PS: We’ve received the following email from a resident and believe it needs highlighting. We have edited out the address.
Dear gedebates.
Our street, Elliott Ave Carnegie has now lost 8 houses, between Neerim Rd and Jersey Pde (railway end) not including the corner blocks on Neerim Rd to the rampant development. We were rezoned 2 years ago to RGZ1 and there are only 7 out of 15 remaining. We live at XXXXX Elliott and have found out the three houses next to us, to the north have been sold. We will also be facing 5 houses opposite us, all of which will be 4 stories, in a street of single dwellings. The dramatic increase in traffic, people and loss of our community is devastating after a peaceful and lovely 35 years.
I know this is happening everywhere. We feel helpless and incredibly angry with the council.
where to from here?
We featured Elliott Avenue several months ago – a street that was full of beautiful well kept homes that has now been sacrificed like much of Carnegie. See: https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/one-little-local-street/
Six McKinnon neighbours sell combined residential development site for $8.88 million
Six home owners at McKinnon in Melbourne’s south-eastern bayside, have reaped a $8.88 million, off-market sale of their residential development site.
Savills Australia’s Julian Heatherich brokered the sale of the 3 to 9 Claire Street offering.
Sold at what is believed to be a record $2913 a square metre for the area, six neighbours came together with the common aspiration to create a one-off opportunity by combining their properties to form an attractive development prospect.
“Six home owners have reaped a circa 40% price windfall,” Savills Australia’s Julian Heatherich said.
The property, comprising four residential sites totaling 3049 square metres and six individual properties (six owners), is zoned General Residential, has 60 metres frontage to Claire Street, minutes walk to McKinnon Road retail strip and railway station.
COMMENTS
- How many dog boxes will the developers have to build in order to recoup their money and make a profit? 60? 80? 100? All feasible on 3000+ square metres zoned for 3 storeys!
- How much longer will council continue with their bullshit that the zones have nothing to do with this rampant over-development?
- What is ‘capacity’ for a dead end street that contained 10 lots (two of which each contained 2 single storey units) making a total of 14 dwellings in the street not so long ago.
- Since the zones have come in, this has all changed and the population of this street is set to increase by at least 1000%. That’s right – 1000%! Here’s why –
1 Claire St (with land size of just under 800 sq metres has recently been sold). A permit has been granted for 3 double storeys
6-10 Claire St is now heading to VCAT for an adjudication on a three storey development consisting of 36 units and a reduction in visitor car parking. Council refused the permit.
Then there’s 11 Claire St, with a permit for a two storey dwelling and 9 units – achieved after three VCAT visits. The first two refused permits for (a) 4 two storey dwellings in June 2012; (b) 2 storeys with ten units (October 2012) and finally in August 2013 a permit for 2 storey and 9 units. When granting a permit for this last decision the member stated – I am similarly satisfied that the design and scale of the building generally represents an appropriate response to the existing and envisaged character of the area in that the two storey scale ensures the development does not dominate the streetscape. The building includes elements that sympathetically respond to the prevailing architectural typology. These elements include wide eaves, pitched roof forms, good fenestration, basement garaging, and (subject to conditions) reasonable front, side and rear setbacks in order to provide for appropriate landscaping.
So now we’ve gone from two storeys to the blank cheque handed to developers for 3 storeys – all with flat roofs, removal of every single tree and vegetation on site, and setbacks that are a joke! And the total number of dwellings in a street barely 50 metres long has gone from 14 to possibly 130-150 dwellings. Thus hundreds of cars and all having to enter and exit onto McKinnon Road!
This is planning madness for sure and the blame must be laid at the feet of this council. The inconsistencies, the contradictions and the lack of justifiable strategic planning is unforgiveable. And what must never be forgotten is the simple fact that residents were the last to know about the zones. Like mushrooms we were kept in the dark – not worthy of being ‘consulted’, and not worthy of anything except paying rates that have been going up year after year by 6.5% – all needed to pay for increased staff and huge pay rises to the CEO! That’s the culture, the ethos, and the ethics of this administration and its lackey councillors!
Glen Eira Debates 
August 5, 2015 at 10:20 PM
Wow nearly 9 million is a hell of a lot of money. Plus another 2 to 3 million at least to build the place. They will cram as many as they can and most will be single bedroom. That’s where the money is and costs cheaper to build.
August 5, 2015 at 10:56 PM
We’re repeating a comment that is currently listed under a previous post. We believe that it relates to the current Claire St issue and that there could be some glitch with WordPress. Here’s the comment –
Utterly appalled and dismayed. As residents who back on to Claire St and regularly walk through to McKinnon Road and station, we cannot believe that this beautiful character filled street will be obliterated with a concrete mass of apartments. Established oak, liquid amber and eucalypts have been conveniently razed to the ground – all within a couple of weeks…how convenient for the developers when there are no trees to consider! Until recently, real estate agents were touting Claire St as a rare cul-de-sac in McKinnon with its classic golden girls. Not only a loss of definitive neighbourhood character, but loss of established gardens, biodiversity, permeable land and totally inappropriate developments for a small no through street with only 12 house blocks.
August 6, 2015 at 9:29 AM
I hate what is happening to our streets and the loss of some beautiful homes, gardens and hundreds upon hundreds of mature trees. It is practically impossible now to drive down Bent Street and some of the other adjacent streets without pulling over to let another car coming from the opposite direction to get through. If council had decided instead of 13.5 metre height limit or the 10.5 metre height limit as a blanket one size fits all then things would be a lot different. You would not get flat ugly three and four storey buildings that look like they’ve been designed by some martian. Glen Eira has been allowed to become a monochrome blue grey monument to greed.
August 6, 2015 at 6:50 AM
And they will get away with razing the trees because Glen Eira, unlike any other Metro Councils, doesn’t have a tree protection policy. Instead it relies on the planning scheme which allows for any or all vegetation on a lot to be removed without penalty as long as it is removed 12 months before a planning permit is applied for.. That’s the reason many properties sold to developers are demolished, razed (a.k.a. moonscaped) and fenced off. It’s better to get rid of any potential issue before preparing plans and getting finances in order.
After 10 years of trying Council’s illustrious Local Law Committee, under the august leadership of Michael Lipshutz (Cr. since 2005), has decided to chuck it in the bin because it was too hard (too incompetent to plagiarize?). It’s another blatant instance of residents being ignored. Despite residents regularly clamouring for tree protection since the late 1990’s (it’s up there as a top priority in every community plan), the current incumbents all decided to support Lipshutz without asking a single question.
August 6, 2015 at 12:01 PM
It wasn’t chucked out for being too hard. It was not supported by Magee and Lobo so vote was lost.
August 6, 2015 at 2:05 PM
Bullsh*t – Magee and Lobo = 2. There are 9 Councillors.
August 6, 2015 at 10:12 AM
“Off market” = hi ho hi ho it’s off to Asia we go. Another substandard high density over development for Glen Eira.
If Cr. Jamie Hyams qualified his statement that it is “not the fault of the zones”, I’d agree with him. The qualification I’d make is that it is not soley the fault of the zones, The Zones provided the impetus (which is what they were intended to do – cut the red tape) and years of planning incompetence or neglect (take your pick) in Glen Eira did the rest.
The 2002 Housing Diversity/Minimal Change Area carve up was the forerunner of the Zones imposed in Glen Eira in 2013. In the intervening years other Councils adopted the state govt’s. 2002 recommendations for holistic planning (ie. Structure Plans) for Housing Diversity Areas. The State Govt. was so convinced that this was the way to go planning wise that it provided model plans as guidelines and subsidies for Councils. This planning would have incorporated height limits, traffic and parking management, provision of open space and drainage and various overlays (ie. enforceable conditions applicable to specific areas and/or items such as trees, surface flooding, neighbourhood character and allowed Council’s to collect fees from developers to assist Council pay for the increased costs incurred as a result of increased development, such as additional parking provisions, increased drainage).
While other Council’s adopted the Govts. recommendations, Glen Eira didn’t. Glen Eira opted to rely on the much cheaper, soley ratepayer funded, unenforceable policies which have remained unchanged since 2002.
This is why
. Glen Eira experiences the highest rate of Council decisions being overturned by VCAT. Other Council’s can substantiate their decisions with the appropriate planning tools based on detailed and regularly updated analysis.
. Glen Eira is a developers delight. Glen Eira simply doesn’t have the means of even beginning to manage the current development spate and as a result developing Glen Eira is a much more attractive proposition than in Council’s benchmark Councils. Glen Eira has the lowest Open Space Contribution Levy, no parking waiver fees. minimal permeable surface requirements, least setback requirements, no development contribution levy, no neighbourhood character statements to speak of and no tree protection.
. Glen Eira, unlike other Council’s, lacks the required substantiation to apply for planning scheme amendments to the Minister for additional controls to the zonings applied by the previous State Govt. Hence, Glen Eira has decided on a wait and see planning approach (hardly a pro-active or responsive approach) while other Council’s are being granted tighter controls and conditions.
Combine this all with Glen Eira’s (Administration and Councillors)
; appalling record of community consultation
. selective disregard for heritage, neighbourhood character and trees
. appalling record in acquiring additional open space (and instead focussing on maintenance of existing open space)
. a growing questioning of planning and traffic management competence
and it pretty much says it all.
Yep, it’s not the fault of the Zones, it’s the fault of Council.
August 6, 2015 at 10:20 AM
A caveat on the above comment:
1. Whether or not VCAT overturns Glen Eira cases more than any other is unknown to us. If you have evidence could you please forward it on to us.
2. Open space levy (after years of negligible contributions) is now 5.7%. When compared with other municipalities gaining 8%, 10%, and even 20% for their activity centres and growth areas then Glen Eira’s levy is low. Again, it may not be the ‘lowest’ in the state as claimed, but council has given up a great opportunity to exact much more from developers. That comes as no surprise!
August 6, 2015 at 11:06 AM
The ugliest street that I’ve come across in this area has to be Nicholson. These buildings look like shipping containers that have been plonked onto stilts. There’s another one going up now and it is huge plus a few more with real estate signs out the front. The street is already parked out so god only knows what will happen once all of these are built and people with cars move in. There has to be some changes made and proper design principles introduced together with sound parking management. If not then many more people will be leaving the area, making some money and getting out of Glen Eira as quickly as they can. I know that this only paves the way for more development but I see it as a tragedy that people are being forced out of their homes because their amenity is gone and they hate what is happening all around them.
August 6, 2015 at 6:46 PM
With all this development going on I predict that rates will go through the roof so that infrastructure like drainage can be put in and despite Labor’s proposed rate capping. Newton will wheedle his way out at the esc and the money will keep rolling in from residents instead of developers.
August 6, 2015 at 6:59 PM
It is an outrageous LIE, that many Councillors at Glen Eira CONTINUE to state that the rush for land by developers in our suburbs has nothing to do with the implementation of new zones, almost 2 years ago. It shows what absolute CONTEMPT they have for the residents of these suburbs!!!
We are regularly sent letters from real estate agents, representing developers, who are offering “large sums” for our property in McKinnon. And they are not only from local agents. Some have so far come from the City of Bayside, and Oakleigh, and even the CBD.
So, Councillors Hyams, Pilling, Lipshutz, Magee,Souness, and any others who insist on repeating the ‘not the zones’ mantra…WAKE UP!!!!!
Take notice of the statistics of new apartment approvals in our City. And HEAR what your communties are saying to you!
When we were faced with fighting a 3 storey development in our street, which will add to the already unsustainable pressures on local infrastructure, like McKinnon Secondary School, we put it to council reps….Why was there no consideration of the impacts of high density development on local schools, such as McKinnon?
We were given the brush off, and told that education considerations are the responsibility of the State Govt, not local council. Simarly with parking and traffic…. no one is interested. They hand ball it to some other authority.
Developers engage traffic ‘experts’, who provide fancy tables of figures, supporting Developer interests, to argue that their developments will have no negative impact on traffic or parking. The traffic study provided by the developer of 2-4 Penang St, claimed that the street, only 100 meters long could cope with up to 3000 daily car trips!!!
When will this all STOP?
McKinnon will be transformed from a beautiful, architecturally significant, village, into a concrete jungle.
Bring on the next GECC elections!!! And let’s hope that every disgruntled resident who is outraged by what this council has willingly allowed what has happened here, to stand up, be counted, and vote in new councillors who will actually put the needs of our community before their own political/personal ambitions!!!
August 6, 2015 at 7:46 PM
Thank you Outraged for telling it like it is. Council cannot escape the fact that local roads are their responsibility. Infrastructure is their responsibility when local drains are involved. Urban Design Frameworks are their responsibility. Parking precinct plans for Activity centres are their responsibility. The purchase of new open space is their responsibility. It is also the legal duty of councillors to provide the necessary scrutiny of our very profligate bureaucracy and to ensure that our money is well spent. None of these things happen in Glen Eira. Add to this all the cheap talk about sustainability and environment and you look around and every development site is stripped bare and this shows what lies are being fed to people. I’m glad that there are now so many angry residents out there. I hope the anger continues and that at the next election every single one of these morons is decidedly voted out. The next step would be to terminate Newton’s contract and advertise the position. Even if he has to be paid out it will be the best investment that this council has ever made.
August 6, 2015 at 9:36 PM
where is the open space needed to alleviate this higher density living, the open space strategy is already outdated
August 7, 2015 at 9:12 AM
Good question but don’t hold your breath while waiting for an answer from Council
You need to realise two very significant things.
1. Unfortunately Council has done exactly what Mathew Guy did in Fishermans Bend, ie failed to acquire open space before implementing zoning changes and now finds itself priced out of the market. The price increase arising from the zone imposition has made a mockery out of the calculations justifying the open space levy increase to 5.7%. It’s evidents in what you are now seeing (as per the recent parkland acquisition overlays and street closures), Council is scrambling to get bits and pieces wherever it can rather than focusing on increasing the levy rate and acquiring larger land parcels, as they become available, that are located in the areas where open space is most needed (ie. in the Growth Zones).
2. Council’s much heralded and excellent 2012 resolution to reserve all funds collected from the open space levy (then estimated to be some $2m pa) for the acquisition of new parkland has been quietly reversed. The open space levy will now be spent on new parkland acquisition and maintenance of existing parkland without any guideline on the “split” being provided. In 1998 Glen Eira proposed to split spending the levy revenue 50/50 between acquisition and maintenance yet despite receiving millions (eg $12m received between 2003 and 2012) in levy revenue since 1998 only a paltry $1.92m was spent on acquisition (2 Packer Park properties). The rest disappeared into the general parkland fund. This disproportionate spending, which results in lost opportunities, will continue..
End result – Glen Eira Council lacks the forethought, dollars and will to address the ever deteriorating open space to population ratio.
.
August 6, 2015 at 10:10 PM
Usually the money from the open space fund is spent on large new park buildings, yellow brick roads or chunky ineffective concrete plinths, so we actually lose green grass when this treasure chest is opened and spent. Only two house sites have been purchased in the last 10 years, but one loses count of all the open space lost to the above or robbed for some other ridiculous reason.
August 7, 2015 at 9:26 AM
yes, you are correct, the open space strategy in its lifetime will deliver us less open space per person, than we have now. And this OP Strategy was meant to solve our lack of open space problems, it was a white wash of the problem
August 7, 2015 at 11:34 AM
We need councillors who work for the interest of the city of glen eira. And planning workers who are remembering that they work for the people of this city. This included the CEO