The cry from residents should not simply be ‘save East Bentleigh’, but rather ‘Save Glen Eira’. Street after street is being ravaged and not only in the so-called ‘growth zones’ or in the major activity centres. Our alleged 80% ‘protected zones’ of Neighbourhood Residential Zones (NRZ1) are equally at risk of seeing the doubling of dwellings with resultant impacts on amenity, traffic, infrastructure, and open space.
Council clings to the myth that the zones (secretly introduced) have got nothing to do with this onslaught – that it is all the result of a statewide building boom. What is happening in Glen Eira has everything to do with the new zones and the appalling lack of ‘protection’ contained within the Planning Scheme. When other councils can do their homework and have structure plans, design and development overlays that mean something, parking precinct plans, tree protection clauses, development contribution levies for drainage, and our council refuses to even entertain such tools, then there is something drastically wrong.
Victoria in Future 2014 (a government ‘predictor’ of housing needs) asserted that from 2011 to 2031 Glen Eira households will increase by another 10,000. That’s roughly 500 new dwellings per year. Glen Eira in the past 11 months has had roughly 2400 new dwellings approved – with still a month to go according to the Planning Permit Activity Reports from government. Thanks to the new zones and an outdated and woeful planning scheme, Glen Eira is in the top ranks of handing developers carte blanche to build and build and build with barely an impediment to mega profits. The refusal to revisit, amend, and tighten the Planning Scheme has got nothing to do with the ‘building boom’ and everything to do with a culture that is utterly pro-development with little concern for residential, environmental and social amenity of residents. How any council can operate efficiently when its housing strategy is based on data from 1996, and planning scheme reviews are delayed and delayed, residents should start asking why? And how well our 9 councillors are doing their jobs in representing their constituents.
Below we feature applications that have come in over the past two months and have not as yet been decided by council (a token few have been ‘refused’ and another couple are for amended permits). Given council’s and VCAT’s ‘generosity’ to developers, we anticipate that 95 to 98% of these applications will get the nod. Please note:
- The scale of development due to the zoning
- The fact that it is basically the residential ‘growth areas’ that are being inundated and not the Commercial zones which council claims will take the majority of development
- A planning register that is not worthy of that name since what does ‘multi-unit development’ actually mean? Is this for 10 units, 20 units, or 100 units? Surely it is incumbent on council to provide full details (as demanded by legislation) in its online planning register?
- East Bentleigh, McKinnon, Murrumbeena, Ormond aren’t even Major Activity Centres – yet they are being over-developed and ruined – again thanks to the zoning!
- The list below does not include the literally hundreds upon hundreds of applications for 2 storey attached dwellings in quiet residential streets!
5-9 Elliott Avenue CARNEGIE VIC 3163 – 4 storey, 36 dwellings, reduction in visitor parking
86 Truganini Road CARNEGIE VIC 3163 – Construction of two or more dwellings on a lot (GRZ2) Buildings and works (SBO) Reduction in the standard car parking requirement (52.06)
10 Ames Avenue CARNEGIE VIC 3163 – 6 dwellings
9 & 9A Truganini Road CARNEGIE VIC 3163 – four storey building comprising 20 apartments
331-333 Neerim Road CARNEGIE VIC 3163 – 4 storey, 26 dwellings, no visitor car parking
455 South Road BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Proposed apartment complex & shop (C1Z)
6-8 Blair Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Construct a four storey apartment building above basement car parking and a reduction in the standard car parking requirement (visitor parking) (RGZ1)
21-25 Nicholson Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Construct a four storey residential building comprising 45 apartments above basement car parking and a reduction in the standard car parking requirement (visitor parking)
322-328A Centre Road BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Multi storey (max 9 levels), mixed use development comprising basement car park (62 spaces), ground floor retial and residential development (C1Z)
20 Bent Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Multi level residential unit building (RGZ1)
37-39 Nicholson Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – RGZ – Construction of more than two dwellings on the land (RGZ1)
14-14A Vickery Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Construction of 10 x 2 bedroom townhouses, dispensation 2 vsitor car parking spaces
77 Robert Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – The construction of a three (3) storey building above basement car parking to comprise of sixteen (16) dwellings
27-29 Nicholson Street & 20 Hamilton Street BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 – Construction of a three (3) storey building comprising of five (5) units, construction of a two (2) storey building comprising of five (5) units and a reduction in the visitor car parking requirements – Amendment
52 Hill Street BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – Proposed apartment complex with basement (GRZ1)
51 Browns Road BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 & 670-672 Centre Road BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – Use of the land for accomodation where the ground floor frontages excced 2 metres and building and works in a Commerical 1 zone, construction of a residential building in the General Residential Zone, reduction of car parking under Clause 52.06, waiver of on-site loading facilities under Clause 52.07, removal of an easement under Clause 52.02 (GRZ1)
9 Francesco Street BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – The construction of six (6) double storey attached dwellings – Amended
2 John Street BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – Proposed three storey of residential apartment building comprised of 12 units with basement car parking
48-50 Hill Street BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – The construction of ten (10) attached dwellings (4 double storey dwellings and 6 three storey dwellings)
46 Hill Street BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – Construction to the land for four (4) dwellings
12-14 Quinns Road BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – The construction of a three (3) storey building above basement car parking comprising of up to 30 dwellings
18 Browns Road BENTLEIGH EAST VIC 3165 – Construction of four (4) three-storey dwellings above basement car parking
16-18 Glen Orme Avenue MCKINNON VIC 3204 – 9 x 3 storey townhouses
3 Malacca Street MCKINNON VIC 3204 – Development of the land with three dwellings
151 McKinnon Road MCKINNON VIC 3204 – Proposed shop and 3 apartments
27 Station Avenue MCKINNON VIC 3204 – seven (7) double storey
29 and 31 Prince Edward Avenue MCKINNON VIC 3204 – three (3) storey building above basement carparking comprising of twenty-one (21) dwellings
193-195 McKinnon Road MCKINNON VIC 3204 – Construction of a four (4) storey building comprising of two shops and up to twelve (12) dwellings, a reduction of the car parking requirement and a waiving of the loading bay requirement – amended
245 Jasper Road MCKINNON VIC 3204 – four (4) double storey
10-12 Station Avenue MCKINNON VIC 3204 – 3 storey, 21 dwellings (refusal)
24 Station Avenue MCKINNON VIC 3204 – 3 storey, 7 dwellings
17 Rosella Street MURRUMBEENA VIC 3163 – 6 dwellings
7 Toward Street MURRUMBEENA VIC 3163 – 17 apartments with basement car parking for 19 cars
8 Murrumbeena Road MURRUMBEENA VIC 3163 – Construction of a three storey building comprising fourteen (14) residential apartments above a basement car park – Amended
3-5 Adelaide Street MURRUMBEENA VIC 3163 – 6 dwellings
600-604 North Road ORMOND VIC 3204 – Demolition of the existing building and construction of new six storey building for use at the ground level for retail purposes (shop) and the upper levels for residential apartments with 76 car spaces and 26 bicycle spaces. Waiver of the on site loading bay requirement and reduction in the statutory requirement for on site car parking associated with the residential visitors and shop. (C1Z)
34 Cadby Avenue ORMOND VIC 3204 – Multi-dwelling development (building and works) (GRZ1)
13 Lillimur Road ORMOND VIC 3204 – Construction of five (5) dwellings (2 double storey and 3 three storey)
534-538 North Road ORMOND VIC 3204 – The construction of a four storey building for use as 2 shops and 20 dwellings, a reduction of standard car parking requirements associated with the shops and waiver of loading bay requirements – amended
24-26 Cadby Avenue ORMOND VIC 3204 – Construction of a three (3) storey building comprising twelve (12) dwellings above a basement car park and reduction of visitor car parking requirements
235 Grange Road ORMOND VIC 3204 – The construction of a three (3) storey building above basement car parking comprising of up to eleven (11) dwellings and alterations to access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1
630-632 North Road ORMOND VIC 3204 – The construction of a four storey building comprising of two ground floor shops and fourteen dwellings, waiving of loading bay requirements and a reduction in car parking requirements – Amended
20 Wheeler Street ORMOND VIC 3204 – The construction of eight (8) double-storey dwellings and a basement car park – refusal
23-25 Rothschild Street GLEN HUNTLY VIC 3163 – Construct a three storey development comprising 26 apartments above basement car parking and a reduction in the standard car parking requirement (visitor)
19-21 Rothschild Street GLEN HUNTLY VIC 3163 – Construction of a multi unit residential development and a reduction in the provision of car parking (GRZ1)
2 and 2A James Street GLEN HUNTLY VIC 316 – Construction of six (6) three storey dwellings and a reduction in the car parking requirements of Clause 52.06 (refusal)
143-147 Neerim Road GLEN HUNTLY VIC 3163 -Construction of a three storey building comprising up to 30 dwellings above a basement car park and alteration of access to a Road Zone Category 1 (permit)
Glen Eira Debates 
July 4, 2015 at 2:24 PM
Scarey scarey stuff. That’s not the Glen Eira I and my neighbours want to live in. This council has got a lot to answer for.
July 4, 2015 at 2:51 PM
To whom it may concern I live at 11 Elliott Ave Carnegie. We have a ‘rumour’ that 5-9 Elliott Ave have been sold although no one has directly spoken to us about this due to the confidentiality clauses residents have to sign. We are directly impacted by this as it is next door to us to the north. I notice this development is mentioned in your list as applications that have come in the last 2 months. Where does one get this information and how can we get confirmation of this event? Also there is a corresponding ‘rumour’ that 8, 10, and 12 Elliott Ave have also been sold although no one has told us directly due to the previously mentioned ‘clause’. This development is opposite us and will join up with 114-16 Elliott. 10 out of 16 houses have sold in this part of Elliott Ave alone. HELP. Where do we go from here? This is a desperate situation and we have lost contact with out immediate neighbours, community and future.
July 4, 2015 at 3:25 PM
Council’s online planning register may be searched from the following link. Searches can specify suburbs or streets. Please remember that the register may be behind a couple of days
http://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/Council/Planning_and_building/Planning/Planning_application_register
July 4, 2015 at 4:47 PM
The units that they have applied to build ( 4 story) would already be advertised in China. Anything within a short distance from Monash Uni would sell very easily. In China the entrance to uni is so competitive so only the brilliant kids make it. The property market in Melbourne is a good investment and under the Federal rules they can buy a flat to house their one and only child whilst they are at uni. They will work day and night to ensure their offspring doesn’t end up working inn a factory.I have asked plenty of the new owners and all have a similar story. Too bad as there are some nicely restored homes in your street.
July 5, 2015 at 11:00 AM
I know Elliott Avenue and it WAS a beautiful street with well kept houses. My commiserations on what is happening in Carnegie and everywhere else. Council either does not understand how they are ruining suburbs and peoples lives or they don’t care. All they want is more money coming in through rates. The zones are killing Glen Eira.
July 4, 2015 at 5:03 PM
It is a shame that the planning scheme is not balanced. Many of the town planners that direct councillors will retire on a defined benefits super scheme. Of course these schemes regularly run short of funds and need topping up with millions from the ratepayers. The schemes were designed when people worked until they were 65, retired then died around 70. These days people live till they are 90.
The ratepayers will be rewarding these people for years.
They retire on a % of their final average salary and this is indexed every year until they die. If a someone dies on a directors wage they would be pretty well of. Say 65% of a directors pay. Yes some of the ratepayers are getting their noses rubbed in it well and truly.
July 4, 2015 at 7:44 PM
Unfortunately, this sort of sh*t is what our illustrious 9 Councillors unanimously voted in. Even those who spoke against the motion, in a great display of integrity/representing the community/courage of convictions (call it what you will) turned around, and voted for it
Why
– Crs. Delahunty and Okotel – had wished for an opportunity for resident participation but were outvoted in behind the scenes, contrary to local law, sessions. Lobo makes the same claim, but since he didn’t speak against it and I am not privy to the behind the scenes crap so the jury is still out on his performance.
– the need to present a united front – since when did residents become the enemy?
– what’s the point of voting for something you know is already lost – how about those little somethings known as
. representing the residents vs. the Admin, and
. complying with the local law (how do you know it’s lost unless the decision has been made behind closed doors).
– I trusted the Administration – what about doing your frigging job ie. understanding the planning scheme and listening to residents.
Good job Councillor’s – your disinterest has unleased a tsunami of pissed off residents. It’s unlikely that your past reliance on the community forgiving/forgetting is going to carry you through the next elections. Just listen to the quality of arguments presented by resident objectors at planning conferences and the quality planning officers presentations at the planning conference and in reports. Combine that with other recent decisions (eg. tree protection is too hard, heritage isn’t worth saving, turn around on open space acquisition, give CEO Newton another 5 years and many others) and the result is you have signed your own death warrant.
Roll on elections in Nov. 2016 – trying to push through the cr*p stuff in the year before the election while saving the year of elections for the safer good stuff (Community Grants, Opening of the Glen Huntly Reservoir Reserve) ain’t likley to work this time.
July 4, 2015 at 8:51 PM
The amount of development is truly remarkable. I cannot believe that all will sell since the prices are going through the roof. I’ve been told that units on Centre and Mackie roads are standing half empty. Looking into my crystal ball I see large areas of Glen Eira turning into one bedroom tenant zones where there is no sense of family life or community.
Council can try and blame others but they must take a large share of the responsibility because of what they’ve zoned as three and four storey sites. It does notning but give “certainty” to developers that they are welcome to produce plans that literally jam as many units as possible onto what previously was a single storey home. That’s not progress in my book. It’s greed by developer and indifference and greed by council. The more dwellings then the more rates and the more squandering of ratepayers money on more useless staff and more money for the ceo.
July 4, 2015 at 9:19 PM
Q&A
Q. And how well our 9 councillors are doing their jobs in representing their constituents.
A. All fail,
WHY
because they all want the 90 grand that comes with become the mayor, so they all kowtow like slaves to the king maker the CEO, groveling little peasants to the last
July 4, 2015 at 9:42 PM
Pilling a la Magee are there for 90K. Delahunty would have been a better choice for Mayor and Souness deputy with planning background
July 4, 2015 at 11:16 PM
Delahunty has got her eyes on the prize – a seat in parliament. No rocking the boat for this lady. If that means stringing along with Lippy and Jamie and Andrew, so be it. It’s all about good publicity and feathers in her cap like the Elsternwick Plaza that’s been talked about since time immemorial and the crappy little half street park that they are about to spend a fortune on in Fitzgibbon and Eskdale. The rest of Glen Eira does not enter into the equation. Councils and councillors are something we cannot afford. I’m all for getting rid of them.
July 4, 2015 at 10:28 PM
What’s happening in the Caulfield and Elsternwick areas? I’d wager that they aren’t copping this much development
July 5, 2015 at 7:02 AM
Actually, Peter, it’s happening there too – haven’t you heard of Caulfield Village, Monash Uni. Expansion and just wait for the former ABC site to come up for grabs. And that’s not to mention the number of 10 storey’s approved for Glen Huntly Road.
But I do agree that by far the current gold rush is occurring in Carnegie/Murrumbeena and the Bentleigh/East Bentleigh areas.
Council keeps telling us how wonderful their planning department is – and we are paying dearly an ever increasing no. of planners. Yet take a look around – the only things outpacing the proliferation of high rises is traffic congestion, lack of parking, demise of trees and heritage and the drop in public safety. Silly me, I thought these things were Council’s responsibility and all part of planning.
July 5, 2015 at 12:46 PM
A very quick check of applications for the past two months would, we suggest, reveal a different story to what is occurring in the areas included in Neighbourhood Centres and their residential surrounds of Bentleigh etc. Most of the following applications are along main roads and smack bang in the middle of major shopping strips. There does not seem to be the same amount of intense development in the residential hinterland in these suburbs as there is in Bentleigh, East Bentleigh, McKinnon, Ormond, Murrumbeena, and of course the devastated Carnegie. We posit that this is entirely the result of council’s planning and the introduction of the zoning which tells developers to ‘go for it’ – plus land is generally cheaper in these suburbs. All incentives for major over-development.
4 – 6 Hudson Street CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – Construction of four dwellings over two allotments in a neighbourhood residential zone pursuant to clause 32.09-5
356-364 Orrong Road CAULFIELD NORTH 3161 – Construction of a five-storey building comprising a supermarket, not more than 64 dwellings, basement car park, reduction in the car parking requirement and the display of business identification signs – Amended
466 Dandenong Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – Construction of a three storey building comprising 14 dwellings and a basement car park; and a reduction in the visitor car parking requirements of Clause 52.06
132 Hawthorn Road CAULFIELD NORTH VIC 3161 – Construction of a four storey building (containing a shop and dwellings) and associated works on common property including car parking and waiver of loading bay requirements
1048 Glen Huntly Road CAULFIELD SOUTH VIC 3162 – Construction of four (4) double storey dwellings
342 Hawthorn Road CAULFIELD SOUTH VIC 3162 – Construction of five storey building comprising use and development of 18 dwellings, reduction of statutory car parking requirements, waiver of loading bay and bicycle storage requirements, demolition and buildings and works on land affected by a Heritage Overlay (refusal)
991 Glen Huntly Road CAULFIELD VIC 3162 – The construction of a 3 storey building comprising 11 dwellings and a reduction of the standard parking requirement for resident visitors
114 Murray Street CAULFIELD VIC 3162 – The construction of four (4) double storey dwellings
28 Riddell Parade ELSTERNWICK VIC 3185 – Construction of an eight storey mixed use development comprising shops, food and drink premises, dwellings (54) and offices; Reduction in the statutory car parking requirement; Waiver of the statutory loading bay requirement; and Variation of the drainage easement on the northern boundary generally in accordance with the endorsed plans – Amended
1-3 Carre Street ELSTERNWICK VIC 3185 – Development of a four (4) storey building with basement to be used for thirty-four (34) dwellings and three (3) cafe/restaurants and associated sale and consumption of liquor, a reduction in car parking requirements and the waiving of the requirement for a loading bay. (refusal)
5-7 Nepean Hwy ELSTERNWICK VIC 3185 – Construction of a part four and part five storey building comprising 53 dwellings above basement car parking and alteration of access to a Road Zone Category 1
15-19 Gordon Street ELSTERNWICK VIC 3185 – Demolition of existing building and construction of an eight (8) storey building containing 55 dwellings and food and drink premises; reduction in statutory car parking requirement and buildings and works in a Heritage Overlay – Amended application
538 Glen Huntly Road ELSTERNWICK VIC 3185 – Construction of a three (3) storey building comprising of up to twenty (20) apartments with basement car parking and a reduction to the requirement of Clause 52.06 (visitor parking)
July 5, 2015 at 12:45 PM
The alleged “planning system” is shite. Many of the flaws have been discussed here, but there is no political interest in improving the situation. From top to bottom, no decision-maker wishes to take “credit” for the outcomes they have contributed to. Unaffordable housing is a consequence of federal government policies that artificially inflates demand. Victoria In Future 2014 doesn’t actually make predictions: it makes projections based on current trends. Nobody can know what the future population demand will be since that is dependent on the immigration policies of future governments and the fertility of Victorian women [currently at 1.8, or less than replacement rate].
The planning system is also broken at State level, but critically, with bipartisan support. It is essentially distributed over many Ministers: Minister for Planning; Minister for Local Government; Attorney-General; Minister for Transpport etc. Councils by law [Local Government Act] are supposed to have regard for the long term and cumulative effects of their decisions. LGA doesn’t apply to VCAT—it is free to be as reckless as it likes when it replaces Council decisions with its own. The A-G supported fee increases of 1800% for various VCAT applications and lied about the magnitude of the increases in a press release.
DELWP and its predecessors have never allowed the purpose, objectives, role, functions or powers of Local Government guide its policies. Planning Panels when sitting in judgement of a proposed Amendment are free to say pretty much what they like—there are no formal decision criteria. Planning schemes don’t contain decision criteria either—just a bunch of topics that a decision-maker is supposed to consider or have regard to. VCAT has the freedom to do what it likes except in the very limited places where it is prohibited from doing so.
If you go back to when C25 was introduced, Council spelt out its “preferred character” for the residential areas around Activity Centres. It bears no resemblance to what is actually happening. Cr Hyams and senior officers claimed to the Planning Minister that community consultation was not necessary when the new Residential Zones were imposed on us [C110], because of the “extensive” consultation that took place in 2003. This wasn’t the view of Council, as Council didn’t vote on any such motion.
The Minister proceeded to lie to Parliament when he claimed the Amendment was prepared at the request of GECC. GECC didn’t make the request—an officer did, without authorisation from Council. It turns out that the Department doesn’t check whether an officer has the appropriate authority when it receives requests from them. There was no Council vote on the matter. Instead Council deliberately evaded answering questions about what it had decided to do.
The Planning Scheme is supposed to be reviewed every 4 years. [It was 3 years, but State Government unilaterally increased it.] The last GECC review was done in 2010. A lot has changed since then. The public is increasingly aware of the flaws in the planning scheme. Further, there is a lack of transparency and accountability for decisions, no security of funding for infrastructure. There isn’t even effective democracy, which the government has tacitly admitted when introducing a pathetic and inconsequential amendment to PAEA about VCAT considering the number of objections.
Elliot Av has been sold out, quite literally.
July 5, 2015 at 9:24 PM
Since this blog rules out “corruption, kick backs” call it what you want you like, as a driver for all these strange bureaucratic behaviors. There is not to much point in having any in depth discussion on why Glen Eira is what it is.
In most causes corruption is the reason behind most bureaucratic systematic failures of these magnitudes. History tell us this, until residents call a stinking fish for what it is. Great profits will flow to who knows whom.
July 20, 2015 at 12:32 PM
Omg!
I had no understanding that there was so much over developing in our community.
We need to get together and save the best suburbs in Australia.