to develop, they would not be required to do so.
“The development plan just provides guidance on how the area should be developed,“ he said.
“Based on the valuation of nearby properties and the cost to develop properties on Glismann Road, it is considered the development at present is feasible.
“Further analysis of this matter is being undertaken as part of a development contributions plan (costings). The council will consult further with the community prior to applying to rezone the land.“
Mr Hanning said he had bounced his view off a number of engineer consultancies and developers, and they had all concurred.
“Any prospective developer would want to acquire as many conjoined properties as they could and then design a road system to maximise their profit and minimise their development costs in accordance with their own design. This is established process and residents would then be offered maximum value for their land,“ he said.
“It’s never done this way. What the council should have done is made it a special zone, allowing medium density development or maybe allotments of about a quarter of an acre.
“If this plan goes ahead, they’ve frozen the land.“
Councillors unanimously backed the first phase of the development plan on the grounds that if the council did not produce its own plan there was a “real risk” that a blanket residential zone would be implemented by the State Government.
But a Victorian Planning Authority (VPA) spokeswoman confirmed there were “no development plans for Glismann Road” and that the issue was purely a matter for the council.
Glismann Road had originally been identified as an area for future “urban development“ in the Beaconsfield Structure Plan.
About $100,000 had been spent on development plans, reviews, reports and meetings in relation to the Glismann Road development plan as of July 2016.
Mr Pomeroy said the next phase of the plan would be for the council to create a development contribution plan before a planning permit could be granted.
He expected it would be one-and-a-half years before the panel process began, which would provide another opportunity for community consultation.
For more information and to view the plan, search “Glismann Road Development Plan” at www.cardinia.vic.gov.au.
