For all the talk about ‘consultation’ the single thing that residents have been clamouring for over the past few years is being totally ignored – a review of the residential zones.
The image above provides clear, unassailable evidence of how disastrous the implementation and maintaining of the current zoning has been. Please note carefully:
- The vast majority of development since the introduction of the new zones HAS NOT OCCURRED in those areas zoned as Commercial – which is what the planning scheme states should happen. Instead, street after street has been destroyed because it is zoned as suitable for 4 storey development.
- Many of these streets are not within cooee of the railway station (circled in red) which is the reason for designating these areas as an ‘activity centre’. They might be 400-600 metres away from the station, but only as the crow flies. Walking distance (ie properties in Mimosa, Beena, etc) would make these sites at least one kilometre from any railway station.
- Activity centres are also supposed to incorporate community facilities such as open space. The map reveals not a skerrick of nearby open space!
- Other councils do their structure planning on the basis of recent Housing Strategies. Glen Eira’s fossilised strategy originates from 1998 data. Yet, we now have the spin about structure planning that will extend over the next 10 to 15 years, WITHOUT any new housing strategy!
- Even Matthew Guy had enough sense in his July 2014 directive to mandate – A planning authority must use a housing strategy to inform the balanced application of the three residential zones. We assume that Guy’s order would presume recent analysis and data, since those councils who chose the option of going to a committee for the implementation of their zones were told that their proposed zoning couldn’t go ahead since their data is too old! Glen Eira as a result has no strategic justification for its implementation of the new zones according to what the committee told numerous other councils!
- Guy even states – A planning authority must evaluate and monitor the implications of the application of any of the three residential zones within two years of their gazettal into a planning scheme. Planning authorities must specifically assess the affect of the residential zone(s) on housing supply, housing prices, infill development site land prices and the availability of land for infill development but are not limited to those matters. Three and a half years down the track and residents are yet to receive any decent ‘report’ as to the efficacy of all the zones – are they working? Where is development really going? What needs changing? How best to protect residential amenity?
- Residents also should realise that when Amendment C25, which created the Housing Diversity/Minimal change areas in Glen Eira, the panel appointed to evaluate the amendment clearly saw this as an ‘interim’ measure. The word ‘interim’ was used over 20 times in their resulting panel report. Here is one example of what was stated – The boundaries of the neighbourhood centres identified in the amendment are considered by the panel as interim at best. Thus, we are stuck with ‘interim’ housing diversity borders and for the past 17 years no inclination by Council to do what it promised – ie review the areas and implement controls that will protect residents.
The take home message is that unless these councillors have the courage to admit that disastrous mistakes have been made, the rot will continue until the bottom falls out of the housing market. We simply ask:
- Why can’t the borders of housing diversity areas be reduced given the fact that instead of the required 600 new dwellings per annum, Glen Eira is now accommodating over 2000 net new dwellings per annum?
- Why should suburbs such as Ormond have over 40% of its area designated as suitable for 3 storey developments? – especially when large swathes are zoned as heritage?
- Unless there is a comprehensive review of the zones, then residents have every right to label this council not only as incompetent, but negligent in its duty.
- Creating structure plans only for the Commercial areas will not solve the problem of street after street being over-run with substandard dog boxes. This isn’t planning. It is cow-towing to the development industry and the refusal to admit that the Newton & Akehurst vision for Glen Eira is a total disaster, especially when residents have had no say in what happened!
As a reminder of the human cost involved, we re-publish an email we received a while back from an Elliott Street resident. It spells out everything that is wrong with planning in Glen Eira –
We live in the house next to the 51 units, 4 storeys, 3-9 Elliott Ave. It is on our north side! We will also be opposite 60 more units in Elliott Ave. Only 6 out of 20 houses left in our part of this small suburban street…… what can we say. We explored all avenues including going to VCAT, employing a Planner for quite a substantial fee. We achieved some minor concessions with shadowing and setbacks. It has been an exhausting process. I wonder if we are completely stupid to continue to stay here after 36 years, enjoying the peace and convenience of living in Carnegie. However, all has changed. The council has won. The peace and joy of living here is shattered. We will stay and see how things pan out. The world is changing at such a rapid pace around us and I’m afraid we’ve lost faith in the Council and its concern for the community. We will look back in a few years time at the implementation of these zones and wonder how it could happen. In a bizarre way it makes me empathise with the first people of our country and the bewilderment of colonisation! Rapid change can leave a community depleted.
March 8, 2017 at 12:45 PM
Christ. A mess if there ever was one.Every new councillor has to read this and change the zones. They are killing Carnegie.
March 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM
Hyams, Magee, Delahunty, Esakoff – hang your heads in shame and resign.
March 8, 2017 at 1:06 PM
Must soon be time to call to account any Councillor elected off the back of campaigns including pledges to fight inappropriate development? Settling in period is over.
March 8, 2017 at 6:32 PM
My recollection is that all of the newbies were singing the same tune and even the old hands. Time to stand up and assert themselves.
March 8, 2017 at 2:59 PM
Step up new Councillors.
March 8, 2017 at 8:34 PM
Horrible over development. My sympathies to the resident from Elliott Street. He must be going through hell with trucks, dust, pollution, noise, traffic.
I would love to know how many car parking waivers council has handed out for all of these. My guess is that there are over 1000 new dwellings in the map. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that council has given the developers 250 waivers. That is something they should disclose but they won’t because it is too embarrassing and would tell everyone what a balls up the planning scheme and the zones truly are.
March 8, 2017 at 9:30 PM
Mimosa is going the way of Eliot and Tranmere. Easy pickings. Fill up one street and move onto the next. Good job council.
March 9, 2017 at 7:15 AM
Mimosa is on its way, yes. Illegal road closures, footpath blocked, close to 100% non-permeable area, adjacent residents fleeing the onslaught, no open space nearby, and no strategic justification. Typical council failure.
In response to the repeated failures for developments to meet their own parking needs, Council has now extended parking restrictions well beyond the “activity center”, and has sought retrospectively to justify the substandard and dangerous 90-degree parking in Rosstown Rd [imposed without consultation]. They admit it doesn’t comply with Australian Standard 2890.5 but consider the Standard to be execessive.
The 7 or so injury accidents they’re aware of plus all the unknown non-injury road accidents that VicRoads’ RCIS database don’t capture has led them to make the extraordinary claim that “the arrangement is operating safely”. Their current strategy is to leave road hazard warning signs flattened: saves money but leaves a reminder just how unsafe things are.
March 9, 2017 at 12:09 PM
I don’t get this. Either there are standards or there aren’t. How can they say something is excessive and then reckon things are safe. What happens if there’s an accident. Anybody with half a brain would sue the pants off them if they got hurt.
March 9, 2017 at 11:31 PM
They hope like hell no one finds out about their stuff ups. If you do then the excuses department takes over
March 10, 2017 at 9:09 PM
When I’ve asked, on each occasion Council has declined to reveal whether it has any standards. The impression given is that its decision-making is ad-hoc, and that it is particularly uncomfortable if any decision is closely scrutinized. Nobody is ever accountable. Councillors aren’t really adding value if all they do is pass on comments from an anonymous officer whose response fails to address the substantive issue.
March 12, 2017 at 3:45 PM
Sorry to ask you Carnegie Resident – Who did you vote for in last October 2016 elections? and what was your criterion?
March 9, 2017 at 9:23 AM
The maps a beauty. A big blank down the middle that’s all commercial. Too small and expensive for developers to worry about when they can pick and choose from miles of 4 story height limits all around and would cost them a lot less. Pick up 3 properties that are over 1500 for say $4 or 5 million and put up 50 boxes and you’re set. Cant do that in shopping strips like Koornang. Shop frontages are tiny and would cost a bomb. People anyway have leases so that’s another downer for the developer.
March 11, 2017 at 7:07 PM
Wynne’s a bloody joke
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/leafy-suburbs-forced-to-squeeze-in-more-homes-under-new-planning-blueprint-20170311-guw08u.html
March 11, 2017 at 9:55 PM
Before elections labor bluffed residents and took advantage
March 12, 2017 at 10:06 AM
Labor had good opportunity to correct the zones. Last time they won on promise to residents to review the zones designed by Council and approved by previous liberal government. As soon as labor won, they focused instead on railway crossings above and below. Reviewing of zones were much more important than anything else. Added s*it over s*it.