Another VCAT decision will not please residents in East Bentleigh. Without adequate controls developers are now going for broke. This time it is an amended permit for 669-673 Centre Road raising the height from 4 storeys to 6 and the number of apartments from 32 to 39. And once again the developer appealed to VCAT because of council’s inability to determine its decision within the prescribed 60 day limit.
We now have the utterly ridiculous situation where so called ‘neighbourhood centres’ are being granted permits that in some cases outstrip what council regards as ‘appropriate’ for its ‘urban villages’ or Major Activity Centres. The best example of this is council’s ‘approval’ of 8 storeys for the Ormond Tower (a neighbourhood centre) which is higher than its interim height limits for both Carnegie and Bentleigh.
The reasons for the permit in Bentleigh East ultimately boils down to the following – and we quote:
- I acknowledge that a building of six storeys may have an appearance from certain views as a dominant element. This arises from the adjoining single storey development and form surrounding the site on Centre Road. However, I must also be mindful of a number of factors including:
- There are no height controls or development overlays to guide development in the centre or to restrict the height of built form,
- There is a five storey development under construction located to the west of the review site and other permitted developments of a range of heights within the surrounding area.
- I am mindful that in the context of the ‘targeted approach’ to housing densities within the municipality, higher forms are contemplated and the area is changing. In the short to medium term the view of the building from the east would be larger than the adjoining buildings but this may change given the centres zoning and policy direction.
- There is nothing in the Planning Scheme to indicate that a uniform or low building height is anticipated in this location. In a commercial centre, heights often vary. In this immediate future, this building will be one storey taller than its neighbour to its west.
- A fair reading of the Housing Diversity Policy identifies that change is anticipated in Neighbourhood Commercial Areas such as this. It is recognised by the Planning Scheme that neighbourhood centres will provide significant opportunities for housing diversity. It further recognises that different outcomes are sought in the commercial and residential areas of neighbourhood centres. The proposed additional two levels is in keeping with the vision to provide for further housing diversity.
We remind readers that we have yet to get confirmation that council is intending to introduce structure plans for each individual neighbourhood centre, nor have any specific timelines been provided. All that has been stated is that an ‘activity centre strategy’ will eventually see the light of day. We doubt whether this ‘strategy’ will be binding on developers. In the meantime residents are paying the cost of council’s refusal to enact any meaningful legislation for the past decade.
Glen Eira Debates 
June 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM
So how many built and approved apartments in East Bentleigh now. Would 400 be in the right ball park?
June 20, 2017 at 9:54 AM
Since the introduction of the zones VCAT decisions alone total well over 500 for East Bentleigh itself. This 500 does not include all those permits granted by council but which did not end up at VCAT. Here is the list. One proviso – there was an important amended application for Centre Road but the VCAT decision did not list the number of dwellings and neither does the council planning register. We believe this development included well over 60 units.
2 Malane St – 9 dwellings
18 Molden Street – 2 dwellings
146 & 148 East Boundary Road – 36 dwellings
3 Heather Street – 6 dwellings
27 Elizabeth Street – 10 dwellings
19 Thomasina Street, – 2 dwellings
12 Anarth Street – 2 dwellings
150, 150A-E East Boundary Road & 795-801, 803, 805 & 807 Centre Road – 103 dwellings
795-807 Centre Road and 150, 150A-E East Boundary Road – 96 dwellings
43-47 Elizabeth Stree – 9 dwellings
20 Begg Street, – 2 dwellings
7 Quinns Road – 5 dwellings
670 – 672 Centre Road and 51 Browns Road – 63 dwellings
309 East Boundary Road – 2 dwellings
1 Jane Street – 2 dwellings
46 Hill Street – 4 dwellings
7 East Boundary Road – 2 dwellings
633 Warrigal Road, – 2 dwellings
18 Browns Road, – 4 dwellings
48-52 Hill Street – 10 dwellings
18 Richard Street – 2 dwellings
13 Quinns Road, – 8 dwellings
1 St Georges Avenue – 12 dwellings
27 Lilac Street, – 4 dwellings
817-819 Centre Road – 24 dwellings
22 Monash Street, – 2 dwellings
14 Laurel Street, – 10 dwellings
79 Brooks Street – 2 dwellings
10 Bolinda Street – 2 dwellings
49 and 49A Lancaster Street – single dwelling to rear
25 Leary Avenue – 2 dwellings
8 Longview Avenue, – 2 dwellings
2A & 2B Huon Grove – 2nd dwelling on lot
June 20, 2017 at 10:15 AM
FYI: A couple missing which are difficult to find on the case lists.
5 Heather Street – 13 dwellings.
9 Francesco Street – 6 dwellings
June 20, 2017 at 10:57 AM
It’s interesting to compare the numbers to the ID. report you put up last month. Basically, if I’ve interpreted it correctly, which is far from a given, , the report pretty much says that same level of development in the last 3 years (i.e. total number of new dwellings) is essentially all that is needed in East Bentleigh over the NEXT 33 YEARS to meet targets / aspirations!!
June 20, 2017 at 11:28 AM
We have repeated time and time again that according to all projections, Glen Eira has become the development capitol of the South East. Since the introduction of the zones the average number of net new dwellings is close to (and in some years over) 2000 dwellings per year. Victoria in Future 2016 forecast a need of 9000 new dwellings by 2031. Council has reached over 6000 in the space of 3 years. This does not include the 1500 plus for Caulfield Village nor the 3 or 4 thousand that will become Virginia Estate. Even the MRDAC reports stated that all Glen Eira had to accommodate was 700 net new dwellings per year. Thus we have experienced a tripling of projected need. What also needs to be taken into account is the size of some of these municipalities and the impact this has on overall density and the pressure it puts on infrastructure, open space, etc. Erecting 2000 net new dwellings in a municipality 3 times as large as Glen Eira does not have the same impact as erecting 2000 new dwellings in an area of a meagre 38.9 square km. The fact that council has not uttered a single word about density, nor what is ‘capacity’ is negligence of the highest order. Nor have they bemoaned, as other councils have, the latest Wynne amendments that now allow far more development everywhere and basically eliminate the division between NRZ and GRZ. The neighbourhood residential zones are now ripe for overdevelopment on a major scale. We already have applications coming in for 3 apartments on 580 square metre site and 7 apartments on a 1000 square metre site. This is only the beginning. Until councillors realise the full implications of all this, and actually get off their backsides and take control, then the residential amenity of Glen Eira will deteriorate further.
June 20, 2017 at 9:59 AM
This will pall into insignificance once a few more thousand are developed at Virginia park. My guess is that the plans will come in well before council achieves any structure plans for this suburb.
June 20, 2017 at 12:06 PM
Height limits themselves are ridiculous unless somebody states the strategic justification for them, such as ensuring reasonable amenity for current and future residents in the vicinity. There is no particular justification for higher height limits in “major activity centres”, which after all are simply a list of suburbs in an appendix in M2030/Plan Melb/Plan Melb Refresh. 2018 State Election will see further tweaking as Libs have recognized Labor is on the nose over its dictatorial approach to Planning.
A key question about the 669-673 Centre Rd decision is whether it complies with the recent Apartment Development standards and whether the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development were considered. Contemporary practice at Council and VCAT is to ignore anything that is inconvenient.
June 20, 2017 at 4:49 PM
This has been stated plenty of times. Even a delay of 1 year to get the neighbourhood centres properly protected is going to mean that they will already have many precedents. Six storey apartment blocks will become the norm everywhere in Glen Eira. I remember a quote printed here where Hyams said that it’s not likely that the shopping strips will have six storey heights. Shows how much he knows and now that it’s a reality how little he and the others have done to stop it.
June 20, 2017 at 5:30 PM
Who
June 20, 2017 at 6:07 PM
From the Leader circa 2013:
Mayor Jamie Hyams said the council initially had some concerns with the changes to the commercial zones, but that most of those had been addressed during the consultation process. He said the council understood the worries some people had that the developments in commercial zones could unduly affect their neighbours. But he said there would still be a role for council to ensure any development is in keeping with neighbourhood character. “It is a bit of a concern that there will be more carte blanche for developers,” he said. “But it’s not as if you’ll get a six-storey building in a row of shops.”
June 21, 2017 at 10:02 AM
Mr. Hyam’s has alway shielded the developers and the bureaucrats, with a wall of misinformation, chicanery and half truths.
What he said yesterday will have no bearing on what he’ll say today.
He prides himself as a master of propaganda and deception.
June 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM
It is not that the council is unable to make a decision within the prescribed 60 days. It is clear that the responsibility is deliberately passed to VCAT to avoid the council being attacked by residents.