1 Mount View Road, Upper Ferntree Gully VIC 3156

Development of a Medical Centre

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Knox City Council, reference P/2020/6431)


Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Vicki Toes commented

    This Medical Centre is not aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding area. Dawson Street has period houses and this will look like a big white elephant. It says on the application that it will have 19 car spaces. If it has provision for 13 practitioners, who probably will all have a car....that’s 13 spaces taken. Now if all practitioners have a patient each, that’s another 13 cars so with only 19 available where will the other 7 cars be parked? Some might ride a bicycle to use those 20 spaces, but usually if you’re going to see a doctor it means you’re usually sick and you won’t be feeling like getting the old push bike out! The surrounding parking is not sufficient to support more parked cars. So then cars will probably park in private car parks ie: Fern Tree Plaza, Royal Hotel etc. thus taking away car spaces for those businesses.
    This application has serious impact on the surrounding neighbours, local traffic, aesthetics of the area and available parking. It is not justifiable or sustainable for the area which already has local Doctors and Dentists, and who don’t need to have their already suffering businesses impacted again as they try to survive during Covid.

  2. Morgan commented

    Ryan Liu's development is like Box Hill Medical Centre. It plans to destroy some beautiful trees on the property and thus hurt our birdlife and our health.
    We recently bought into the area for the neighbourhood, the trees and the birds that come so close to people and our health - all of which would be destroyed by this development and force rate-payers to sell and move further out to stay healthy.
    If Knox Council considers this proposal during lockdown it means many residents will not be able to know or find out about it - which would be negligent and injurious to residents, to not be given reasonable chance to be informed - to be able to object.
    Having thirteen doctors working at one time, with only nineteen carspaces, means the developer obviously plans to use carspaces belonging to Ferntree Plaza, the Royal Hotel and street carparking, and further congesting traffic.
    A fair developer, with any real interest in health, would surely make a small medical centre not designed to harm health, destroy lovely old trees and hurt the native animals and people, which this 9metre building, overdeveloped, overpopulated building, does.
    I have never objected before, so please I need guidance to be able to make effective objection - please advise me.

  3. commented
    Hidden by site administrators
  4. Patricia Parkerson commented

    Without a doubt, this is most suitable for the development.

    And as a result already the land comes with Commercial 1 zoning.

    Where before recently also was the Ferntree Gully Paediatric Clinic's site.

    As located beside Ferntree Plaza, near Upper Ferntree Gully Train Station, the Angliss Hospital.

    Further, the nearby houses in our area are not heritage protected where the steets posses no architectural houses of any remarkable note mostly weatherboards with corrugated roofs, in an area that is mostly generic too.

    On the otherhand, clearly this proposal is really needed for our future care needs, consistent with area's future progress.

    With no issues here except typical nay sayer owners who refuse to move with the times as well.

  5. Morgan commented

    Is Patricia Parkerson a real person, and a resident? Or a paid employee of the developer?

  6. Morgan commented

    Patricia Parkerson, you fail to mention that previously it was a one-person clinic, in a vintage weatherboard home, on a property with some lovely trees and friendly native birds, things vital to health and wellbeing. Your proposal is of a 9metre high cheaply-made office block, with 13 doctors, only 19 carparks, that also destroys the trees and bird habitat. It is all concrete and the silly bike-racks are not a substitute for parking that would be stolen from Ferntree Plaza and the Royal Hotel and congest the street. It is not 'nay saying' for residents to want to be healthy and avoid this overdevelopment of an office-block amid beautiful vintage houses. This is an unhealthy development from a developer who does not care about health, otherwise he would propose a smaller clinic with 5 doctors, not 13, and care about the environment by keeping the largest trees and birds and not hurting the neighbourhood for money.
    Also to be trying to force this through during lockdown appears legally actionable as it prevents many residents from finding out or being able to protect their own homes.

  7. Ruth Millicent commented

    I firmly believe this is not a problem.

    None of the houses in our immediate suburb area are built in the 18th century which would be worth protecting like in Malvern, Hawthorn and other areas.

    The fact is the area is clearly commercial focused.

  8. Morgan commented

    Is Ruth Millicent a real resident? What houses were built in the 18thC in Melbourne? None that I know of in the suburbs I know well that she mentions. The beauty of Upper Ferntree Gully is the neighbourhood, the lovely vintage historical homes, and other appropriate family homes. An office block akin to Box Hill Medical Centre, a concrete unhealthy medical clinic of 13 doctors, is not any healthy addition.
    The area also is not commercially focused so this 'person' obviously has no idea or does not live close.
    Also note the miss-spellings in the plan and in some comments above - not in Australian usage - are these 'positive' comments coming from locals then?
    This is very unAustralian in its unhealthy proposal, traffic congestion, theft of others' carparks without payment, unsightly 9metre blight on the landscape, destruction of trees, and damage and destruction to native birds and people who love their neighbourhood.

  9. Hills Mate commented

    You are on the ball here, Morgan, and not the only one who is unconvinced by comical 'false positive' comments. Thank you, from a fellow resident! Don't get too caught up in their straw man's arguments. Keep your eye on the facts and 'keep the powder dry' on the rest, as they say.
    Just make sure you formally submit an objection to Knox City Council... in case your points here do not count in the planner's view as a submission (or may never reach them). You can use the council's website to do this and list all the reasons you've already mentioned, follow the link on this page to view "advertised plans" and make a submission https://www.knox.vic.gov.au/Page/Page.aspx?Page_Id=277

    As for the application, a slight reduction in size of this proposed building to accommodate even half the number of practitioners, would enable a continuity of the green canopy which is already being too disturbed by the destruction of backyards in place of impervious surfaces and building sizes across Knox. That is, if they are interested in re-establishing any natives of any decent use for wildlife. The external look of the building is terribly unsuited to the area, has the applicant not read Amendment C162 of the Knox Planning Scheme? This does not look like a building that responds to its surroundings very sensitively......

    Too right, Upper Ferntree Gully is not 'commercial focused'(?) and is hardly the centre of things by any stretch of the measure! We are a small township right next to the vast Dandenong Ranges NP. We could hardly be considered 'commercial' and that attempt just proves these fake profiles haven't spent much time living here, if at all. It is a mixture of old, renovated and new homes, but the difference is, even the new homes here are sensitively designed to respond well to the surroundings (and leave room for canopy trees) and they complement each other. The commenters need only look around a few blocks of Upper Gully to see the calibre of the homes being built here, if they cared to. It's not trying to be Malvern or Hawthorn but, guess what, beautiful stunning period homes aren't protected there either and those perfectly good homes get demolished too!

    Offending a community preemptively with intentionally overly-emotive insults about their homes is certainly not very wise. Don't force your way in here, and don't assume we're all against development. You have to come to the party and provide something of a high calibre worth getting behind first, Mr developer!

  10. Sean C commented

    Ruth Millicent You are so funny. John Batman purchased "Melbourne" in May 1835. You have no idea about this city. How much you get paid for this comments, 50c?

  11. Faye commented

    I also support this small development regardless.

    The houses nearby are plainly of no significance architecturally too.

    As the area is next to the shopping centre, and near the already developed medical precinct.

    These are the facts.

    But clearly, clouded by the obvious if not odious attempts to divert attention from them by comments of backward so called deluded residents. Who are of the classic, very limited and narrow in scope provincial mind set.

    A dreadful shame on you all.

  12. Vicki Toes commented

    Fay, Ruth and Patricia. So come on gals...how much were you paid for those comments? I seriously take offence to your comments about the residents of this area. We don’t mind progress but that progress must be sensitive and in keeping to the area. These plans are the complete opposite and certainly don’t take the vegetation, bird life, aesthetics or traffic and parking volume into account. I’m all for development but development that takes into consideration the area as a whole. Change the plans to a single story smaller development and I would be all for it. So don’t you dare say we have a very limited and narrow mindset. I am truly disgusted that you have stooped low enough to make these types of comments. For your information I have just spent a fortune on doing up my home...yeah sure...it’s not in Hawthorn or Malvern but at least my home suits this area and is not an eyesore.

  13. Morgan commented

    Thank you Hills Mate,
    I do not yet know how to object but need to, and hope I can contact someone to help.
    Vicki, look carefully, 'Faye', 'Ruth' and 'Patricia's' comments are written by the same person, not different people. Most likely the developer. They do not read like paid employees, but by someone with a vested interest. Also see the way they are set out. Like re-routed comments. 13 Edward Street also has these same developer fake comments added. This is a phenomenon I never saw in Planning Alerts in the years I lived elsewhere in Melbourne. Is Upper Ferntree Gully being targeted by Box Hill-like tower developers spreading out and trying to mis-lead planning during Covid lockdown?

  14. krystian commented

    I live in our beautiful area. But I support this. Main road is wide. Just make sure parking is on site. I like it. Otherwise looks good. Cheers

  15. isbael j commented

    Do shopping here.. Yeah Morgan [redacted by admin] your picking up developers Asian surname name [Liu] so what? plus putting down English use of some [not in Australian usage] really ain't cool. Anyway, I can lodge my objections to this. I want better access, native plants & street screening.

  16. Morgan commented

    'Isbael' sorry if I have offended you at all. One of my Asian friends is a horticulturist, and all value our native animals and birds and we respect each other. This over-development, parading as 'medical' during covid lockdowns, hurts health, breathing, and our township, and native birds, for generations to come.

  17. holly commented

    This is important because we ALL know that this medical centre gives us essential services & is better than any risk. Are you ok Morgan [name redacted by admin]? God, I'm in heaven!

  18. jacques poldermans commented

    The above development is totally out of sync. with the surrounding area in respect to buitlding height, destruction of existing trees and most importantly traffic congestion at the corner of Mountview Road and Dawson Street. As Mountview Road is the only way for vehicle traffic from around the Willow Road area to access the shopping complex and The Angliss Hospital without having to cross the Burwood Highway, additional vehicle movement at the above intersection will lead to traffic congestion and result eventually in accidents to pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed private medical clinic of 13 doctors could have frequency of 52 clients in 2 hours and 208 in an 8 hour day, not counting 15 minute appointments as well as an increase for arriving of people for appointments and those not having completed one. In short considering the above this application should be rejected and a smaller building with with facilities for 5 doctors considered as an alternative.

  19. Sally Scott commented

    Well interesting reading the comments but that is not why I am here. As a resident that sees first hand how this area is already impacted by lack of parking for nurses and other hospital staff. Having this size practice with a car park that potentially will only Just fit the said doctors, what about the other practitioners, the admin staff and also deliveries etc etc ...not only will it bring the overflow into the streets and other car parks it will bring traffic congestion.

  20. Sally Scott commented

    Well interesting reading the comments but that is not why I am here. As a resident that sees first hand how this area is already impacted by lack of parking for nurses and other hospital staff. Having this size practice with a car park that potentially will only Just fit the said doctors, what about the other practitioners, the admin staff and also deliveries etc etc ...not only will it bring the overflow into the streets and other car parks it will bring traffic congestion.

  21. Sebastian White commented

    Could it be any more obvious that Faye, Patricia and Ruth are the same person writing those comments? Come on. At least mix up your writing style a little.

    What a disappointing monstrosity of a building, which will completely disrupt the immediate area in which it would be situated — Upper Ferntree Gully already has the shopping district and the enormous Hospital area devoted to commercial / industrial infrastructure. The area that the planning outlines is at the mouth of the Ferny Creek trail, and is surrounded on all sides by vegetation and birdlife, not to mention families who have chosen the area for its stillness and humble, woody charm. Absolutely no-one who loves Upper Ferntree Gully would have asked for this ghastly neo-brutalist arrangement of brick and glass — only developers hunting for dilapidated or disused structures to bulldoze and build over. Oh dear.

  22. Sarah Reynolds commented

    Definitely agree with the supporters here for this to get green light. Unlike Morgan [name redacted by admin].
    As Council is completely on our side, who want to better our area and won't just approve anything, unlike what some downers like us to think here.
    Because with the council, this rather little development is critically, absolutely needed. As indeed:
    -There'll be no loss to the character of our area
    -There'll be no concrete jungle
    -There'll be no traffic congestion to area but a huge improvement
    -There'll be nothing unsafe about it
    -There'll be no loss of trees or green space, etc...

    On the contrary looks great this brilliant development with our council who know what they are doing.
    Which is already right beside our big local Maxi supermarket commercial area - this is fully recommended and is exactly more vital than ever before.
    Therefore, surely it'll be splendid; so quickly bring it on.
    Thank you for about time improving our local amenities and your help.

  23. Robinson family commented

    Together we're alright with this. What with the world as it is now -- we see the good in everything!

  24. mandy commented

    I am happy. But please NEVER have a McDonalds ever here.

  25. Hedley C commented

    I will be objecting to this development because it is not in harmony with the area. It will lead to the loss of part of the lovely green canopy to an arid car park. it will increase traffic density and potential risk to families and young children that use the adjacent bike track in large numbers. If the development proceeds in its current form, I will not be voting for my local council representative.
    I urge those that oppose this development to object to council as comments here do not count as objections.

  26. EVELYN commented

    It's onwards and upwards.
    Hedley you're part of a pack?

    Your comment is considered like rest... Or are you one of the same
    Look more investment = more money.

    Plus, houses prices go up
    But more important more money JUST to fix our community streets, footpaths, parks, everything.

    This is a great area THATneeds more developers, and this project is not in a residential area/street. It's right in the commercial ZONE.

    STRONGLY support it. And
    Yes I love and live in the area

  27. Sean C commented

    Hey Sarah Reynolds, Evelyn and etc,

    People know who you are. Please stop doing this kind of fake comments, you will just have more objectors.

  28. KOLT ROSTAM commented

    Other's agree that is not perfect and others want it.
    I must say that anything is better than the maxi supermarket eye sore now. It is obvious that this medical place with trained staff is needed. Nothing here to complain about.

  29. Barrett Jagger commented

    The bigger the bricks critics throw at it the bigger the palace that is going to be built.
    But she'll be apples.

  30. K Atreides commented

    Morgan [name redacted by admin].
    I’d say considering your constant commentary on this thread that you most likely know just who the cowards are that have been dumping junk mail into the mail boxes of myself and other residents of UFG, I call them cowards because you put no name or identification to this environmental rubbish.
    Tell your friends to keep their crap out of my post box as I will determine what I as a resident of this suburb either support or decline as acceptable.

  31. John Citizen commented

    Completely agree with K Atreides. Keep your shit out of our letterboxes you pests...I was neutral on the idea until I received that propaganda junk, now I am all for the development just to spite Morgan [name redacted by admin].

  32. Amelia commented

    Are we expected to always stop all developments?
    I'll give it a burl.

  33. COCO Farren commented

    Ignore donkeys and other naysayers!

  34. Steven Alexander commented

    As a resident of the area since 1989 - it has been fascinating to read the comments regarding the proposed development at 1 Mount View Road - Upper Ferntree Gully.

    We purchased a small home in Albert Street, and have enjoyed the unique area. It was wonderful to raise our family within close proximity to the UFTG Primary School, Angliss Hospital, Talaskia Reserve, Rlwy Station, & Ferntree Plaza - to name but a few conveniences.

    Those who reside at the 'Foothills' know how unique and delicate our little corner of the world is. To this end, I must object to the size and scale of the proposed development in its current form.
    Although many of the objectors have made good points - I took most note of the posts by Sally Scott, Jacques Poldermans and Hills Mate. Well done.

    I too have been bemused and amused by the interesting phrasing, terminology and arguments of some of the supporters of the proposal - eg Patricia, Ruth and Faye. Vicki Toes lovingly refers to them as 'The Gals'. Love It!

    I agree that the building appears unattractive - and not sympathetic to the area. Perhaps it would be more apt in Hawthorn or Malvern? Sally's point regarding the parking is well made. If there are only 19 car spaces for 13 doctors and patients, support staff, and deliveries - it would most likely add to car congestion at Ferntree Plaza and the Grand Hotel.

    However magnanimous 20 on site bike spaces may appear at first - closer scrutiny reveals the following -
    The doctors at the practice will not be utilizing the bike spaces. I imagine that there would be 13 'Doctors Only' car parking spaces (You will easily be able to identify the 'Doctors Only' slots - they will be well populated by Mercedes Benz and Range Rovers).This leaves only 6 parking spaces available to the patients and the rest!

    The proposal is being promoted as being conveniently located to public transport. Well, most people who are elderly or unwell will not be using public transport. They will either be driving their own vehicle (not a bicycle) - or being transported by a caring support person (not a 2 seat bicycle). Traffic and parking congestion!

    We already have 2 medical surgeries and 3 practicing doctors within 400 metres of the proposal. The Orion Medical Centre on the Burwood Highway has only one doctor at present - but has room for more doctors to join the clinic as the need arises.

    For medical emergencies - the Angliss Hospital is approximately 500 metres from the proposed development. Having my 2 children born there, as well as our own medical emergencies and outpatient treatments -I can vouch that there is nothing wrong with the Angliss!

    I am sympathetic with the sensible and sensitive development of the 'Foothills' - and would not be averse to a smaller clinic of, say, 5 doctors on a single story - or a discreet double story of no more than 9 metres.

    Having lodged my objection to the council, I was advised that the issue will most likely end up in VCAT early next year - as the objections have been quite vociferous on this issue.

    Well done everyone!


  35. Vicki commented

    Thanks Steve for your valuable opinion and official objection to this planning. I have said all along I am not objecting to a medical centre but just the size of it. It is not suitable to the area and a smaller single story medical centre would be welcome.
    I too have lodged an official objection but I did not receive notice that it would maybe go to VCAT.
    Is there anyone who could tell me who to vote for, and who would support our objection as I am having trouble trying to find a Dobson ward candidate who is willing to object to this in such a short period of time before having to return our postal vote.
    As I have only just received my postal voting info....it leaves little time to investigate who is willing to vote against this development...any guidance in this matter would be appreciated.... candidates opinions welcome

  36. Dobson resident commented

    Vicki - suggest you look at Dobson Candidates Mike Koclega's website - he posted before and after photos on this site and says it is not in line with UFG - thinks it does not fit the Upper Gully Strategic Plan.
    Meagan Baker posted that she Likes the developer's proposed building photo on Upper Gully Foothills Facebook page.
    The third candidate as yet has made no public comment.

  37. Vicki commented

    Thanks Steve for your valuable opinion and official objection to this planning. I have said all along I am not objecting to a medical centre but just the size of it. It is not suitable to the area and a smaller single story medical centre would be welcome.
    I too have lodged an official objection but I did not receive notice that it would maybe go to VCAT.
    Is there anyone who could tell me who to vote for, and who would support our objection as I am having trouble trying to find a Dobson ward candidate who is willing to object to this in such a short period of time before having to return our postal vote.
    As I have only just received my postal voting info....it leaves little time to investigate who is willing to vote against this development...any guidance in this matter would be appreciated.... candidates opinions welcome

  38. Bridget Normandy commented

    Really dumping your crap in letter boxes.
    The same coward naysayers are out again with comments.

    Stay away from negative people.They have a problem for every solution.

  39. Vladimir T Smirnov commented

    CONGRATULATIONS to all those fine men, women & families who supported this small development across our community. What do you think is worth waiting for? Oh my, the objectors here seem all the one person. What makes you weird? Agree about Morgan [name redacted by admin] (and her B.S. cohort). Hypocrite littering our letterboxes with anonymous paper junk mail, but crying to protect our environment.
    Be adult enough to walk away from the nonsense of idiots around us.
    Vladimir T Smirnov

  40. Brad Longman commented

    They're Carrying on like a pork chop. Agree Need this.
    No growth in our area = no real estate price increases for younger families. Some Old tosser owners nearby stopping growth.

  41. Steve commented

    Mmmmm. Pork Chops!

  42. Paulina & 3 children commented

    WE are overall very happy with this.
    As community members we want it to go ahead. Nothing is permanent.
    All smiles & god bless.

  43. Steve commented

    Dear Brendan.
    Thank you for your thoughtful and courteous contribution to this important discussion.
    On behalf of the Old Tossers – we would like to welcome you to our community. We hope you find your stay here as pleasant and as tranquil as we previously have - and now do.
    Just a reminder that the Yellow Lid bins (general rubbish) - are collected once per week – on Tuesday mornings. (Best to put it out on Monday nights).
    The Blue Lid bin is for recyclables – collected on alternate weeks (once per fortnight).
    The Red Lid bin is for green waste – and is collected on the alternate week to the Blue Lid bin (as mentioned above).
    If you are unsure – just see what bins the Old Tossers are putting out on Monday nights – you’ll soon get the hang of it!
    On behalf of the Old Tossers -We hope that your short term property speculation bears fruit for you. We all sincerely wish for you and your nearest and dearest to be in good health – and remind you that the Angliss Hospital is within 600 metres of the proposed development site.
    We would further like to reassure you that there are also 3 other doctors / 2 clinics within 300 metres of the proposed development. Rest assured that they also offer excellent ‘in clinic’ operatives to take blood samples for analysis of anything you may have concerns about. This is not to mention an Endoscopy clinic, Oncology clinic, and mental health facility (Chandler House) – all on Albert Street – just 400 metres from the proposed development! Who would have thought!
    Hopefully this can help (to) allay your concerns regarding your medical options and needs in the area.
    On behalf of all the ‘Old Tossers’ - we would like to sincerely welcome you to ‘The Hood’!
    Don’t be a stranger – we hope to see you at one of the amazing clinics already being offered in UFTG.
    If you have any undisclosed information as to why we may need a sudden influx of 13 more doctors to the village – please advise. We have a right to know.
    Finally, Dr M.Utten at the Orion Clinic has been trying to attract just 1 other doctor to work in the clinic for the last 2 years. No doctors as yet have been interested.
    Your’s in good health.
    Old Tossers.

  44. Belinda Winfolds commented

    It's no surprise that Steve's comments here are passé.

    This application closed to genuine objections around 8 October 2020.

    Where a wise man changes his mind, a fool never will.

  45. Harry commented

    Objections are still open and can be made until Council meeting vote. Council meeting will probably in be in December. Objections can be made direct to Council.

  46. Harry commented

    Objections are still open and can be made until Council meeting vote. Council meeting will probably in be in December. Objections can be made direct to Council.

    Some issues are
    Not enough on-site parking for 13 doctors with 30min/15min appointments.

    Traffic congestion and safety for children and families, as there is a school nearby. Traffic congestion would make crossing dangerous for schoolchildren, families, bike-riders and dog-walkers.

    Not suitable for surrounding area, it is one-corner property, oddly zoned commercial, in a block that is zoned Residential, and surrounded by mostly single-storey homes.

    The ''visual bulk'' of the building, with noisy air-conditioning and bright lights, directly overlooking single-storey homes.

    Loss of canopy trees, Knox already has less canopy trees than Whitehorse. Upper Ferntree Gully is the ''Gateway to the Dandenong Ranges''.

    Removing canopy and safe access to Ferny Creek Trail - which is a ''wildlife corridor'' where many native birds move through, being close to the National Park

    So if anyone else wants to make an Objection, please call Knox Council and submit your objection in writing.

  47. Lyndsay neighbour commented

    Spot on. Clearly, all the sensible supporters are right.

    The objectors are one of few in modern denial.

    The supermarket next door/opposite is absolutely awful concrete jungle but this will go a long way to do great things for our area.

  48. Vicki commented

    Harry thanks for your great information. Steve...I’m clearly part of the “old tosser” brigade and I appreciate your friendly advice to our new neighbours (or are they? 😉) about bin night...very helpful of you. Thanks Dobson resident for pointing me in the right direction on whom to vote for. My goodness....some of these comments read like who’s who of the neighbourhood. My husband has lived in the area since 1985 and I have worked in the area since 2000 and lived in our house since 2004 so between us we know just about all the locals. Not one single resident I have spoken to, that will be highly impacted by this development, is happy with it. Us “old tossers” are happy for the development to go ahead if it was single storey with half the amount of doctors. We already have all the doctors we need in the area with the hospital nearby and really??? do we need more??? Completely inappropriate to the streetscape.

  49. P. Bolston commented


    Steve, Harry or is it Morgan? Anyhow,
    I Also feel I'd love this to be built.

    Obviously, because Maxi supermarket --& its run down huge plot with noise, cars, & huge amount of available parking.
    That's is next to this new development.

    There's no loss of privacy, no parking issues, no street or traffic issues, no noise, therefore it's on a commercial zoned lot already with no effect on listed building or conservation area, the proposed layout and density of building is appropriate with its
    design, appearance and materials and with Covid and employment a useful help to government generation related policy and so forth.

    Renounce and enjoy!

  50. Harry commented

    Thank you Vicki, and Steve, enjoyed reading your views.

    With parking, this developer has tandem-parking, where cars are locked-in behind other cars. The Royal Hotel's carpark is for patrons only and is a tow-away zone. The bus-stop, with stationary bus, is directly outside 1 Mount View Road.

    (The developer, under female and male aliases, has said local residents are backward, deluded, very limited, have narrow provincial mind-set, are donkeys, coward naysayers, hypocrite, downers, idiots, B.S. cohort, pork chop, fools and old tosser owners.

    Developer here claims UFG has ''no architectural houses of remarkable note in a generic area, ''the houses nearby are of no significance'', that the area is ''commercially-focused.'' Comment asking for ''better access'' matches his planned second drive-way off Mount View Road for one car, in an already narrow and over-capacity street.)

    Objections to Council are open until council-vote, meeting likely in December.

  51. Clarke & Helen commented

    Seen plans, not that bad. Whoever is crying you must live next door. I feel for you. The facts are this site is in a commercial area.

  52. Steve commented

    Hello Belinda.
    Hope you are feeling ok?
    No hard feelings from my end - I am a very forgiving person. As pointed out by Harry - It is not too late for you to lodge your objections. Good luck – and welcome to the team!

    Vicki - Your house looks FANTASTIC - well done to you and your husband on the tasteful renovations. Now THAT'S what is going to add value to the area - not some ugly concrete development unsympathetic to the area.

    Apparently us Old Tosser Objectors are in "modern denial"

    We are being instructed to "Renounce and enjoy!"

    Never. Never. The Old Tossers will NEVER SURRENDER!

  53. Chris Elder commented

    I live in Mountview Rd.....its a nigtmare especially when cars decide to drive down the wrong way...it is a very narrow road and very busy as it is. Previously staff at the hosdpital were using this road for all day parking... now it is a 2 hr limit and we can now have visitors again! This facility will impact upon residents once again and Dawson St will be even busier. We already have two medical centres in UFTG and the hospital has room for specialist apointments at Chandler House.
    P.S. This forum does not need people like you 'FAYE'...being rude and calling residents in this Municipality backward and deluded. Shame on you Faye! Where are you manners?
    Keep it tidy please. I wonder about your values!

  54. Steve Alexander commented

    Well said Chris.
    Very informative and well put.
    I also agree that there is an agressive slapdown of anyone who raises concerns against.
    I have been called an Old Tosser' and a Fool.
    Let's keep it civil.

  55. Chris Elder commented

    I find it very hard to comprehend why there would be rooms for 13 doctors!
    Especially when as mentioned by resident 'Steve' that the Dr from Orion Clinic has been scouting for a Dr. for a couple of years to no avail! This facility may well be built in a Commercial zone but residents, traffic congestion and the local wild life need to be considered as do our local school children and the elderly who need to cross an already busy Dawson St. The speed along Mountview Rd and Dawson street is horrendous and this will only increase with the extra heavy load of traffic.

    It is obvious the comments for the facility to go ahead does not affect some residents directly. There are the 'Precious People' who are guilty of creating a marginalized community so long as it suits them!. They don't want to go out of their way to travel to appointments but want it all....no matter the cost to others or the environment.

    Residents who object are certainly not deluded, narrow minded, nor backward but merely disillusioned and do not wish to be living on the edge of a miniature Box Hill!!

  56. Alicia commented

    Wheel chair toilets, parking

    disabilities matter

  57. HC commented

    Council accepts objections until the council meeting vote, which I am told is on the 21st of December.
    Otherwise the plans will not be changed, reading the developer's comments here.

  58. HM commented

    I was just informed by a local horticulturist that the canopy trees actually on Ferny Creek Trail would also die with the concrete in the adjacent car-park over much of their roots.

    Fresh air, access and use of the walking and cycling trail contribute more to public health, and Covid concerns, than a private concrete block of office-suites.

  59. Harry commented

    In Agenda for Knox Council Meeting on 21st of December, the Planning Officer asks Councillors to grant a permit for a 9-doctor, two-storey clinic, operating between 7am-9pm, retaining one canopy tree, and also granting the developer rights to remove two street trees.
    He says 47 households objected. Council says only he reads our objections, not the councillors voting, and objector issues are not mentioned or addressed in Agenda presentation. No recognition of Upper Ferntree Gully being different to Knox in general with UFGs proximity to the National Park, no mention of Ferny Creek Trail and its ''wildlife corridor''.
    He says it is ''well designed and will make a positive contribution to the local neighbourhood''. I did not receive a letter, or notice of the meeting. Meeting Agenda is on Knox Council website, for meeting starting at 5pm, with public access and live-streamed on Zoom, on Monday 21st of December, 2020.

  60. Alexis Smith commented

    The development of another medical centre at 1 Mountain View Road UPPER FERNTREE GULLY is not needed as we have enough medical centres in our area. We do not need another one which will destroy trees and the habitat of birds on this site. Yet another greedy developer eating away sections of our area. Won't be stopping my car to allow cars to enter or exit the Carpark nor will l be a patient of this unnecessary clinic. I implore the Council not to grant permission for this development.

  61. HC commented

    Alexis, comments here go to Knox Planning who wrote the Agenda recommendation to ask Councillors to vote to give the developer a permit. The Meeting Agenda 21st December 2020 report is on the Council website. The Planner advocates developer interests in the Agenda, not mentioning or considering our concerns. Council Planning told neighbour today our objections are not sent, unless requested, to the councillors voting. No transparency or fair practice. Will Councillors have enough knowledge of the area and residents? Hills Mate, please advise.

  62. HC commented

    You can email your views to the Knox Councillors - though vote is today at 5pm https://www.knox.vic.gov.au/Page/Page.aspx?Page_Id=82
    The Planning Officer is advocating for the Developer's interests, and the Councillors have not read our objections, it is not being conducted fairly as we have no informed representation.
    The Planner in meeting Agenda does not recognise the specialness of UFG, and Ferny Creek Trail and also gives the Developer permission to destroy all, except one, canopy trees on the property, and trees actually on Ferny Creek Trail Entrance. At 9 suites, 9 metres high, in a residential block.
    Planner did not send a letter of the meeting, and those who did receive a letter were told it is 21st of December at 7pm, when the meeting is actually at 5pm, with public access and live-streamed. Without transparency of process and figures, without fair process, and only allowing questions afterwards. Any legal court would delay until we also have our side heard, and this needs investigation.

  63. Hills Maiden commented

    There were 57 Objections, from 52 households, which should have triggered Community Consultation ("PCC" being over 50).
    Knox Council removed six Objections from the Council file. The Planner's Agenda presented the false figure of 47 households, preventing a Community Consultation Meeting.
    A formal complaint was filed in January 2021 to investigate and Knox now admits to leaving out four Objectors (two more received online, Council discounts saying they were blank, although they never told the Objectors of the online fault, and sent them letters that they were Objectors.)
    Subsequently in May 2021 Knox invalidated three more Objectors to try to cover up breaking their own rules.
    One Objection that Knox Council hid and did not consider was from Save the Dandenongs League.

  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