PS – WE FORGOT TO MENTION THAT COUNCIL NOW ADMITS TO A ‘PRELIMINARY’ FIGURE OF 3000 DWELLINGS FOR VIRGINIA ESTATE! WE FORECAST AT LEAST 3500 BY THE TIME ANY OFFICIAL PLANS COME IN!
This is a long and complicated post so we beg your forbearance.
Council’s planning is largely based on the projected population figures plus available ‘developable’ land as stated in the Housing id reports. We then get a few draft scenarios that seek to apply the new housing styles (ie garden townhouse, garden apartment, commercial, etc) to the various zones such as Neighbourhood Residential (minimal change), General Residential (3 storeys) and Residential Growth Zone (4 storeys).
As we’ve stated previously, some mention is made of Wynne’s introduction of Amendment VC110, but this is almost exclusively related to the requirement for the ‘garden areas’ in the General Residential Zone. No specific mention is made of the impact of removing the 2 dwelling mandatory condition for the Neighbourhood Residential zone. From what we can tell, this does not even feature in the multitude of so called ‘calculations’ council uses to justify its draft position.
Worse still is the Housing Report’s and council’s claim that areas zoned NRZ will in all likelihood achieve a dwelling capacity of 18 dwellings per hectare. The areas zoned GRZ are forecast to achieve a dwelling density of anything between 75 if it is designated as a ‘garden townhouse’ to 150 dwellings per hectare if it happens to be labelled ‘townhouse and apartment mix’.
Both of these calculations are so off the mark, given recent trends, that it is not funny. Thus, if we can’t trust the data, how can we trust the recommendations and the overall planning decisions that are being made?
NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE (POST VC110)
Below is a list of the first 9 applications to have come in following the gazetting of Amendment VC110 in March 2017. Assuming that all will receive a permit, the results indicate that instead of a dwelling density of 18 per hectare, these 9 applications alone will bring in a dwelling density of 38 dwellings per 0.8 hectares!!!!!! We must then ask – what does this do to council’s planning? If the NRZ is now set to become a pseudo GRZ, do we need to firstly expand the activity centres and secondly have vast swathes zoned GRZ in all our neighbourhood centres?
Here are the figures for these 9 applications. Please bear in mind that we followed the ‘methodology’ used by council and the Housing report! Also worthy of noting is that Council’s document where the above table came from (UPLOADED HERE) does not include NRZ examples in its appendices!
76 Bignell Road, Bentleigh East – 3 units, 600 sqm
27 Draper St., McKinnon – 3 units, 1010 sqm
4-6 Hudson St., Caulfield North, 1300, 8 units
36 Mawby Road, Bentleigh East – 4 units, 700sqm
2 Newman Ave., Carnegie – 6 units, 1033sqm
22 North Ave., Bentleigh – 3 units, 777sqm
1 Ridell Parade, Elsternwick – 3 units, 700sqm
2 Shanahan Cresc., McKinnon – 3 units, 778sqm
3 rigby Ave., Carnegie – 5 units, 1134sqm
38 UNITS ON = 8032SQM = 0.8 HECTARES!!!!
GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE (3 STOREYS)
Council does include some ‘sample’ permits granted in this zone. Why these specific ‘examples’ were selected, we have no idea, and nor was any explanation provided!
We have tried to be far more ‘objective’ and the list below is the outcome from consecutive VCAT decisions in descending order. Only 2 are identical to the ‘examples’ provided by council. The site coverage cited come directly from the VCAT decision itself.
In complete contrast to council’s prognostications, we find that the GRZ establishes an average of just under 195 dwelling per hectare – well and truly above both figures that council provides. We are yet to see what real impact Wynne’s mandated ‘garden area’ will have on the GRZ. We are not hopeful given that anything above 1 metre in width can be deemed as part of the garden area and if land is subdivided first and is less than 400 square metres, then there is no need for garden area at all! So we again have to ask what does this mean for our overall planning if these figures are so off the mark?
33-35 Belsize Ave, Carnegie – 29 units – 1357sqm
291 Grange Road and 4 Walsh Street, Ormond – 23 units -1254
27 Elizabeth Street, Bentleigh East – 10 units – 878
137-139 Murrumbeena Road, Murrumbeena – 27 units – 1629
6-10 Claire Street McKinnon – 33 units – 2053 (council notes 1744sqm)
19-21 Rothschild Street, Glen Huntly – 23 units – 1366
466 Dandenong Road, Caulfield North – 14 units – 800
132 Hotham Street, St Kilda East – 16 units – 964
12-14 Quinns Road, Bentleigh East – 22 units -1276
10-12 Station Avenue, McKinnon – 21 units – 1449
1 St Georges Avenue, Bentleigh East – 12 units – 822
817-819 Centre Road, Bentleigh East – 24 units – 1231
2-4 Penang St., McKinnon – 22 units (1388sqn)
143 – 147 Neerim Road, Glen Huntly – 32 units – 1672
130 Murrumbeena Road, MURRUMBEENA – 16 units (883sqm)
91 McKinnon Road, McKinnon – 10 units (566sqm)
64-66 Bent Street, McKinnon. – 31 units (1371.29 sq m – not the 1500+ recorded by council)
2 Ormond Road, Ormond – 15 units (846sqm)
90-92 Hawthorn Road, Caulfield North – 24 units (1240sqm)
135 – 137 Neerim Road, Glen Huntly – 39 units – 1654
4-6 James Street and 14-16 Etna St., Glen Huntly – 45 units (2462sqm)
UNITS – 488
Area = 25,161sqm = 2.51 hectares. = 194.42 DWELLING PER HECTARE.
November 6, 2017 at 5:31 PM
A wonderful post that helps me make sense of all the spin. Council and the government have always endorsed consolidated lots. Saw an ad for a consolidated lot in North Caulfield in nrz. This is going to happen more and more which means more density in an already dense municipality. Council will never answer the question about what is the optimum density that we can cope with and how much it will cost. Everything depends on a decent answer to this. You can stick 300,000 people into Glen Eira if you want to but what will that do to overall amenity and infrastructure needs. No use having houses and people unless they can live properly. I don’t think the way planning is going will be able to achieve this in the short or even long term.
November 6, 2017 at 5:56 PM
Gillon’s blokes assured us they wanted 1100 apartments only. Double the size and 2200. Now we’re given ball park figures of 3000 for starters. Mirror image of Caulfield which started at 1100 and is now around 2100 and sure to be more. At least in Caulfield there is transport. East Bentleigh has nothing. Good stuff council and very well orchestrated.
November 6, 2017 at 11:08 PM
Well, you would have to say, no one was ever meant to even read let alone take these planning doc’s seriously. There is absolutely no sustainable living thinking in the whole lot, just the developers wish list. All this mess in Glen Eira will be conveniently handed to the Minister for rubber stamping after the 2018 election. That way the bureaucrats serving the departments can extract the maximum donations (some times called bribes without having to be so rude and crude as to having to actually ask for the cash) out of the developers
When the roads are chocked, flooding is wide spread, the air is foul, schools over-crowded and dysfunctional. Maybe a few more people may take sustainability more seriously, but I wouldn’t hold your breath.
November 7, 2017 at 6:47 AM
Just more pro-development propaganda
November 7, 2017 at 10:18 AM
FYI – mandatory, rather than ‘discretionary’ height limits are possible as evidenced by Wynne’s signing off on the Banyule, Ivanhoe centre structure plan. Raises the question that if you don’t ask, advocate, beg for mandatory, as is Glen Eira’s position, you don’t get mandatory!
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/east/the-sky-is-no-longer-the-limit-for-developers-in-ivanhoe/news-story/ccd585317f7f7aa6ba9ea8e2190f97c6
November 7, 2017 at 6:58 PM
So when Council apply for the extension, they can ask to change the discretionary limits to mandatory. Simple. And a simple fat chance.
November 7, 2017 at 5:09 PM
State Government defines low density to be less than 25 dwellings per hectare; medium density between 25 and 75 dwellings per hectare; high density above 75 dwellings per hectare. So Glen Eira is getting medium density development in its Neighbourhood Residential Zone, and high density development in General Residential and Residential Growth Zones.
At the same time the open space per person shrinks, there isn’t enough active open space to meet demand for organised sport, and on average more people are living further away from passive open space.
Melbourne also takes water from rural Victoria, as if they didn’t have enough problems with drought/flood/bushfire cycles, and has shown no interest in sustainability. Victoria-wide we have a Minister for Roads but no Minister for Sustainability.