No need for words. The image says it all – 500 apartments crammed into another handful of streets! And this is without the 7,8, and 9 storey developments waiting in the wings along Centre Road itself. We should also point out that in the majority of these developments, permits were granted by Hyams, Esakoff, Magee and Delahunty who also decided that the community was not worth consulting when they introduced the zones in secret and by stealth!
CLICK TO ENLARGE
Glen Eira Debates 
February 18, 2017 at 9:33 AM
GECC recently confirmed that they view changing the purposes, ranges of uses, amenity standards and decision guidelines of land located moderately close to Activity Centres to be “neutral”. This is the justification they cling to for believing the public should be excluded from the Amendment process and that the application of the new residential zones should not be reviewed.
They further alleged the changes were “consistent” with their policies, although those policies are themselves inconsistent. It is pretty clear they have abandoned the need to encourage a mix of dwelling types, or to facilitate social housing, or to maintain amenity of surrounding properties.
What would be interesting is to do an audit on all the 3- and 4-storey developments to establish just how many ResCode standards they fail to comply with. Here in Carnegie for example few developments comply with the permeability requirement. Council would like people to believe that flooding is pure coincidence.
There is a human cost in all this but Council doesn’t have to pay it. It takes a toll on people when they are forced from their homes because the loss of amenity is unacceptable. The stress leads to health problems and in at least one case contributed to a fatal heart attack.
February 18, 2017 at 10:26 AM
Thinking about a question posed in a previous post on numbers of bedrooms, I suspect that what is shown here is further evidence of cashing in with one bedroom places. There are several 2 lot buildings. The numbers for each are so different that I am sure that half of them are single bedroom boxes of minute size. Two in Blair Street caught my attention. Both are 4 storeys and 2 consolidated lots. One has 24 apartments, the other 35. An 11 apartment difference can only mean that the second one contains many more single bedroom apartments. That is cramming everything in and getting the maximum profit.
Other comments made here are totally correct. This council has failed its residents and created a concrete jungle. You can’t drive down any of these streets anymore and walking past trucks and rubbish is no enticement.
February 18, 2017 at 1:50 PM
Not forgetting the loss of private open space that did have the opportunity to establish a reasonably size tree or two. The new developments give no such chance.
So we can expect on top of more frequent flooding events, higher ambient temperatures, particularly at night, when the law states that all air-conditioning units have to be silenced and 10pm.
The effects of heat stress accumulate as the hot spells proceed, leaving the very young and elderly most at risk.
Against the free ranging rights of developers and capital investment to rort any system put in place, human needs run last.
February 18, 2017 at 9:50 AM
A quick add makes it about 260 apartments in Bent. Unbelievable.
February 18, 2017 at 9:53 AM
Full on ongoing destruction of our beautiful suburbs. Words fail me.
February 18, 2017 at 10:10 AM
What a disaster – the new Councillors should call for an immediate review.
February 18, 2017 at 1:05 PM
In another damning indictment how this council has mishandled and pandered to the MRC over the Caulfield Village Development, the Planning Minister has just approved the amendments for the Flemington Racecourse Development – rezoning the land but also imposing various conditions – ie nothing higher than 15 storeys (versus 22 for Caulfield) and $3000 PER APARTMENT for community infrastructure. As well, we also have an open space levy of 7.06% for the Epsom Road area. (Caulfield Village 5% and 4% and not a cent for ‘community infrastracture per unit’). Also stipulated in this schedule is – “For Flemington Green, a 5% allocation of affordable housing must be provided. For Epsom Road, 15 dwellings for low-income employees at Flemington Racecourse must be provided.” For those interested in reading more, please see: http://www.mvcc.vic.gov.au/planning-and-building/major-developments/proposed-flemington-racecourse-development.aspx
The only feasible conclusion? – sold down the drain by Lipshutz, Hyams, Esakoff and Pilling who were the ‘official’ decision makers in this debacle!
February 18, 2017 at 2:32 PM
I recall Staikos during the last election. He was going to ensure development was kept in check. Virginia Park will be a real mess. I doubt think the planning minister knows who he is.
February 18, 2017 at 4:14 PM
Staikos is trumpeting Daniel Andrews/parliament’s announcements to make look that they are his achievements. Election promises replaced by something else.
February 18, 2017 at 9:45 PM
We will have a chance come next elections in 2018. Like Miller he likes to post his pictures everywhere.
February 18, 2017 at 2:43 PM
My experience today is hardly unique. Got cold-called by an aggressive real estate agent [“Better Agents”]. He was desperate for me to allow him to represent my property as part of a joint sale with neighbours so more money could be made. I said no. Actually I probably said no 11 times. Then he started more aggressive tactics. Skyrail. 4-storey developments nearby. Noise. Suggested I could have a 3-storey development next me [curious, since it is zoned NRZ]. I know council is shit, State Government is shit, and we are badly governed, but even so I don’t want to sell under duress. The heavy-handed tactics made me even more determined to fight against incompetence and corruption.
February 18, 2017 at 5:16 PM
Well done “Carnegie Resident” what self-interested money hungry clowns these real estate agents are. I guess they hope to get rich quick and live anywhere except in Glen Eira.
February 19, 2017 at 12:46 PM
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP] defines “medium density” to be between 25 and 75 dwellings per hectare, and “high density” to be more than 75 dwellings per hectare. There are only 2 places in the Planning Scheme that specify “high density” as a goal: Chestnut and Blackwood Streets in Carnegie with frontage to Dandenong Road; and Phoenix Precinct Area 1. Conversely, a search for “medium density” reveals 9 references, including in Housing Diversity policy and other areas of Phoenix precinct.
It appears Council is rejecting its own planning scheme by encouraging all those 4-storey developments at around 300 dwellings per hectare [4 times the minimum that qualifies as high density], and no explanation how its 15-year-old Municipal Strategic Statement justifies it. Council refuses to be accountable for its insistence on applying Residential Growth Zone [RGZ] to its urban ghettos.
Council asserts there is a need to direct medium density residential development to locations where it will have the least impact on residential character, yet it is actually encouraging high density, contrary to its policies.