Council |
Dwellings approved |
Subdivisions approved |
Area sq.km |
Density/sq km |
GLEN EIRA |
1,280 |
1,031 |
38.67 |
3183.57 |
Bayside |
35 |
492 |
36.96 |
2402.79 |
Boroondara |
613 |
18 |
59.96 |
2621.93 |
Hobson’s Bay |
457 |
8 |
64.21 |
1298.35 |
Kingston |
1,142 |
1,266 |
91.33 |
1465.91 |
Knox |
965 |
455 |
113.79 |
1295.7 |
Manningham |
837 |
215 |
113.47 |
1003.73 |
Monash |
964 |
150 |
81.48 |
2002.21 |
Port Phillip |
187 |
1,300 |
20.63 |
3905.51 |
Stonnington |
1,498 |
568 |
25.64 |
3509.97 |
Whitehorse |
830 |
888 |
64.25 |
2289.22 |
Yarra |
757 |
512 |
19.53 |
3530.48 |
May 9, 2013
Oh Calcutta!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[9] Comments
Glen Eira Debates 
May 9, 2013 at 9:53 PM
The Source for the table is the DPCD Planning Permit Activity Audit for 2011/12. See: http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning/planningapplications/planning-permit-activity-in-victoria/planning-permit-activity-report-2011-12
May 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM
Now I know why I’m starting to feel claustrophobic. Looking at the table the only council that had more building going on was Kingston and they’re more than twice the size of Glen Eira. Port Phillip was destroyed in the 50’s and 60’s where Elwood was turned into practically all flats. Stonnington is interesting but I suspect that with their large commercial areas many of the building have been redeveloped into units.
This does paint a picture of high density dwelling under the Newton regime. It is unsustainable especially when so little has been spent on basic infrastructure such as drains and traffic management. Can’t wait for the additional 1500 units as part of the c60. The density levels will go through the roof then. The stats confirm what a basket case planning is in Glen Eira.
May 10, 2013 at 9:11 AM
The numbers are for 11/12 so last years and this years should go the same way. More buildings and more crush. Someone put up a post about infill a while back and the warnings are proving true. Too many dwellings and too many people without the proper planning and without a thought for environment and liveability for residents.
May 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM
Just goes to show how desirable it is to live in Glen Eira. Congratulations to past and present Glen Eira Councils on a job well done. I live in the best suburb in Melbourne.
May 10, 2013 at 10:59 AM
Betya ya don’t live in Bentleigh, Carnegie, East Bentleigh, Ormond, near the racecourse, Murrumbeena and all those other suburbs that are being destroyed.
May 10, 2013 at 9:07 PM
Developers come to Glen Eira because they know they’re on easy street and will get what they want nearly every single time not like in other councils.
May 10, 2013 at 11:11 AM
Density per square k is but one measure of what is happening in Glen Eira. Combine this with the flow on effects of traffic, loss of open space, loss of vegetation, pressure on drainage systems, loss of privacy with dwellings built right up to fencelines and overlooking, higher energy consumption and density and its impacts become more significant.
Then there’s the bent of council to treat development proposals on a piecemeal and ad hoc basis and the above is exacerbated ten fold. The preponderance of 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings everywhere do not add to diversity. They are the slums of the future – poorly designed and poorly built with transient populations. That is not the way to create a sense of community.
May 10, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Was it not Lobo who once said that if we keep allowing such developments in the middle of nice streets then we will be heading to make Glen Eira look like Calcutta.
May 10, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Anyone see the leader article on the budget? Taken straight from the council media release which is all bullshit so the leader just copies it including the bullshit about this only being a 3.5% rate increase. Gosh I hanker for the days of some newspapers that deserve that name!