The Planisphere Report recommends that approx 1000 homes in 17 streets and areas are worthy of greater protection.  Planisphere  also sees as dangers to “neighbourhood character” some of the following:

  • Loss of original buildings, particularly if replaced with new buildings that do not respond to the key characteristics of the street.
  • Incongruous building style, materials, colour or form of building and roof.
  • Painting or rendering of exposed clinker brickwork.
  • Buildings over one storey.
  • Second storey additions that are highly visible from the street.
  • Development that breaks the general rhythm of built form along the street.
  • Boundary to boundary development or reduced frontage setbacks.
  • Buildings with an overall rectangular or box form or extensive surfaces of unarticulated brick or masonry.
  • Carports or large scale garaging, particularly if constructed forward of the building line, or dominating the width of the frontage.
  • Change to the location of driveways.
  • Change to front fencing style, such as removal of a fence, a high fence or a fence of different material other than brick.
  • Extensive areas of hard paving – greater than existing driveway widths.
  • Development that breaks the general rhythm of built form along the street.
  • Boundary to boundary development.
  • Double storey buildings or second storey additions that are not designed to be in keeping with the form, massing, window proportions and setbacks of other buildings in the street.
  • Buildings with an overall rectangular or box form or extensive surfaces of unarticulated brick or masonry.
  • High front fences, or fences constructed of an impermeable material.
  • Loss of canopy trees in private gardens or street trees.
  • Removal of bluestone kerbing.

If these are all “dangers” to neighbourhood character then we submit that the current building stock within most of Glen Eira is susceptible to these exact same “dangers”. In fact, it would be extremely difficult to wander down any street that hasn’t already experienced some of the above. We have instances galore, especially in Minimal Change Areas where: box like structures, some of multiple storeys are acceptable; where trees are not protected; where driveways proliferate at the expense of street trees; where bluestone curbing is ripped out and not replaced.

We urge residents to consider the above dangers and why the current planning scheme, together with the proposed amendment only deems 17 areas as suitable for greater statutary control. We would also welcome contributions about specific streets – ie. do you regard the street you live in as “intact’ and having “significant character”? Let us know which streets YOU WOULD NOMINATE – especially since council does not appear to be interested in allowing residents to name these areas!

It’s also noteworthy that the advertisement for the C87 Amendment appeared in last week’s Leader Newspapers. This week there is no repeat ad. Bad luck if you happened to miss it last week – especially when Council’s home page is also totally silent on the C87. We can only again point to the lengths that other councils go to keep their communities informed and up-to-date. For example the Stonnington home page features these planning issues: Chadstone Planning Scheme Amendment; 590 Orrong Road and Mandatory Planning Controls for Chapel Street. Once again we remind Council that ‘community engagement’ can only happen when the community knows that their views are sought!