The reality of what’s happening to our neighbourhoods is evident in the following data. In the space of just 9 weeks, there have been planning applications for well over 600 dwellings. Given the current zoning and council’s pro-development stance, combined with VCAT’s endorsements, we estimate that probably 95% of these applications will be rubber stamped. We also suspect that councillors don’t have a clue as to most of these applications!
Featured below are just those multi-unit proposals. We ignore the countless double storey attached that is rampant throughout all areas.
1170 Dandenong Road, Carnegie – 3 storey – 27 units
15 Belsize Avenue, Carnegie – 4 storey – 52 units
93 Truganini Road, Carnegie – 3 storey – 28 units
98 Truganini Road, Carneig – 4 storey – 29 units
401 Neerim Road, Carnegie – 5 storey – ???? units (Your guess is as good as ours!)
254 Jasper Road, McKinnon – 4 storey – 7 units and shops
45 Ulupna Road, Ormond – 3 storey – 11 units
630 North Road, Ormond – 4 storey – 14 units
482 North Road, Ormond – 4 storey – 23 units
269 Grange Road, Ormond – 3 storey – 13 units
2C walsh Street, Ormond – 3 storey – 12 units
85 Robert Street, Bentleigh – 3 storey – (again, your guess is as good as ours!)
75 Patterson Street, Bentleigh – 3 storey – 5 units
2 Tovan Akas Avenue, Bentleigh – 3 storey – 8 units
455 South Road, Bentleigh – 6 storey – 10 units
29 Loranne Street, Bentleigh – 4 storey – 42 units
22 Bent Street, Bentleigh – 4 storey – 41 units
24 Mavho Street, Bentleigh – 4 storey – 28 units
150 Tucker Road – 3 storey – 23 units
188 Tucker Road, Bentleigh – 3 storey – 10 units
PS; TO RUB MORE SALT INTO THE WOUNDS HERE IS THE LATEST APPLICATION BY THE MRC FOR THE RACECOURSE!
Use of land for a place of assembly (Outdoor Cinema)
So, what was supposed to be used for racing has now become another money making venture for the MRC. What was supposed to create no noise, will now be blaring out movies at all times presumably of night and day. What was supposed to be the end of the MRC’s manoeuvring according to some councillors is still well and truly alive. And naturally residents are still being kept in the dark as to what occurred at the VCAT mediation regarding the objection to council’s miniscule conditions on balconies and parking for the C60. We’ve learnt that the VCAT member has made an order! When will council divulge whether they’ve caved in again or not?
Glen Eira Debates 
September 13, 2014 at 11:17 AM
Incredible figures and they only tell a fraction of the story. I don’t see Caulfield or Glen Huntly or Murrumbeena in any of the listed addresses plus all the other suburbs. If these suburbs equal around 600 in a few months then the real results would be close to double this for all of the council areas. That is frightening and unacceptable and with people doubling and tripling up and selling their land to create huge lots, then the number of dwellings will keep rising. Building 52 dwellings on land that held 1 or 2 houses is not on – in terms of drainage, parking, open space and overlooking/overshadowing. Residents will be leaving in droves as they already are but that will just mean more opportunity for over development.
September 13, 2014 at 11:27 AM
We remind readers that in their infinite wisdom Glen Eira Council also decided that there would be no MINIMUM lot size – in other words there is the potential to build on a handkerchief (ie some lots in the 487 Neerim Road decision were 199 square metres) and also the potential to subdivide and then subdivide again! Needless to say, countless other councils have included a minimum size lot in their zones. Glen Eira is simply not prepared to do anything that is likely to hinder development – that is the bottom line. The casualties are existing and future residents and especially those who have the misfortune to reside in the so called housing diversity areas that in reality offer NO DIVERSITY, since the vast majority are either single bedroom cupboards or tiny two bedroom units!
September 13, 2014 at 11:32 AM
Yep, Council has definitely opened the flood gates.
Planning officers have the authority to approve a development proposal if less than 3 objections are received. It used to be 1 but another Council slight of hand raised it to 3. 3 or more objections means it gets reviewed by Delegated Planning Committee (all planning officers, no Councillor involvement) who decide, on some rationale known only to them, whether they or Councillors handle it.
So heres the deal folks – neighbours should organise and object to every one of these developments. There are standard grounds for objections (height ain’t one them thanks to Council). List the grounds out (doesn’t have to be detail) and hand it round to the neighbours and include the adjoining streets (they too will suffer the consequences of overshadowing, overlooking, traffic and parking, noise, lack of landscaping, surface run off). Get them all to lodge an individual objection* and start calling the Councillors.
Councillors implemented the zones and have, under delegations, put the handling of objections in the hands of the Administration. Basically, clogging the system will force Councillors to deal with residents, face and address the issue. Don’t be fobbed off by Councillors telling you they can’t talk about the development because it hasn’t come to them yet. They set up, and can therefore change, the rules that determine when it comes to them and the earlier their involvement the better.
* Objections have to be lodged individually. Council counts petition type objections (ie. multiple signatures on one objection) as 1 objection regardless of the number of signatures.
September 13, 2014 at 5:19 PM
Great idea about objections. It can even work better in the long run. Every over the top application should have resident objectors going to vcat. Developers will get the message that if they want to build in Glen Eira then they should expect long delays waiting for vcat decisions. That costs plenty of dough when you’re thinking overdrafts, bank loans and sitting on multi million dollar properties that are standing empty. The longer they have to wait the more money down the drain. That’s when they’ll start thinking that maybe Glen Eira isn’t such a cash cow after all. Side step council full stop. They’re a useless waste of time and space anyway.
September 13, 2014 at 11:33 AM
A very good and interesting posting, well done folks
September 13, 2014 at 2:13 PM
And the development list doesn’t even include all the residences in Business Zones around main shopping centers and neighborhood centers whic are not classified as residential areas but exploding with residences ! Let’s discuss this too
September 13, 2014 at 10:34 PM
But there are almost none of these
In carnegie there has been almost no multi unit development above the shops even though this is one place where there would be minimal impact. I the original discussions with council back 10 years ago they were indicating that this was likely to be the location of high density development but alas, not to be, nearly all of it in residential Zones
September 15, 2014 at 7:55 AM
They are still using the same double speak today.
They knew then that the shops, banks and post offices would be the last to go because that land is more expensive (per sqm) than the adjoining residential lots and also because the retail/commercial lots are generally smaller and have been developed boundary to boundary which means higher construction costs. Lots zoned residential were/are cheaper to acquire and cheaper to build on and, unlike the lowly resident, all tax deductible.
True 10 years ago and true now – ask yourself what they are not telling you now (the names have changed but the culture hasn’t).
What I am extremely concerned about is that they are still continuing to do the minimum with regards to the impact these developments will have – drainage, traffic and parking, open space for starters.
September 13, 2014 at 3:23 PM
Are there any 3 or 4 story developments in Caulfield?
September 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM
Drive down any street and you’ll find them
September 13, 2014 at 3:50 PM
Yes, but not in residential areas as is happening in Bentleigh, Carnegie, etc. Here is a sample –
625 Glen Huntly Road CAULFIELD VIC 3162 – 4 storey, 5 units & shops
338A-338B Orrong Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – 3 storey, 8 dwellings, mixed use
87-89 Kambrook Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – 4 double storeys
681 Inkerman Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – 3 storey, 20 dwellings
356-364 Orrong Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161– 5 storey, ?????units
244-246 Alma Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – 3 storey, 6 units
September 15, 2014 at 2:35 PM
anyone know where the cinema will be? Will it be on crown land or there own land? think of the poor horses!
September 15, 2014 at 2:38 PM
if this cinema goes ahead. Everyone needs to ensure that this cinema does not breach noise guidelines and ring 000 to complain about the noise if it is running after the prescribed times. I think it must be in a residential area. Who was the brains behind this?
September 15, 2014 at 2:39 PM
Sorry – we should have made this clearer. The new application is (we assume) for the 4 storey screen that recently gained a permit from Council to be placed on the course (ie centre of the racecourse – crown land!). Argument was that it would be used for racing and people in the grandstand could view this screen. Now the ‘uses’ are expanding and expanding! Same old stor(e)y – give them an inch and they take a mile!
September 15, 2014 at 6:42 PM
so which one of using the crown land uses does this fit into. Im confused.