There are many questions/issues regarding the so called structure planning for Virginia Estate that residents have been left in the dark about. Unfortunately, the 9 documents released by the VPA provide few answers. It should also be noted that three of the most important documents only made their appearance following the closure of ‘community consultation’!!!!!
What we still don’t know and what will have a major influence on the final development plans are:
- Will the entire 24 hectare site be rezoned to Commercial 1 or a Combination of Commercial 1 and Mixed Use. If this occurs then the entire site will be available for residential development. Or will we have a rezoning that makes this site a Priority Development Zone akin to Caulfield Village and thus opens up a completely different kettle of fish?
- If there is to be ‘office’ accommodation (ie a zoning of Commercial 2) then how much of the land will carry this zoning and therefore prohibit residential development?
- Will we have MANDATORY HEIGHT LIMITS or discretionary height limits?
- Will we have height according to Australian Height Datum (AHD) as with the Caulfield Village instead of a fixed number of mandatory storeys?
- Will the existing Schedule which states that any development plan SHOULD be exhibited be replaced with MUST BE EXHIBITED? If this isn’t changed then residents need to be aware that legally this means there are no objection rights once the plans come in and council doesn’t even have to exhibit the plans!
- Thus far nothing has been released about traffic, drainage, and levies payable by the developers. Reading between the lines it appears that council will be quite prepared to accept a meagre acre and a half for open space instead of exacting either a decent allocation of open space or some major financial payment. As for traffic and drainage, all we get are admissions that these present some major problems and will be attended to further down the track!
- We also are very sceptical regarding the stated number of ‘preliminary dwellings’ – 3000. When the site was 12.5 hectares Gillon proposed over 4000 dwellings (see below). Now that the site has literally doubled in size and there are two new ‘partners’, we are told that with a doubling of land size available the owners have magnanimously decided to only erect 3000 dwellings! The ‘escape clause’ is of course the word ‘preliminary’!!!!!! Beware we say!
What is even more disturbing about some of the documentation provided is to be found in the following:
As far as we know, the criterion of ‘net developable land’ is used only as part of calculations for open space levies/developer contributions – and not for ‘structure planning’ per se. Its inclusion here raises countless questions.
Further, if we look at ‘land use outcomes’ then a mere 4.7% as ‘residential’ is really pushing the limits of credibility. As it stands all of these categories (ie Commercial, Mixed Use and Retail) can allow residential development. A lot more clarity, precision, and less sleight of hand by the VPA, council and the developers would be highly welcomed!
Glen Eira Debates 
January 23, 2018 at 10:55 AM
Yup stacks of unknowns.
January 23, 2018 at 11:16 AM
I’ve browsed through most of the documents and would say that they don’t give a clear picture of what is likely to happen. The most detail I saw was in the arborist report and how many trees would have to go. The rest concentrated on what is there now instead of revealing much about future plans. It’s pretty hard then to give decent feedback when everything is unclear.
January 23, 2018 at 3:39 PM
There is not enough open space when the size of the land is considered and 1.2 hectares for a school isn’t enough either.
I went back to some of the earlier posts up here and the comparisons to other major developments don’t hold up regarding open space. The French example they used had 35 hectares of open space.
January 23, 2018 at 5:04 PM
Yes it’s obvious they are going to piggyback their need for open space amenity off the surrounding the Marlborough and Virginia Reserves, I suspect that our 9 dummy councillors will just sleep through the whole process without having to stress their brains. Onsite pollution, flood-zone requirements are all being hidden from view and no doubt will be undermined for the cash on offer.
January 23, 2018 at 7:47 PM
Attended meeting and heard locals say how they are already flooded…. asked V P A official about the current site coverage and the increased site coverage… given that it all flows into the Elwood Canal and he said that it did not matter and that new drainage facilities or extra open space were not necessary. There must be a limit to the capacity of this drainage “system” which takes most of the run off from the City of Glen Eira and other subutbs (a total of about 21 suburbs in all).
As for the school being on such a small area. What a disgrace. I guess it will be another vertical school where the children who live in apartments with very little access to daylight, open space for exercise s in a back yard of cricket or kick to kick in the garden will not be able to play in the school yard at recess either.
The lack of outdoor space in the site is criminal negligence as it is the deprivation of our young children of recreational, sporting and fresh air opportunities as well as satisfying their need for sunlight.
All will be well because the developer some from overseas will pocket handy profits to construct buildings of a standard not permitted in their homelands.
January 23, 2018 at 9:38 PM
The regs say you cannot build a school in a special building overlay ie. land subject to flooding. The SES say it dangerous for people to enter flooded areas to try and collect children etc. So much of the development happening in Glen Eira is sucking the life out the amenity built up over many many decades, and the present lot of developers are getting a free ride to the bank.
January 23, 2018 at 9:50 PM
The VPA [formerly Metropolitan Growth Areas Authority] is a property developer, whose brief is to make money for key donors to political parties by “facilitating” massive developments through rezoning and state-subsidized infrastructure. Have a look at the composition of the Board. Doesn’t help that they have no standards and are unaccountable and lack transparency. That’s how we are governed these days.
January 23, 2018 at 10:17 PM
Off topic: the true horror of Skyrail is now emerging, with towering structures located only centimetres from property boundaries. It is also obvious that 4 tracks will not fit in the existing corridor, making liars of Council and LXRA. LXRA publishes information that puts the decking for one track at 6.8m, although google earth suggests 5.3m. You don’t fit 4 x 5.3m or 4 x 6.8m within a 20m corridor with 0.7m setbacks. No wonder LXRA has refused to publish any concept plans for 4 tracks, but what is Council’s excuse for insisting they can fit? Not that there’d be any open space left if the corridor is completely decked.
January 23, 2018 at 10:28 PM
Still off topic – http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/just-a-minute-level-crossing-project-resulting-in-small-time-savings-data-shows-20180123-p4yys5.html
January 23, 2018 at 10:48 PM
Nearly another 900 cars along North rd according to the Age stats. Great for Virginia’s 3-4000 new apartments, and supposed hundreds of workers driving along North and East Boundary. Grid lock for sure.
January 28, 2018 at 12:39 PM
Off Topic. At the Council Australia Day Cititzenship ceremony two of the Councillors, Davey and Taylor refused to pick up the Australian flag. Someone should have told them that councillors are expected to behave like grown ups not children. They were elected to represent the people of their wards. Not too many indigenous people in those wards. Unfortunate for them that they are missing the point. I doubt whether either of them has spent any time in real indigenous communities but are prepared to blindly follow dogma dished out by well organised fools. Very few aboriginal people support changing the date.
January 28, 2018 at 3:52 PM
What did they do last year?
January 28, 2018 at 4:04 PM
They behaved themselves, and were respectful. This year disrespectful and poorly behaved. Something we expect from children. Let hope they can find some time in their busy lives to grow up.
January 28, 2018 at 7:01 PM
What’s a real indigenous community I’ve never heard of that before?
I think there is far more aboriginal people opposing the Australia Day date than not, and myself being a first generation Australian would like to see the date moved out of respect for the feelings of the folk that rightfully feel disenfranchised by the present day date, and I say present day date because the date has moved around a lot of the decades. Moving the date would be a small change that could be easily achieved and would be readily accepted by most Australians.
If Cr’s Davey and Taylor refused to pick up the Australian flag as you stated, well, that’s their personal choice. It sounds like they simply demonstrated by their actions; who’s feelings they empathise with, I would have done the same. They have my support, as empathy is a very grown up behaviour.
I’m mystified as to how you can be a well organised, and a fool at the same time; surly a fool is a fool and I wouldn’t be able organise anything let alone dish out dogma