21 Northumberland Road, Pascoe Vale VIC 3044

Development of the land by the construction of a building (seven storeys with roof terrace) containing 73 dwellings and a reduction in the car parking requirements

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website 4 months ago. It was received by them 3 months earlier.

(Source: Moreland City Council, reference MPS/2018/471)

24 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Nicole Lehmann commented

    73 dwellings is too much fir an already crowded area. That’s potentially an extra 150 people in streets that are already difficult to park and drive on. Definitely seek a reduction in scale a d a 7 story desiring will stand out and not fit into the landscape.

  2. Emily Lynn commented

    A 7 story building in this street and this area is completely out of character for the area. I thought there would be a height restrictions in such a suburban street surrounded by parklands. Are there going to be 73 parking spaces built for 73 dwellings? and there is not sufficient parking in the street and surrounding area.

  3. Mel Wu wrote to local councillor John Kavanagh

    This is beyond a joke. I live on this street, and it is already overflowing with cars. It's a nightmare to get into our driveway with the units next door to this application. The cynic in me says that the applicants are trying to push through a 5 storey development so starting way above at 7 storeys in order to 'compromise'.

    I will be doing a letterbox drop of the area tomorrow, and ensuring ALL locals are aware of this application. There are 103 carparks cited for 73 dwellings; with stackers. How many of the residents of this development will actually use the stackers? Case studies in other built up areas have shown they do not work and residents choose to avoid them. There is no supermarket within close walking distance, and all residents WILL own cars.

    There are no other comparable developments in this area, with the max height being 3 storeys. This should not be allowed.

    John, can you please arrange a public meeting for this proposed development.

    Delivered to local councillor John Kavanagh. They are yet to respond.

  4. Bill Davis wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    Yes, we feel your pain Northumberland Rd residents. The west side of your street has been zoned RGZ2 (Growth Zone) due to it being within a few hundreds meters of PV Station. Never mind that the neighbourhood is totally removed from the station and is (or was) firmly low density suburban.

    While not ignoring Council planning on individual developments, I do think we need to turn our attention to our State Gov which I recall from the re-zoning meetings a few years ago were the main drivers for pushing medium (high) density living on us. This is happening all over Melbourne, although it seems to be particularly exacerbated in PV and Glenroy. Personally I would like to see a push for the development of regional centers with appropriate industry, infrastructure and transport investment rather than turning Melbourne's suburbs into an apartment tower jungle.

    Lets see what John and Oscar have to say on the current State Gov policies as they are now both running as Independents for the next State election in Nov. We need a shakeup in PV from being an evermore safe Labour seat and hence ignored by both parties. I urge all concerned residents to question John, Oscar, sitting member Lizzie Blandthorn and other candidates as to their positions on the current zoning.

    Lets get informed and make a push for an informed change in November.

    Regards to all

    Delivered to local councillor Oscar Yildiz. They are yet to respond.

  5. Lisa O'Halloran commented

    It is understandable that planning policy encourages a mix of housing types given proximity to Pascoe Vale station, however neighbourhood character provisions exist to ensure that higher density is not a shoehorned in, poorly designed blight on the streetscape

    The development of a seven storey mass with a 60m long, poorly articulated frontage to Northumberland Road is inconsistent with the character of recent developments let around the surrounding neighbourhood.

    The eastern side of Northumberland Rd has general residential zoning, and it would be sensible to conclude development would feather off to the edges of the growth zone, rather than supporting what will be the densest site in the growth zone in question. An appropriate townhouse or unit development is certainly warranted in this location, with acceptable vehicle access, breaks between built form, screening of rooftop services and landscaping.

    I also seriously question whether the a single point of access to the basement carpark via a new crossover at the north eastern corner of the site is supportable or safe from a traffic engineering perspective.

    If any local residents are interested in a consolidated response to this development, please contact me lmdallatorre@gmail.com

  6. Resident of Oak Park commented

    If this development is using car stackers good luck to those who live nearby....

    My experience with a Car Stacker:
    - They only offer 2 year warranty yet they cost in excess of 30k each
    - Residents have to maintain them or they will fail
    - In previous building, they stackers would constantly fail, the stacker company charge a premium to have it fixed as there is pretty much a monopoly here or duopoly. Residents cant afford to fix them so they either don't use them or use them the least amount of time possible so they dont break'
    - They are noisy
    - Takes ages to get out of the building at 8am and after 5 when people are loading them up.

    All of this leads to cars on the street..... Stackers are not car parks, they are good for only getting away with not supplying a car park.

    Council needs to reject applications with stackers unless the stacker is backed by a 10 year warranty. How can you say you have a car spot if it is only warrantied for 2 years...

  7. Zoe Button commented

    73 dwellings is far too many for this area. There will be will be a significant increase in residents and too many cars for our community to cope with.
    - Local primary schools are already beyond capacity. As is Strathmore Secondary College, these dwellings and all the other local high density dwellings popping up within the Strathmore Secondary zone will add to this strain and cause concern for local families with young children.
    - Trains are already congested and this will only worsen as the increase in demand will no doubt not be met.
    - This will also add further pressure to local resources such as local medical centres, supermarkets, supermarket parking etc

    A reduction in car park requirements is a joke.
    - Train commuters have had to migrate further from the station and are now parking along Northumberland Rd and in the surrounding streets such as Prospect St and Pleasant St due to the extensive developments in Fawkner street, Heath Street and Grover street and with recent parking restrictions in those streets. The streets around this proposed development and all the streets heading towards the station are already congested each weekday with cars of those who use the train. Residents of this dwelling with their 1-2 cars each, visitors to the area and train commuters will be competing for parking spaces.
    - Northumberland Rd, Prospect Street and Fawkner Rd will also suffer heavier and more constant traffic as a consequence. This intersection and current pedestrian crossings will not be sufficient putting people’s safety at risk. My concern also extends to its close proximity to Austin Cresent Reserve and Gavin Park and the safety of our community accessing these spaces.

    Along with the poor consideration of the practicalities of such a dwelling with the significant influx of residents and cars on our already tight local resources, a 7 storey building is going to look ridiculous. It will not be in keeping with dwellings within the area, it will be sitting on top of a hill, it will be visible from afar and will ruin the look of our neighbourhood.

  8. Jane Citizen commented

    It is great to see the community respond to this.

    It appears that any appeal will just get overridden with appeals at VCAT or similar or minor modifications made as current 'bylaws' permit such building activity.

    This is clearly evidenced by the council approving access to a very narrow, non used, dirt road rear alleyway behind 31, 33, 35 etc Austin Cres to allow entry to new developments on the street in the hope that suddenly after over 100 odd years of non use, the lane would be magically be able to transport cars etc.

    Should we organise a march to Moreland council and hope they will hear us... or should we vote for candidates who will fix this problem.

    If only we had the $$$ and political clout of Richmond or South Yarra.. etc. I am exhausted barking up the Moreland Trees :)

  9. Vince wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    Seriously ? You let these so called drop kick developers to make decisions about our area ? I can’t believe the greed of these developers destroying this area ! Enouth is enough ! It’s time to do something about this situation! If anyone would like to help me I would like to make a difference , please pass it on https://www.change.org/p/daniel-andrews-lower-council-rates-as-it-s-gettinghard-to-live-stop-building-units-in-moreland

    Photo of Oscar Yildiz
    Oscar Yildiz local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Vince

    Hi Vince,

    Thanks so much for your email, can you call me when you have 2 minutes please - 0413 850 357?

    Regards

    Cr. Oscar Yildiz JP
    Councillor Moreland City Council
    Responsible for Recreation & Leisure
    Moreland City Council
    Tel: 9240 1193
    Mob: 0413 850 357
    Facebook: Oscar Yildiz
    Twitter: @oscaryildiz70
    Instagram: oscar_yildiz

    Mayor: 2010/2011
    Mayor: 2012/2013

  10. Concerned resident wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    Another step back for Pascpe Vale. The rates from Pascoe Vale have been sucked dry by Moreland City council for decades in favour of Brunswick and surroundings suburbs. Worst thing that ever happened to Pascoe Vale was the amalgamation of councils in 1994. The lack of public development on local infrastructure in Pacoe Vale has lead to this dire situation I feel sorry for the local residents and I sure am glad I don’t live there anymore. Even the Pascoe Vale pool has no funds alocated for improvements under the newly voted ongoing aquatic strategy. Get out while you still can because the only developement you will be seeing in the next 10 years is more of this! It says so in the state governments planning strategy brunwick, coburg and werribee are the allocated public growth areas so unless Pascoe Vale renounces it’s membership to moreland city council your rates are going straight to Brunswick and coburg!

    Photo of Oscar Yildiz
    Oscar Yildiz local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Concerned resident

    Hi,

    Thank you so much for your email. I will definitely not be supporting this application. It’s disgraceful and they - greedy developers are destroying our neighbourhood!

    I’m happy to discuss if you would like to call me?

    Regards

    Cr. Oscar Yildiz JP
    Councillor Moreland City Council
    Responsible for Recreation & Leisure
    Moreland City Council
    Tel: 9240 1193
    Mob: 0413 850 357
    Facebook: Oscar Yildiz
    Twitter: @oscaryildiz70
    Instagram: oscar_yildiz

    Mayor: 2010/2011
    Mayor: 2012/2013

    Photo of Oscar Yildiz
    Oscar Yildiz local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Concerned resident

    Dear Concerned resident,

    Can you please contact me at your convenience on 0413 850 357?

    Regards

    Cr. Oscar Yildiz JP
    Councillor Moreland City Council
    Responsible for Recreation & Leisure
    Moreland City Council
    Tel: 9240 1193
    Mob: 0413 850 357
    Facebook: Oscar Yildiz
    Twitter: @oscaryildiz70
    Instagram: oscar_yildiz

    Mayor: 2010/2011
    Mayor: 2012/2013

  11. John Hann wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    I have lived on this street for over 10 years & I strongly object to this proposition. It’s a residential street that most of the time feels like a one way street.
    There’s not enough infrastructure to support a carpark of that size.
    There are considerable parking issues in the surrounding streets near the station that have expanded further & further out.
    It will get even more congested than it already is.
    I believe that such a building would be out of place & not to mention an eyesore.
    A caveat to ensure no more building of anymore out of character building on the already congested residential street should be put forward!

    Photo of Oscar Yildiz
    Oscar Yildiz local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to John Hann

    Hi John,

    Thank you so much for your email. I will definitely not be supporting this application. It’s disgraceful and they’re destroying our neighbourhood!

    Regards

    Cr. Oscar Yildiz JP
    Councillor Moreland City Council
    Responsible for Recreation & Leisure
    Moreland City Council
    Tel: 9240 1193
    Mob: 0413 850 357
    Facebook: Oscar Yildiz
    Twitter: @oscaryildiz70
    Instagram: oscar_yildiz

    Mayor: 2010/2011
    Mayor: 2012/2013

  12. Lindy Mazur wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    I have lived on this street for 12 years. With more and more units being built, the street parking has become overcrowded and has made it difficult and extremely dangerous to enter/exit our driveway and navigate down the narrow street. This proposal is ludicrous! This is a residential area so why can anything higher than 3 storeys even be considered?! Besides the fact this building would be an eyesore, and create further parking chaos on our street, I have significant concerns about the impact on other local community services. Schools and child care centres in the area are already at full capacity with large waiting lists, it is already difficult to get car parking at the only decent local supermarket and it is impossible to get an appointment with local health services (ie. GP’s). I strongly oppose this building development.

    Photo of Oscar Yildiz
    Oscar Yildiz local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Lindy Mazur

    Hi Lindy,

    Thank you so much for your email. I will definitely not be supporting this application. It’s disgraceful and they’re destroying our neighbourhood!

    Regards

    Cr. Oscar Yildiz JP
    Councillor Moreland City Council
    Responsible for Recreation & Leisure
    Moreland City Council
    Tel: 9240 1193
    Mob: 0413 850 357
    Facebook: Oscar Yildiz
    Twitter: @oscaryildiz70
    Instagram: oscar_yildiz

    Mayor: 2010/2011
    Mayor: 2012/2013

  13. Peter Fong commented

    The proposed development is a disgrace.
    It will totally dominate the streetscape.
    There are no gaps between the buildings.
    The architectural aesthetics will be the equivalent of a block of concrete( or rendered foam ) dumped on the street.
    It will be so foreign to the area it is unbelievable.
    Stacker car parks, just do not work. Couple this with a single driveway and people will only park on the road. It will be like creating an underground traffic jam every morning.

    This is already an busy arterial and it is almost impossible to have visitors on the street already because of medium scale development. This development is so excessive it will ruin the street.
    The argument that this is close to lots of amenities is false. Yes there is a train station, but there is no Coles. There is not places to eat at night unless you only want fish and chips or pizza, so everyone will *NEED* one or more cars.
    The development does not look setback far enough and does not appear inline with the houses adjacent.
    The common rooftop space will create noise that will travel across the street directly into houses east of the proposed site, which sits higher and therefore will be roughly inline with the height of the proposed common space. I live in one of these houses!!.
    The proposal seems to overshadow Grover street quite significantly.
    It looks like the dwellings will have poor internal amenities.
    The underground build in is a cynical attempt to get around 4 storey height limits. Do we want our residents to live in dungeons? Is this a positive outcome for anyone, or are we only interested in building urban slums? This is not what growth zones are for !!

    It seems that this proposal is so unacceptable that this is just a spurious proposal that will allow the developer to try and compromise on something that would be equally unacceptable had it been proposed.
    I accept there is a need to more well planned urban density, but this proposal is just pushing the envelope too far.
    Laws should be changed to fine developers for proposing such disgusting plans. It is the planning equivalent of frivolous litigation. They get away with murder and leave residents with the mess and cost of fighting it.

  14. Steve Jordan commented

    This development is not in keeping with the local area and will not add any value apart from to the developers who won’t be living there afterwards.

    We are not a CBD area so don’t need skyscraper style apartment units being built here.

    Infrastructure is already strained in this area and this type of development will only make matters worse.

  15. Martin Saj wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    Entertaining the proposal of a 7 storey development on 21 Northumberland Road, Pascoe Vale is disgraceful and borderline negligent on the council planners behalf.

    I refer them to: SCHEDULE 24 TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY of this area.

    Here is how the decision to proceed with this development will blatantly contravene this planning overlay:

    1. OBJECTIVE: To implement the Moreland Neighbourhood Centres Strategy, 2017. RESULT: FAILED. Page 34 of this document clearly restricts this area to 4 storey MAXIMUM development.

    2. OBJECTIVE: To ensure built form outcomes are appropriate to the context of Moreland’s Neighbourhood Centres. RESULT: FAILED. As this is open for interpretation, I will refer you to the overwhelming response AGAINST this development you have received from rate-paying residents. Disregarding the community's view is just disrespectful.

    3. OBJECTIVE: To improve the quality of higher density and mixed use developments by providing appropriate built form guidance. RESULT: FAILED. Car stacker system is suitable only for occasional use by residents. This will almost certainly NOT be the case. Again, you're not considering the context of the location and way of life in the area.

    4. OBJECTIVE: To improve amenity outcomes for residents in higher density and mixed use developments and for residents in adjacent buildings. RESULT: FAILED. I'm sure the adjacent properties would strongly disagree their amenity would be improved by this joke of an application. The road is TOO NARROW to service any more traffic as it is. The Schools in the area are AT CAPACITY. The train line is AT CAPACITY during peak hours before it is even stops at Pascoe Vale. Devon Road and Gaffney Street remain the ONLY ROUTES for traffic coming off Pascoe Vale road and are NOT SUFFICIENT to deal with the load ALREADY. This is made worse by the ancient level crossings at both intersections.

    5. OBJECTIVE: To ensure that new development makes a positive contribution to the public realm. RESULT: FAILED. Reduced quality of life for existing residents is not a positive contribution.

    I would hope some of the above points make their way into the logical approval process next time.

    In the meantime, I will remain disappointed by absence of considerate planning Moreland is continually subjected to.

    Photo of Oscar Yildiz
    Oscar Yildiz local councillor for Moreland City Council
    replied to Martin Saj

    Hi Martin,

    Thank you for your email. I have definitely noted your concerns.

    Regards

    Cr. Oscar Yildiz JP
    Councillor Moreland City Council
    Responsible for Recreation & Leisure
    Moreland City Council
    Tel: 9240 1193
    Mob: 0413 850 357
    Facebook: Oscar Yildiz
    Twitter: @oscaryildiz70
    Instagram: oscar_yildiz

    Mayor: 2010/2011
    Mayor: 2012/2013

  16. Charlie Lewington commented

    This is a ridiculous notion to put 73 dwellings where 3 houses used to be!
    If each dwelling has an average of 2 people that is 156 people living in a space designed for three houses. If only 1 third of them have a car that is over 50 extra cars in an already packed street. The trains are already at capacity and with an extra 100 people a day they wont cope.
    This sets a precedent for the area that developers can build whatever they want, wherever they want without any regard for the current residents.
    Until now development has been respectful and often hidden from the street and to jump from that to a 7 story apartment block is ridiculous.
    Pascoe Vale is a family suburb, we live here to have peace and quite, gardens and sunlight and this building will take that away from the current residence.

  17. Michael Robinson wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    I am speaking on behalf of my elderly mother who lives near this site. She is appalled by it but is not in a position currently to object. Pascoe Vale is now littered with monstrosities but this proposal makes them look like puppies. I plead with you to reject this proposal and anything that comes near it in nature

    Delivered to local councillor Oscar Yildiz. They are yet to respond.

  18. Chris M wrote to local councillor Oscar Yildiz

    Is there an update on this application? It really is a shame if it goes ahead. This is a residential area. There is no excuse except for blatant greed.
    Why would the council allow a 7 storey 73 dwelling building to be built on a residential street?

    Delivered to local councillor Oscar Yildiz. They are yet to respond.

  19. Lisa O'Halloran commented

    The applicant is taking the matter to VCAT as council did not respond within the statutory timeframe - ie failure to decide
    Objectors have until 13 December to lodge statements of grounds
    lmdallatorre@gmail.com if anyone would like to discuss

  20. Vince commented

    To the developers, we the people of this area are sick of you only thinking about the $$$$$$ and not the people of the area ! We will put a stop to you ! We will not tolerate you destroying our area ! We will fight you all the way ! Enough is enouth it’s time for the government and council to listen to us ! Daniel andrews time to act now or next election you will be voted out !

  21. Zeki Dugan commented

    I have been living in this street since 1998 and I have experienced the increase in traffic and problems with the cars parked on the street.
    Permitting a 7 storey building permit in this street, which is already overcrowded with new developments and so far away from everything except the train station which is not so close either defies logic.
    No, no, no. Not, plus a multi-storey one.

  22. Mel wrote to local councillor John Kavanagh

    If everyone who has commented here can please come to the council meeting in Coburg at 6.30pm on the 23rd January, we may be able to influence the council.

    Also join the Pascoe Vale 3044 Facebook group for updates, which Lisa O'Halloran is running.

    Delivered to local councillor John Kavanagh. They are yet to respond.

  23. Sally Warmington wrote to local councillor Natalie Abboud

    I am writing to express my dismay and strong objection to the proposed development in Northumberland road, a few minutes' walk form my home in Gaffney Street. While I support medium density development, this proposal for 73 dwellings on such a small site has so many flaws it is hard to see it would be even considered at all. The small size of apartments, the lack of sustainable parking (proximity to the station alone does not remove most people's need for a car for many other activities), and traffic congestion in surrounding streets will have a significant negative effect on residents in the area. Regardless of the zoning, this location is a quiet, fairly narrow residential street and this proposed development would be completely out of character.
    As other people have observed, the 7 storey proposal may be a strategy on the part of the developer to try and get 5 or 6 storeys approved as some kind of compromise, but this still would not be acceptable. In this area, medium density dwellings can work well at 2-3 storeys but going up to 5-7 with such small tightly packed dwellings is a completely different matter.
    I urge you to do everything you can to prevent this development going ahead.
    Kind regards, Sally Warmington.

    Delivered to local councillor Natalie Abboud. They are yet to respond.

  24. Sevim Dogan Ozkan commented

    Dear Sir,

    I've been following the updates with great distress regarding the re-development of 21-25 Northumberland Road, Pascoe Vale.

    We've been living on Northumberland Road for the last 11 years. We moved in, with great excitement. It was a great pocket to bring children up and was affordable for new beginners like us. We had the parks, space, railway, close to freeway and some good schools.
    I have always hoped for the area to pick up with some tasteful re-developments, a nice shopping strip to bring the community together where you see the locals and say "hello". Where the locals knew me and my children and created that "village" I've always dreamt about.
    Soon after though, my dreams start demolishing with every old house knocked down and the small, ugly units started rising in every corner. It seems to me that Pascoe Vale has become the "bastard" child of Moreland City council. -Excuse my language-. The station end of the suburb is already tight, we wait for about five trains to cross the railway each morning or get back from work. It's now not possible to park near that area to pop into a pharmacy etc if you're in rush and not to be able to walk. Each street on that hill, the cars are parked on each side, you need to wait for the upcoming traffic to be able to proceed.

    Moreland City council has long given up on Pascoe Vale and I don't understand how they could not see the nightmare they're creating in this area as there's no return from this mistake. I remember the council seeking the opinion of locals regarding the development on the corner of Railway Pde and Gaffney St at some stage. I still think it's such a mistake to fill that corner with yet another building. That corner should have been developed into a little piazza, some little shops, something that the locals could've walked and enjoyed a little stroll.

    73 apartments on a suburban street, on a hill, in an area already so crammed, underdeveloped with infrastructure, parking space and everything is just the last slap on the face of the residents. Years to come, if I'm unable to do anything about this development today, I will be embarrassed to face the future children of this suburb.

    I'm all for the area's growth and development but with some thought, taste and planning within its capacity. If this capacity to be pushed, this also should be done with reason and other investments. The investor will build the apartment in six months and walk away with its pocket full but the locals including those new buyers will live with the consequences for the years to come.

    I really hope that the council will manage to work in unity to oppose this development to offer some faith to its residents.

    Kind regards,

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. Who should this go to?
    One of your elected local councillors

    Your elected councillors can answer your questions and represent you in council meetings.

    Don’t worry if you don’t know who to contact. Every councillor is there to represent you so just pick someone who seems nice.
  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts