145 Glenlyon Road, Brunswick VIC 3056

Use of the land for trade supplies and restricted retail premises (Bunnings), buildings and works including the construction of a two storey building with mezzanine, display of signs, reduction in the bicycle requirements and creation of an easement

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website about 1 month ago. It was received by them 3 months earlier.

(Source: Moreland City Council, reference MPS/2020/260)

21 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Robert Follis commented

    There should be no reduction in bicycle parking anywhere in Melbourne

    Most shops and shopping streets have nowhere near enough secure bike parking, not even enough bicycle hoops in most areas.

    Cycling is increasing massively, please ensure it is properly catered for.

    Cheers Robert

  2. Dawn Waight commented

    MPS/2020/260 The T.T.M. Consulting Vic. Pty. Ltd.'s traffic impact report details were calculated at Bunnings Warehouse 266 Darebin Road Fairfield (not a Moreland municipality) on Saturday 3rd of August and only for one hour 12pm to 1pm not traffic going along Glenlyon Road.Brunswick and peak periods. They were calibrated during stage 3, two days before stage 4 Covid-19 times .By the way the default speed limit along Glenlyon Road is 50 not 60 kph. Darebin Road warehouse is opposite a park and not a residential area but an industrial area Glenlyon Road is residential. Traffic reports should be on Glenlyon Road. I am sure Police just down the road in Dawson st who frequently use Glenlyon Road to get to the city and local surrounds with their cars and booze buses plus other vehicles, fire engines, ambulances would not like to compete with 19 metre semi trailers and 12.5 metre rigid trucks this proposal is asking to do. As far as traffic congestion, anyone who has tried to make a right hand turn from the Coles Service Station in Glenlyon Road will tell you don't do this unless you have a death wish and this proposal is only a few doors away from the Service Station. Locals will tell you the practicalities of cars travelling west down Glenlyon Road from Lygon Street to try to turning right into Bunnings will cause a bank up of traffic all the way back to the intersection of Glenlyon Road and Lygon Street and may be further back. This traffic congestion already happens at Glenlyon Road and Minnie Street just 8 houses from this site. This is a totally inappropriate development in a residential area. The previous businesses did not have as much traffic continually going through. 250 car parks does not mean 250 cars a day. Calculate 200 cars X 8 hours equals an additional 1600 cars each day along Glenlyon Road more when Bunnings open late! Cars will be constantly going in and out at least every 30 to 60 minutes. I don't see too many people riding their bikes, walking or catching a bus (anyway bus no 506 only go to 9 Monday to Friday, 6pm Saturday and does not run Sunday. Quite a lot of purchases require a car. By widening the existing cross overs along Glenlyon Road residents are loosing parking places. Residents have invested their future in their properties expecting a much quieter and safer life on their local road and streets. They are financially bound to their homes that they thought they would live in for a long time. There should be strict adherence to the Moreland City Council General Laws of 2018 in regard to outer hours deliveries and commercial rubbish. Please Moreland Council Planning Department think twice before allowing this.

  3. Michael Welch commented

    This enormous undertaking is just not appropriate for this site. It is a highly prized residential area, the traffic is already horrendous along Glenlyon rd and also along a narrowed Lygon st. It would be incredibly difficult for semi trailers to access the site from Lygon/Pitt st from the rear or from a very busy Glenlyon rd at the front and the impact on parking and traffic flow would be catastrophic.
    Bunnings is proposing to have extended hours so the impact would be multiplied.
    I don’t think a proper assessment of traffic impact, noise pollution, parking access for local businesses and residents and the destruction of established small businesses already reeling under Covid.
    We have plenty of Bunnings stores within a stones throw, in properly serviced sites away from residential areas on sites shared with other large retailers, with the appropriate traffic arrangements and appropriate designated car parking.
    Why squeeze this into an inappropriate site when really council should require Bunnings to explore options away from residential centres especially in this area already renowned for its traffic and parking issues.
    There are many small businesses struggling in this Covid period and to allow Bunnings to trample in and snatch their livelihoods away is just a Council not representing its residents and small businesses as they are supposed to do.
    I have worked part time in the area close to this site and believe it has the potential to have an incredibly negative impact on residents and small businesses in Brunswick.

  4. Sarah Spargo commented

    1. During normal times, Glenlyon Rd is so congested during peak hour that cars are banked up several blocks. Adding to this is inappropriate in a residential area.
    2. The traffic impact report was done during Covid times, and outside peak hours. This gives a result that has very limited bearing on reality.
    3. There is a Bunnings in Sydney Rd, with adequate parking facilities, which is only ten minutes walk from this proposed location.
    4. Parking spots in neighbouring residential streets are so already full that residents frequently have to park half a street away from their home. This is getting worse over recent years, not better. Despite allocating parking, it is unreasonable to presume that all patrons will use it in preference to residential streets.
    5. Articulated vehicles typically use more than one lane to turn. This risks blocking traffic, and risks more collisions.

    Please consider an appropriate traffic impact study that properly reflects the true nature in this location, after the restrictions have lifted, and please use Bunnings in Sydney Rd for this, and please include peak hours.

    Please consider this an OBJECTION to this planning application.

  5. Rebecca Blackmore commented

    Much better than a multi story poorly built high rise and at least it's useful to us. You know all you serial complainers, if you block this, a giant horrid apartment building will go up in its place. This is the best you'll get.

  6. Chris McDonald commented

    I have to agree with Dawn's comments re the traffic in Glenlyon Road.

    In addition, it's almost impossible to find a car park in Glenlyon Road now, let alone when hundreds of vehicles start parking nearby; which they will. You can see this at other Bunnings sites where some people prefer to park on the street rather than in the crowded car park.

    Not to mention the traffic flow, or lack of! You can sit for ages trying to turn right into Glenlyon Road from Lygon St as it is now. I have seen frustrated drivers overtake someone waiting to turn right, to get around the corner into Glenlyon Road before the lights change. It is deadly as is; please don't allow it to become worse!

    Peak hours aside, traffic travelling east backs up for miles along Glenlyon road, waiting for lights on Lygon St. How is this this 50 kph street going to cope with a huge increase in traffic? Simply put, it won't.

    Why put a Bunnings store here anyway? There is already one only 1.3 kms away in Sydney Road! I can always get a car park there on Sydney Road, or they have a large car park out the back, and there are always plenty of spaces. This is unnecessary to say the least.

  7. Gabi Macdonald commented

    i strongly object to this proposed Bunnings shop. The increase in traffic will make already dangerous roads, deadly - the cars of shoppers, the utes of tradies and delivery vehicles will join a huge traffic flow. Many children, young people and disabled people live in this area. Moreland City Council should be a place of inclusion and safety for all people and this change to our neighbourhood will endanger all pedestrians and bike riders.

    The site is currently in a residential area - albeit close to businesses - and it is important that we don't bring an even bigger commercial interests into this spot. Sydney road is very close - there are many more suitable positions for Bunnings in the local area.

  8. Rowena Craick commented

    I object to this planning application on the basis that the traffic impact study does not accurately represent the impact on the local residential area.

    Traffic along Glenlyon rd, where the main bunnings entry/exit is proposed, is already at a complete standstill during (and outside of) peak periods. This study was conducted during perhaps the quietest period in living memory due to COVID lockdowns and is a disingenuous attempt by the developer to sneak this proposal though without accurately representing the true impact on the community and local traffic.

    Council has already held traffic studies and community meetings, hearing numerous concerns about ‘rat running’ traffic that try to escape this congestion in Glenlyon rd by racing north up Minnie street and east along Evans st. This development will dramatically worsen existing community concerns and this application proposes no improvements or solutions to manage the massive increase in traffic to the area. I am tired of seeing the Moreland council (and ratepayers) foot the bill for correcting poor development decisions after they have been approved. The developers should be responsible for major traffic alterations before approvals are given, not leaving it to council and residents to solve later after much community anger.

    This is a residential area, with high volumes of Cyclists which are already at risk in this intersection of Glenlyon/Lygon through the loss of the bike lane and turning traffic. There are also major safety issues for cyclists further back at Minnie and Glenlyon. Right turns by cars across traffic at the proposed entry and exit will also significantly increase risk to cyclists at this intersection.

    Extended opening hours is also inappropriate for a residential neighborhood.

    The are so many industrial sites in the area which are more appropriate for this kind of development.

    Although Lygon st is a high density growth corridor and Council designated activity Centre - numerous residential developments have been approved with reduced parking - on the sole basis that it is well serviced by cycling and public transport options - However this existing Lygon tram service now essential to these high rise residents will also be impacted by the increased traffic volumes heading to/from Bunnings. As the trams have no choice but to sit in the single lane traffic jams, this will severely impact the existing transport options the council has consistently encouraged reliance upon.

    Having watched Bunnings move into Sydney rd less than 1km away from this site and put the existing hardware store opposite out of business, I see no need for council to accept a second bunnings store which will also impact other local small businesses and inappropriately impact the residential amenity, traffic, public transport and cyclists.

  9. Anna Vost commented

    I object to this development of yet another large retail establishment that will have detrimental impacts on smaller local businesses. The traffic along Glenlyon Rd and Lygon St is already very high in peak times, affecting the liveability in the area . The reduction of bike infrastructure will impact the many residents in the area that commute to work by bike. As there are already multiple Bunnings stores in Moreland I have seen smaller businesses lost. This is not what we want for Moreland

  10. Andrew Phillips commented

    Will exacerbate an already horrendous traffic situation. There is an existing Bunnings around the corner. The fabric of Brunswick is changing at a nightmarish rate to the point where it is too noisy and crowded for comfortable living. Please do not do this.

  11. Ricardo Fernandez Carrascal commented

    I strongly object to the development of another bunnings store in a residential area.
    100% agree with Sarah's comments, and I think many others would agree too;
    1. During normal times, Glenlyon Rd is so congested during peak hour that cars are banked up several blocks. Adding to this is inappropriate in a residential area.
    2. The traffic impact report was done during Covid times, and outside peak hours. This gives a result that has very limited bearing on reality.
    3. There is a Bunnings in Sydney Rd, with adequate parking facilities, which is only ten minutes walk from this proposed location.
    4. Parking spots in neighbouring residential streets are so already full that residents frequently have to park half a street away from their home. This is getting worse over recent years, not better. Despite allocating parking, it is unreasonable to presume that all patrons will use it in preference to residential streets.
    5. Articulated vehicles typically use more than one lane to turn. This risks blocking traffic, and risks more collisions.
    6. The impact on small businesses around the area will be catastrophic

  12. Leigh-Ann Billingham commented

    I object to this planning application based on it being its significant size as well as impacts to traffic, overshadowing of surrounding residential properties and the impact it will have on small businesses that are part of the character of this area.

    Currently there is a Bunnings Brunswick, Bunnings Coburg, Bunnings Northland, Bunnings Fairfield. The need for another Bunnings in such short proximity in relations to their other locations will impact the surrounding businesses and traffic while at the same time will not be fulfilling the need of trade and hardware goods that the local community is unable to access in its nearby locations.

    The proposed signage at Glenlyon and Lygon Street will also be an eyesore and out of character of this area. The traffic congestion that will occur with 2 entry points on Glenlyon St and 1 exit via Pitt St will make unsafe areas for bicycles as will as vehicles loading any large hardware goods.

    The overshadowing will be most impactful in the morning added with increased traffic this area would be a dark and busy area for residents in both 1 storey and 4 storey apartments.

    This area is home to many small businesses which is a vital part of this community’s personality. This development would out of character and completely unnecessary. Please listen to the community of Moreland and deny this proposed development.

    Thank you,
    Leigh-Ann

  13. Joy Whitton commented

    My strong objection to this proposal is that cyclists understandably avoiding Sydney Road use alternative roads closer to Lygon and along Glenlyon road. Yet the proposal will increase car and truck traffic around these areas.
    We are adequately served by other close Bunnings stores in Brunswick (Sydney Road) and Coburg so there is no nett gain. And there are nice local plant shops/nurseries that stand to lose business which is sad as they’re nice spaces to walk around and might be pushed out.

    (resident for 30 years)

  14. linda williams commented

    I work just down the road from this site off Glenlyon road. In peak hour, Glenlyon road is becoming inaccessible to enter to via car. Other road users less are already less likely to be patient and give me room to turn in to Glenlyon road. Adding semi's, etc in the mix on roads not designed for them - no dual carriageways leading to the proposed site - will make it much worse.

    On the days I choose to travel by bicycle, on foot or motor scooter, the increased traffic whether it be tradies in four-wheel drives or large trucks will be more hazardous.

    With the abundance of Bunnings within roughly a 5km zone of this site has been remarked upon by others. A trade site should be considered not as close to urban housing and an already difficult intersection.

  15. Bill Ramsay commented

    More than 350 objections to date - which are supposed to be in the public domain. Council has advised they won't share a link to the objections until, they've had a chance to read them, probably in a couple of weeks. So at best guess 3 weeks after the Notice of Application closed (18 Sept) ratepayers and residents may be granted access to documents in the public domain. I've asked the Planner whether the Applicant will have access during this period.

    Council also ignored its own policy on Virtual Moreland and the mandatory povidion of 3D models for development in Activity Centres. Despite correspondence with the CEO (delegated to Director - Future Cities) I've had no response on the issue.

  16. Robbi M commented

    I have lived around the corner from the proposed site for 21 years. Over the years, the whole area including nearby Lygon, Albert and Nicholson st. have become overdeveloped with high rise buildings causing impenetrable, noisy traffic and a million cyclists - it's unsafe, polluted. The congested to the point of being dangerous.

    What advantages will another Bunnings bring to that site?
    We don't need or want another Bunnings when there is one in Sydney road, Fairfield, Coburg and Preston! It's common sense, is it not?
    It would be quite strange for council to allow this I think. It would really reflect badly on them, their ability to make positive, sound decisions.
    Please don't let us down Moreland Council. Please listen to us - we, the people who live here, who object.
    Thank you
    Robbi

  17. John Lovelock commented

    Very good application-provides a must needed service and is a much more efficient use of the site than the existing use. The reduction of bicycle parking is appropriate-unrealistic people will be able to carry large items on a bicycle.

    Meets the following objectives of Industrial 1 Zone
    -To provide for industries and associated uses in specific areas where special consideration of the nature and impacts of industrial uses is required or to avoid inter-industry conflict
    -To allow limited retail opportunities including convenience shops, small scale supermarkets and associated shops in appropriate locations.

    Additionally, the following goals of the DDO is achieved:
    To ensure highly visible development is limited to identified key redevelopment sites and responds to specific design objectives.
    To ensure development is designed to respect the form, design and context of buildings of individual heritage significance.

  18. erica plompen commented

    Interesting to note that Mr Lovelock works for the organisation who has pulled together the application for Bunnings - seems a bit of a conflict of interest and yet has been submitted to council as a 'letter of support'. What Mr Lovelock doesn't mention is that this site is transitioning from the industrial zone to a mixed use zone as council planners have determined that the industrial zoning is no longer appropriate given the changing nature of this area - so the application meets a zoning outcome that was appropriate 20 years ago, not that of today or the future of the area. It also does not comply with the DDO especially in relation to height limits and set backs - a fact acknowledged in its own application. While the site may currently be underutilised does this application provide the best outcomes and maximises its use - not according to the MUZ outcomes council is seeking.

  19. Mark J commented

    The Bunnings development is completely inappropriate for the following reasons:

    Traffic – Glenlyon Road is a busy road. I have lived on this road for over 10 years and traffic has become very congested. This road is already congested during the day, and completely bottlenecked at school pick up and peak hour. The development of this site will increase the traffic and increase congestion and pollution. Idling cars outside my front door reduces the air quality and makes this area unliveable.

    Safety - This road due to traffic congestion is not a safe shared space currently. This development will increase large haulage and traffic making the area increasingly unsafe for pedestrians, cyclists and the for the local childcare and kindergarten.

    -Residential setting - inappropriate location for such a large commercial building. This business should be in a larger commercial space, to reduce the impact on surrounding streets, residents, noise levels, pollution, congestion and reduction of quality of life for residents already living in a high density suburb.

    -Creation of rat runs around the surrounding streets

    - Increased pressure of public transport services – with suspected delay in trams and buses due to traffic congestion

    -Increased rates over time – the residents will end up being responsible through their rates in paying to manage the impact of increased traffic in the region

    -Loss of local business. With the opening of the Sydney Road Bunnings – three local hardware stores were directly impacted, and have closed. We have a nursery in Lygon Street that will be directly impacted by this large store. Brunswick residents have moved to this region due to the creativity and character of local suppliers – Brunswick will become increasingly homogenised and soulless if large commercial superstores are permitted to compete with small businesses.

  20. Mitch Jones commented

    This development is inappropriate for a number of reasons.

    - increase in traffic makes the surrounding streets more congested, polluted and unsafe
    - impact on local businesses by allowing a large corporate trade supplier to disrupt the local economy
    - cultural heritage of Brunswick east being a unique zone of small businesses. We don’t need more monolithic corporate developments in these neighborhoods. Instead we should be preserving a culture of difference and independence which keeps our neighborhood vibrant.
    - impact on local residents and neighbors. People should have a say on what gets built in their immediate vicinity.

  21. Linda Williams commented

    The reduction in bicycle parking should never be considered in any proposal. The increase in the numbers of bicycle users is well researched and shown. Mr Lovelock's suggestion that it is "unrealistic people will be able to carry large items on a bicycle" totally ignores that possibility that the person who sold the large item to someone may have ridden a bicycle to work - and where are they going to store their bike and change?

    The proposal is preposterous in this location with the number of large green warehouses in co-located suburbs, and the likelihood of better locations within a 3 or 4 km radius in an industrial zone.

  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. 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