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 month ago. It was received by them about 1 month earlier.

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

41 Comments

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. Morgan commented

    Sorry got developer's name wrong in previous comment, re-reading report says it is Steven Cao.
    Steven Cao'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.

  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

    Excellent.
    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!

    Steve

  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
    Regards

  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
    Regards

  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.
    CHEERS,
    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!

  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