Whilst other councils are moving fast to shore up their defences against inappropriate development, Glen Eira sits on its hands and does nothing. We’ve already highlighted the Bayside draft Amendment C140 that is seeking to introduce a minimum size subdivision of 400sqm, plus a 40% permeability requirement in its Neighbourhood Residential Zone. Now we have Monash Council and its C125 Amendment that takes in all Neighbourhood Residential and General Residential zones. The significance of this amendment is:

  • It is based on the 2014 Housing Strategy. Glen Eira’s housing strategy is a fossil, based on data from 1998.
  • 3 new NRZ schedules are introduced, 3 GRZ schedules and 1 RGZ
  • Development in activity centres are now to pay 10% open space levy. Glen Eira pats itself on the back for achieving a paltry 5.7%
  • Subdivision in the nrz schedules 2, 3, and 4 will now have a minimum lot size of 300sqm. Glen Eira does not have any minimum. The impact of such planning is clear when there is a current application in for 363R Neerim Road (zoned grz2) for 4 townhouses on land that is approximately 310sqm.
  • Introduction of Design and Development overlays
  • 40% permeability in GRZ3 sites plus a maximum of 40% site coverage plus 7.6 metre front setback from street
  • In grz4 there is a 30% permeability requirement
  • In the NRZ, 40% permeability and site coverage
  • And even in RGZ there is as requirement of 40 sqm private open space and a balcony of 10 sqm

In every single one of the above (if the amendment is approved), residents of Monash will be far better off, than their cousins in Glen Eira. All Glen Eira does is continually pass the buck and blame VCAT for all its woes. That will no longer wash, especially when no action has taken place in either reviewing the atrocious planning scheme or even attempting to introduce amendments that will ameliorate the damage that is currently occurring through rampant overdevelopment. Every time a VCAT member makes statements such as the following, the blame lies entirely with this administration and its complicit councillors.

The Council advised that there is no neighbourhood character policy which applies to the review site and its surrounds, and no neighbourhood character guidelines to assist in determining anticipated built form outcomes. Guidance must therefore be obtained from policy within the MSS and at Clause 22.07.

There is nothing within the policy framework which would indicate that apartment-style development should not be permitted here. Rather, what is evident is an expectation of change as multi-dwelling developments replace the traditional single-dwelling housing stock. The diversity of housing types sought for neighbourhood centres indicates that apartment-style development can be contemplated. (August 6th 2015)

Advertisements