1 - 5 Threadneedle Street, Balwyn VIC 3103

Construction of nineteen (19) dwellings on a lot and a front fence greater than 1.5 metres in height.

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Boroondara City Council, reference PEOT22/0092)

14 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. David commented

    Surely the density is extreme. Where is the consideration for local residents, traffic flow and parking, let alone the impact on the vegetation and open land requirem3nts

  2. Rachel commented

    I agree with David. This will create issues with parking and traffic flow through the area. Your website also says that you intend to build 17 dwellings, not 19, which is also too many for the space and area. Are you actively trying to deceive or is this a ploy to get approval for 17 by asking for 19? Sounds a little fishy to me.

    Threadneedle Street is an important through road for people who cannot turn right onto Union Road between the hours of 4-6 pm during the week. If you add 19 dwellings it will cause traffic issues during these times, creating more trouble for people trying to get home.

  3. Hasan commented

    There used to be a 1915 built house and a well established garden on this site. The garden consisted of a number of canopy and large trees, shrubs and lawns, it was sold and the house and garden were bulldozed in 2018.

    In 2018 the developer lodged a planning application (PP18/01333) for 'Construction of a two storey apartment building comprising of nineteen (19) dwellings'.

    In May 2022 the developer lodged a planning application (PEOT22/0092) for
    'Construction of nineteen (19) dwellings on a lot and a front fence greater than 1.5 meters in height'.

    Their advertising states 'The Planning Permit has been granted for 17 home-sized residences' yet the application states 'Construction of nineteen (19) dwellings on a lot '. Is the application for 17 or 19 dwellings? Weather it is 17 or 19 dwellings it is still a gross over development of this site 'in a quiet tree-lined street'.

    This proposed gross over development is basically one, two storey building that will take up the entire site. In their information they state that each dwelling will have 2 car parks. Where will these car parks be built? Will they be built underground? If they are built underground will it involve digging a deep trench the size of the site, build a concrete car park then the concrete two storey building on top of it? If this method of building is used there will be no space on this site for open green spaces or the planting of canopy, large or small trees. This gross over development will change the nature and character of the whole area.

    This gross over development will also increase the number of cars that use the street as well as on street parking.

    Is this proposed gross over development suitable for 'a quiet tree-lined street' in Balwyn?

    A gross over development was proposed by a developer for Francesca St in Mont Albert North in 2017, just down the road from Threadneedle St. The planning application was for building 25 dwellings with an underground car park. The Whitehorse Council had a number of concerns in regards to the application and received 68 objections from concerned local residents, the council decided not to approve the application. The developer took the council to VCAT, in 2018 VCAT also decided not approve the application. To read about VCAT's decision go to Austlii and search for Ausgood Development v Whitehorse (December 14, 2018).

  4. Dan Chau commented

    I strongly oppose this high desity development that will destroy the character of this neighbourhood.
    Please stop this insane and greedy developer!

  5. Sylvia commented

    TEALS AND GREENS TAKE NOTE!
    This is exactly the type of issue that should be addressed by these "climate change" people or was it just a sham without any conviction?
    This number of units on a single block represents the decimation of carbon absorbing, oxygen giving trees, in addition to the removal of uncovered ground for water absorption.
    This surely must be classified as overdevelopment, if not, then what is?
    This is not environmentally friendly at all.

  6. Bron commented

    Surely a development of this nature is only suitable for main roads, not quiet suburban streets. It’s amazing how some property owners require council permission to change the colour of their paint or style of roof tiles, as this would impact of the heritage and feel of our suburb - and yet whoever is in charge of approving projects such as this, seem to throw those principles out the window, with sub-divisions and hideous fence to fence ‘town’ house designs.Please! I realise the council may profit from heightened population but please stop greedy developers destroying this area.

  7. Someone who cares commented

    Not another greedy, opportunistic development.

    Allowing this type of high-density overdevelopment is another nail in the coffin for the local neighbourhood character, open space, canopy trees, low-density living.

    When are council and government (VCAT) going to wake up to the irreversible harm they are allowing with removal of our green spaces, and creation of urban heat islands?

  8. Bridget commented

    Sadly all this over development is not just a Council issue, but a Vic Building Code issue.
    The best of this areas homes are old and on larger blocks, hence developers are prepared to bulldoze everything in sight to maximise their profits. Time for the legislators to wake up though, this is not what the local residents want or expect, it is not at all environmentally sound, it is destructive to nature, wildlife and neighbours privacy.
    It has a negative impact on the surrounding older houses that are built on bedrock rather than modern foundations, we should not have to fight to retain our privacy or the quality of our homes.
    Boundary to boundary development should be stopped, and so should the excavations to maximise the developers build-space and destroy the adjacent older homes structurally.

  9. Sylvia commented

    Another overdevelopment is coming to 150 Balwyn Rd, cnr Winmalee Rd.
    I lodged a 7 page objection on the grounds of loss of vegetation, no room for canopy tree, not fitting in with existing surrounding houses (yes it’s another cheap build), visual eyesore to winmalee road, removal of public paid water filtration system in nature strip to make way for another driveway, etc.
    it has been approved by council and if I want to take it to VCAT I have to pay $1000 lodgement fee!
    This ‘scorched earth’ approach by developers and approved by council even when the development is clearly contra to the rules, must stop.
    Those that care must lobby at the next council election for councillors that actually care about our environment and are willing to check some of these planning approvals. There is a lot of money being made in the approvals.

  10. Hasan commented

    The historically significant house named 'Banff' at 150 Winmalee Rd, Balwyn.

    According to the Boroondara Online Planning Permit Register the Notice of Decision (NOD) in regards to 150 Winmalee Rd was delegated on May 11, 2022. Has approval been since given?

    The Statement of Significance below for 'Banff' at 150 Winmalee Rd is from a report that was compiled for the Boroondara Council.

    Statement of Significance
    Banff, 150 Winmalee Road, Balwyn is of local historical and architectural significance as an intact and relatively early example of a two-storey Bungalow residence. While Banff provides several signatures of the Bungalow form generally: a fairly low-pitched roof, lightness in its external walling, lightness in its fenestration, and a good siting for views and sun, it is relatively uncommon in the Melbourne context as an example of a clear two-storey Bungalow form (as opposed to the attic form). The Swiss Chalet references are also relatively uncommon in the Melbourne context. With a construction date of 1915, Banff is also relatively early in the development of the modern bungalow form in Australia.

    To read more about this historically significant house search online for the report titled 'City of Boroondara - Review of B-graded buildings in Kew, Camberwell and Hawthorn Volume, 3 Data Sheets For Camberwell and Hawthorn'.

  11. Hasan commented

    Their are currently no applications that I am aware of to develop 150 Winmalee Rd, Balwyn. I am sorry for any confusion the information I posted may have caused.

    Getting back to 150 Balwyn Rd, according to the Boroondara Online Planning Permit Register the Notice of Decision (NOD) in regards to 150 Balwyn Rd was delegated on May 11, 2022. Has approval been since given?

  12. sylvia commented

    Re: 150 Balwyn Rd. PP21/0695. Council has approved, but objectors (like myself) have been given one month if we wish to appeal the decision at VCAT and pay $1000, else the developer will be given the go-ahead if there are no appeals.
    Balwyn is becoming just another concrete eyesore with developments almost boundary to boundary, leaving little room to replace the greenery ripped out during the build.

  13. Bridget commented

    Sylvia, I agree with everything you've said. Sadly, the Boroondara area has become a developers paradise. Older and often magnificent homes are being destroyed, tress/gardens totally flattened and massive boundary to boundary tasteless cement blocks are being built to replace them. A very sad reflection on our disgraceful laws of development and so-called progress.
    This loss of vegetation has enormous environmental impact (negative), loss of light and privacy to neighbours, damage to neighbouring homes by the huge earthworks required to build these massive structures that only maximise profits to developers and income to state and local government,
    If even one tree is considered as worthy of retention, it miraculously "dies" or is removed anyway.....this is totally unforgivable behaviour and the penalties are in no way adequate.
    Stop the destruction of our neighbourhood, do not allow anymore of these structures in our streets. Approving this monstrous structure is totally inappropriate.

  14. Hasan commented

    Re 150 Balwyn Rd - Sylvia, have you considered crowd funding to raise money for lodging an appeal with VCAT?

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Boroondara City Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is part of the digital library from the local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small 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