57 Wattle Road, Hawthorn VIC 3122

I object !
Now with two x6 story applications with Council I appeal to the relevant authorities to consider the impact of such outrageous density increases ( and subsequent applications if they are approved) on the very limited physical infrastructure of Wattle Road.
Surely a x3 story limit ( as has recently been applied to Wattle Rd) can meet a reasonable regional density increase while not totally overloading the available physical and social infrastructure.

I object to two six story buildings in 50&57 Wattle Road. Vehicle and people traffic are currently an issue and the thought of an additional 180 residents ( and cars?) in such close proximity must be considered unacceptable. Safety and emergency response capabilities in what is effectively a one way street should also be considered. Just because the new planning rules could be met is not sufficient for approval. The council’s responsibility to provide infrastructure and amenity must be considered in any approval process. The unilateral application of generic planning guidelines to meet a proposed increase in density target should NOT override common sense.

I wish to formally object to the proposed development at 57 Wattle Road

While I recognise the need for appropriate housing development, I believe the scale and intensity of the proposed apartment development is inappropriate for this location and would place further unreasonable pressure on an already congested residential street.

My concerns include:

Increased traffic and congestion
The street is already experiencing significant levels of traffic and congestion, particularly during peak periods. The proposed development would introduce additional residents, vehicles, deliveries, visitors and service vehicles, further increasing pressure on the existing road network.

Insufficient on-street parking
On-street parking is already heavily utilised by existing residents and visitors. Additional apartments are likely to increase demand for parking and could result in increased parking in surrounding streets, obstructed access and greater competition for limited spaces.

The presence of a primary school within the street is particularly relevant.
At school drop-off and pick-up times, traffic and parking demand already increase significantly. Vehicles stopping, parking and manoeuvring around the school create additional congestion and can create difficulties for through traffic and residents accessing their properties.

Additional apartments would introduce further vehicle movements into a street that already experiences predictable periods of significant congestion.

The safety of children, pedestrians, cyclists and other road users should be given particular consideration.

The aged-care facility is another significant consideration.
Aged-care facilities generate regular movements associated with staff, visitors, residents, taxis, community transport, medical services, deliveries, contractors and emergency services.

These movements are different from those generated by conventional residential development and contribute to the overall level of activity and demand on the street.

The proposed apartment development would add another substantial source of traffic and parking demand to an area that is already accommodating these competing requirements.

Overdevelopment of the site
I am concerned that the proposed number of apartments represents an excessive intensity of development for this particular site and streetscape. Development should be responsive to the existing character, scale and capacity of the surrounding neighbourhood rather than simply maximising the number of dwellings that can be accommodated on a site.

Impact on neighbouring properties
The development may have unreasonable impacts on surrounding residents through increased overlooking, visual bulk, loss of privacy, overshadowing, noise and general activity associated with a substantially greater number of occupants.

Pressure on existing infrastructure
The surrounding street and local infrastructure are already under pressure. Further intensification should only occur where the capacity of roads, parking, drainage, public transport and other infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate the additional demand.

Impact on residential amenity
The cumulative effect of additional apartments in an already densely developed area should be carefully considered. The planning assessment should consider not only the individual development but also the existing and approved developments in the immediate vicinity and their combined impact on local amenity and infrastructure.

Cumulative development
I am particularly concerned about the cumulative effect of continued apartment development in this area. Each individual development may appear manageable when considered in isolation, but the combined effect is increasing traffic, parking demand, population density and pressure on local infrastructure.

This is the second application for a six storey apartment in Wattle Road; the other is at 48A/50 Wattle Road. There are other properties with the potential to attract applications for high rise apartments.

The issues both of these applications raise, and the possibility of other similar applications, concern the ability of Wattle Road to absorb and sustain multiple high rise buildings in a street of varying degrees of narrow width. At its widest, Wattle Road is less than six metres wide. At its narrowest, it is less than four metres wide.

The main issues to which these applications give rise are, first, traffic volume: the two current applications would add potentially 180 extra vehicles to the traffic load Wattle Road bears as a road with an already-busy profile as the site of a school, an aged care facility and a substantial number of multi-residence, low-rise apartment buildings.

The traffic volume issue not only affects Wattle Road but also its feeder roads: Power Street and Glenferrie Road. The increased volume would give rise to bottlenecks at each end of Wattle Road. The increased volume would also affect New Street and Burton Avenue (both narrow streets), which are interconnecting roads feeding traffic into and providing exit for it from Wattle Road. Because of the increased traffic volume in Wattle Road and the increased incentive to use the interconnecting streets, Manningtree Road and Lisson Grove will also experience increased traffic volumes, with similar impact to Wattle Road at their eastern and western entry and exit points as well as at the intersections with the interconnecting roads.

For example, the traffic control measures at the intersection of New Street, Manningtree Road and Drill Street will have to manage a much larger traffic volume with a clear potential for bottlenecks, as will the intersection of Lisson Grove and Through Street (where a multi-level apartment building is currently being constructed).

The increased traffic volume creates the second issue: increased potential for traffic safety failures. Greater traffic volume increases the prospects of driver inattention, e.g, to or by cars exiting from the driveways of high rise and other buildings; speeding; and the increased chance of road accidents involving pedestrians.

Thirdly, the applications, as far as can currently be known from the information available, make no provision for increased services - recreation areas, street services, rubbish collection, footpath maintenance, maintenance of the intersections between the private properties and public land, interaction between the new properties and existing properties - to provide for the needs of both the increased population to which a permit to build would give rise and the impact on existing residences.

In economic terms, the development would create external costs which would be passed on to existing residents. The current policy framework, which excludes local resident input to decision-making, reduces to zero the ability of existing residents to explain and seek remedies for the external costs they will have to bear.

Fourth, the application, so far as is currently known, does not make provision for any physical infrastructure that would ameliorate the impact of the high rise building on the local environment. The development application proceeds on the basis that the developer has no responsibility for local infrastructure to accommodate and make sustainable the impact of the high rise, deep basement building it proposes.

Relatedly, the application, so far as is currently known, makes no provision for reducing the external costs of construction that will be fully borne by local residents.

Finally, and again as far as is currently known, the application makes no provision for 'units' for first home buyers, one of the key reasons given for the current Victorian housing policy.

The development will benefit the well-off current property owners, who can expect a large payment for their properties; it will benefit developers who can expect significant profits from their investment; and it will benefit well-off downsizers who will be able to afford properties that, in all likelihood, can only be purchased for $1.5 million or more.

For all these reasons, the Council should refuse the application.

This application, the application affecting 48A/50 Wattle Road and other potential applications, give rise to a bigger issue.

It is not sufficient nor economically rational nor good planning for Council or the State government to consider development applications of this type on the basis of the facts of the application alone. It is clear that the two applications being made and the potential for others will not only have geographically-limited detrimental effects on parts of Wattle Road nor will they only impact the immediate and near-by neighbours.

The applications will have community-wide impacts, pass on costs that developers can avoid as a result of the policy framework in place, benefit only a narrow range of potential purchasers and property sellers and leave a legacy of unfulfilled traffic, safety, services and infrastructure issues.

Accordingly, Council should resist considering these applications on a one-off basis. Rather, it should apply a community-wide cost-benefit framework. This will require Council to develop an alternative approach to high rise development, an alternative that limits the profile and footprint of development to dimensions that are sustainable, liveable, have a wider community benefit and ensure the external costs they create are borne by the developers themselves.

Clearly, the Council's decision-making ability on these issue is confined by State government laws. The constraint will need to be addressed by Council developing and advocating its own position - the one in the paragraph above - with a view to changing the law. That will require courageous advocacy by all Councillors and Council officers.

To the extent possible, Council should refrain from taking decisions on the two current applications until progress is made on a new framework.

I write in objection of permit for development at 57-59 wattle rd, Hathorn.
I write in support of comments by Michael Angwin and Andrew G.

This is the second application for a six-storey apartment in Wattle Road; the other is at 48A/50 Wattle Road. Combined 90 dwellings, with potentially 180 extra vehicles.

Multiple issues raised (as per other comments) with new Activity centre rules that impact our area, are contrary to preserving liveability, amenity and infrastructure, eg:
- Traffic impact and traffic safety
- Negative impact on existing residences – overlooking, overshadowing, and construction related impacts.
- Negative impact on existing amenities / infrastructure
- Loss of tree canopy

If development is allowed to proceed, other properties along Wattle road will likely attract further applications for high rise apartments, and further amplify the negative impacts to the neighbourhood.
Understandably, the Council's decision-making ability on these issue is confined by State government laws. However, courageous advocacy by all Councillors and Council officers to address these constraints may help to change the law.
To the extent possible, Council should refrain from making decisions on the two current applications (and any new applications affecting Wattle road / Carson Crescent) until progress is made on a new framework.

I join others in the area around 48a and 50 Wattle Road Hawthorn as well as now the huge proposal almost opposite that site, for 57 and 59 Wattle Road Hawthorn. Large scale redevelopment multi-storey complexes of those proposed would overwhelm our quiet, or what was quiet lane.
Multi-apartment structures have been built where until recently gracious homes stood. Much space and vegetation has been consumed by bricks and concrete.
These dominating structures on the top of the Wattle Road hill over-utilise the sites on the narrow street which already busily houses Glenferrie Primary School and the large aged care facility Uniting AgedWell Community, both of which generate much traffic. Pedestrians, some on scooters, bikes or walking frames, others in pushers or wheelchairs are at risk.
We, neighbours affected by these huge proposals need to be supported by our Council as we call for more of a say in developments shaping the future of our environment.

I write in objection of the permit application for the development at 57-59 Wattle Rd, Hawthorn.

I fully support all the points made by Michael Angwin and Andrew G.

Replacing 2 residences with 55 is folly and the burden it will create on the surrounding neighbourhood will be massive.

55 apartments, 6 levels above ground with 3 levels of underground car parking, does not add any affordable housing nor does it dovetail with the Activity Centres assumption that people will not need cars and will walk to public transport.

Has detailed traffic volume analysis been done, taking into account the 35 additional apartments sought via the permit application for 48A/50 Wattle Road, the 55 apartments of this application and the impending build of 45 apartments on Wattle Road at the Power St end? An estimate of approx. 270 extra vehicles. Not to mention the potential for more applications. Our Council needs to take a wholistic approach to these applications and not just review / approve standalone.

Wattle Road is a narrow residential street ill suited for such increases in traffic volume. Footpaths are narrow and are used by many local pedestrians, of which many are school children or elderly.
Adding developments such as these with the increased vehicle traffic will increase risk and danger to the local community.

Removal of any tree canopy should be outright rejected. We are constantly advised by State and Local Governments that we need more shade on our streets, so I would expect the council to refuse the request to remove any trees.

Developments should be restricted to no more than 3 storeys to ensure that the neighbourhood is not overwhelmed with too many residences without State and/or Local Governments having first invested in improving the surrounding infrastructure.

The developers of these projects take little or no responsibility for the mess they create when building and bear zero responsibility for the “mess” the leave behind.

As such I call on OUR council to reject the application.

Whatever profile and footprint are decided for 57-59 Wattle Road, several conditions should be attached to it:
- there should be no resident parking permits granted for parking anywhere in the vicinity. All resident parking should be in the basement
- no guest parking permits should be issued
- waste management should be by private contractor with bins stored in the basement. No bins should be put out for public collection. Bin collection from he property should not take place on the same day as Council waste collection
- residents should not be granted hard waste collection privileges. No hard waste should be left for collection in any street in the vicinity. All hard waste should be disposed of at the expense of the residents of the property
- infrastructure such as air conditioning units should be placed in the basement and not on the roof so as to avoid noise pollution that might affect nearby neighbours; roof infrastructure should be minimised so as not to add to the building's height
- any infrastructure that is not required to be placed for safety reasons outside the building or on its roof should be located in the basement
- no car stacking infrastructure should be permitted. Such infrastructure would encourage residents to park in the street
- each residence should be provided with two car parking spaces in the basement
- there should be a mechanism to regulate car exit from the building. Only one car should be permitted to exit every two minutes
- there should be a garden development and maintenance plan that ensures the property has as much tree canopy as is displaced
- privacy screens should be placed on all windows to prevent residents disturbing the privacy of their neighbours
- the building should be required to install anchor points and other safety features to ensure cleaning etc can be undertaken in a safe manner
- the building should be required to have and to update annually a safety and evacuation plan; and to operate a test of the plan annually
- the building should include in the basement infrastructure for charging electric vehicles
- the building should provide the infrastructure necessary for the installation of solar panels
- the building should be required to have a plan for noise reduction.

In addition to these conditions, the developer should be required to provide the following to the Council:
- a traffic management plan to ensure minimum disruption of Wattle Road and resident safety during construction and car entry and exit planning, design and infrastructure to ensure that vehicle entry and exit from the building causes no disruption to neighbours or to Wattle Road at large
- a street cleaning plan to ensure the waste and other material created by the construction will be minimised along with inconvenience to residents
- a plan to ensure that any vehicle associated with the construction does not park in non-parking areas, that all construction vehicles obey time-limited parking restrictions, that there is no parking on footpaths and that no over-sized vehicles enter Wattle Road
- a noise reduction plan during construction
- a plan to notify residents of every stage of development; the plan should contain an undertaking to consult with residents monthly on the progress with construction.

Finally, the developer is not named in the application. The Council should require the name of the developer to be published along with its investors and financial backers; and to require the developer to submit a financial statement or plan that guarantees that this project can be worked to completion.

Many of these conditions apply to other multi-storey buildings in Wattle Road and should be applied to 57-59, whatever its final shape and size.

I wish to formally object to the proposed development of six-story, 55 apartment building at 57 Wattle Road, Hawthorn.
My primary concern is the impact the proposed development will have on traffic movement, parking availability and the capacity of Wattle Road to safely accommodate a substantial increase in residents and vehicle movements.
This proposal follows closely after the recently submitted application for a six-storey development at 48A & 50 Wattle Road for 35 apartments. While each application may be assessed individually, the cumulative impact of multiple large apartment developments within a short period must be considered. The combined effect has the potential to fundamentally change the intensity of use of Wattle Road and significantly increase traffic volumes in an already constrained local road network.
Wattle Road is a relatively narrow residential street that already experiences considerable traffic pressures from existing residential development, a primary school, an aged care facility, service vehicles, visitor parking and local traffic movements. School drop-off and pick-up periods regularly generate congestion, parking shortages and pedestrian activity. The aged care facility generates ongoing movements from staff, visitors, contractors, delivery vehicles, patient transport services and emergency vehicles.
The addition of a significant number of new apartments at 57 Wattle Road, combined with the potential development at 48A & 50 Wattle Road, will introduce additional resident vehicles, visitor vehicles, deliveries, rideshare services and service providers into a street network that already experiences capacity constraints.
Particular consideration must be given to:
• Increased vehicle movements entering and exiting driveways and basement parking.
• Additional pressure on already limited on-street parking.
• Increased congestion at the intersections with Glenferrie Road and Power Street.
• Increased traffic through surrounding residential streets as drivers seek alternative routes.
• The safety of school children, pedestrians, cyclists and older residents.
• Access for emergency services and other essential service providers.
I am also concerned that the development represents an excessive level of built form for the site. A six-storey development will introduce substantial visual bulk and scale that is inconsistent with much of the surrounding streetscape. When considered alongside the recently proposed six-storey development at 48A & 50 Wattle Road, there is a risk that Wattle Road will experience an accelerated increase in density without a corresponding assessment of local infrastructure capacity.
The road network, parking availability, drainage, public realm and local amenity are all finite resources. Development should only proceed where adequate consideration has been given to the cumulative impact on surrounding infrastructure and the ability of the area to accommodate substantial population growth without adversely affecting existing residents.
I respectfully request that Council carefully consider the cumulative impact of this proposal together with other recent and potential developments in Wattle Road and assess whether the existing road network, parking capacity and infrastructure are sufficient to support this level of intensified development.

I write wrt ED’s recent points made regarding applications for 57/59 and 48a/50 Wattle Road.
The point is the relative scale of these proposals.
I contend ED’s last paragraph destroys their own submission; in that they refer to the existing ‘liveability’ and ‘loverly existing streetscape’ which these two proposals will destroy by not integrating.
For reference I quote ED.
…..is designed thoughtfully and with reference to making it liveable in climate change, using high quality design and materials, taking care to integrate it into the lovely existing streetscape and buildings, and is done in a way where the people living in it connect with and become an integral part of the Road and the Community.

A more considered 3 three floor upper limit addresses every point raised by ED without overloading the infrastructure and existing amenity AND still significantly contributing to an increased population density.
Ray Wood

I write to protest the proposed developments at 50 and 57 Wattle Rd Hawthorn.There are huge potential issues :
Obvious traffic volume increase impacting on Wattle Rd, New Rd and Burton Ave, all effectively single lane streets already, relying on courtesy of drivers to avoid accidents.
Obvious inadequate street parking to accommodate visitors and tradespeople.
Obvious impact on the area during construction. Recent builds of single houses have led to months of road closures with detours signed down our local streets, leading to at times chaos and dangerous driving down the side streets. This is certainly a major safety concern for primary school children and the elderly. At times, it is dangerous for me to try to drive out of my garage due to inattention of detouring drivers.
Concern re the removal of trees significantly impacting on the environment.
Concern re maintaining the infrastructure required.
I am not against reasonable development which is adequately assessed.

I object to the development of a six storey apartment block on 57/59 Wattle Road.
Wattle Road is a narrow lane that currently renders it a one lane road that suffers significant congestions and increasing frustration for both local residents and those legitimately using it whilst picking up and dropping off at two schools and two care homes.
Parking is already at a premium.
The bulk of such a development alongside that proposed for 50/48a Wattle Road is not in keeping with the environment of this narrow lane, the nature of this historic area.
We have seen significant developments and densification in our street which has seen the decline of the living environment in the ways of community unity, loss of trees, the danger of having to negotiate increased cars on a congested road, seeing the sky when now surrounded by up to three storey town houses, let alone six storey blocks.
With the proposed development of 57/59 next to and opposite two heritage listed houses is beyond belief.
To understand such inappropriate development thought bubbles can only be understood by those decision makers walking our road and the immediate surrounding streets.

Subject: Objection to Proposed Development at 57 Wattle Road

I wish to lodge a formal objection to the proposed apartment development at 57 Wattle Road.

While I support appropriate housing growth and increased housing choice, I am concerned that the scale and intensity of the proposed development is excessive for this location and does not adequately reflect the capacity of the surrounding road network, infrastructure and residential environment.

Traffic, Parking and Road Safety

Wattle Road already experiences significant congestion and parking pressures. The proposed development would introduce additional vehicle movements from residents, visitors, delivery services and contractors, further increasing demand on an already constrained local street network.

This issue is compounded by the presence of a primary school within the street. School drop-off and pick-up periods already result in heavy traffic, increased parking demand and vehicle manoeuvring, creating congestion and safety concerns for residents, pedestrians and cyclists. Additional residential density would further intensify these existing problems.

The street also accommodates an aged-care facility, which generates regular movements associated with staff, visitors, community transport, medical services, deliveries and emergency vehicles. These activities already place considerable demand on local roads and parking. The addition of a large apartment development would further increase pressure on a street that is already managing multiple competing transport needs.

Given these existing conditions, I am concerned that the proposal has not adequately demonstrated how the resulting traffic, parking demand and road safety impacts will be managed.

Overdevelopment of the Site

The proposed development appears to represent an excessive level of intensification for the site and surrounding neighbourhood. Development should respond to the established character, scale and capacity of the area rather than seek to maximise dwelling yield.

The number of apartments proposed is not, in my view, consistent with the existing streetscape and risks creating a development that is out of character with the surrounding residential environment.

Impact on Neighbouring Residents

I am concerned that the development may adversely affect neighbouring properties through increased overlooking, loss of privacy, visual bulk, overshadowing and noise. The increased activity associated with a substantially larger residential population has the potential to diminish the amenity currently enjoyed by surrounding residents.

Pressure on Local Infrastructure

The surrounding area is already experiencing increasing levels of residential density. Any further intensification should only occur where it can be clearly demonstrated that local infrastructure, including roads, parking, drainage, public transport and community services, has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional demand.

Cumulative Impact

My greatest concern is the cumulative effect of ongoing apartment developments within the area. While individual developments may appear acceptable when assessed in isolation, the combined impact of multiple developments is resulting in increased traffic congestion, parking demand, population density and pressure on local infrastructure and residential amenity.

The assessment of this proposal should therefore consider not only the impacts of this development alone, but also the combined effect of existing and approved developments in the surrounding area.

Conclusion

For these reasons, I object to the proposed development at 57 Wattle Road. I believe the proposal represents an inappropriate level of development for the site and would adversely impact traffic, parking, road safety, infrastructure capacity, neighbourhood character and residential amenity.

I respectfully request that Council refuse the application or require substantial amendments to reduce the scale and intensity of the development to a level more consistent with the capacity and character of the surrounding area.

I object to these applications.
With two proposed 6-storey developments now being considered, I urge Council and the relevant authorities to carefully consider the cumulative impact of this significant increase in density on Wattle Road and the surrounding area.
The existing physical and social infrastructure appears poorly suited to accommodate such a substantial increase in population, including additional pressure on traffic, parking, pedestrian safety, public transport, drainage and local services.
I believe a 3-storey height limit, as has recently been applied to Wattle Road, would allow for reasonable additional housing and density while remaining more consistent with the existing neighbourhood character and the capacity of local infrastructure.
I respectfully ask Council to refuse the proposed 6-storey developments, or at minimum require a substantial reduction in height and density.

I object in the strongest possible terms to the proposed development at 57 Wattle Road. This proposal should be refused. It is not merely excessive or poorly judged; it is the foreseeable result of recent Victorian planning reforms that have weakened local assessment, reduced the practical weight given to established neighbourhood conditions, and enabled high-density outcomes in streets that cannot reasonably, safely or credibly absorb them.
1. What the proposal allows
The permit would allow a substantial high-density apartment-style development at 57 Wattle Road, involving a built form and level of activity that is fundamentally out of step with the established residential scale of the street. This is not careful site-responsive planning. It is the practical product of a reform framework that gives priority to yield while narrowing the assessment of whether this particular street can carry the consequences.
2. Local conditions are being ignored
57 Wattle Road is part of a real street environment with existing homes, established gardens, local traffic constraints and adjoining residents who would experience the day-to-day impacts of the development. The proposal should be assessed against those conditions, including: neighbourhood character, heritage and landscape context, street capacity, cumulative density, infrastructure limits, overshadowing, overlooking, excavation impacts, tree removal, parking pressure and construction disruption. These matters are not secondary or optional. They go directly to whether the site can reasonably accommodate the proposed level of development without causing unacceptable consequences for surrounding residents and the street as a whole.
3. Built form and amenity impacts
The proposed development would introduce a more intensive built form into a street that has not been planned or designed to absorb redevelopment on this scale one site at a time. Particular concern should be given to the effect of building mass, upper-level windows and balconies, setbacks, landscaping loss, visual bulk, overshadowing and reduced privacy for adjoining properties.
4. Traffic, parking and construction
The proposal would add vehicle movements, visitor demand, deliveries, waste collection pressure and construction traffic to Wattle Road. These impacts should not be treated as minor simply because they arise incrementally. For existing residents, the combined effect of excavation, truck movements, access disruption and ongoing traffic pressure would be practical and immediate.
5. Cumulative pressure
The application at 57 Wattle Road should not be assessed in isolation. Other redevelopment proposals associated with Wattle Road, including 48A & 50 Wattle Road and 23 Wattle Road, show that the street is facing a broader pattern of imposed intensification. If these applications proceed one by one without a coherent assessment of cumulative impact, the result will be uncontrolled density imposed on a small residential street without matching infrastructure, traffic capacity, open space or neighbourhood character protection.
This cumulative context is central to the objection. A single development may be presented as manageable, but several intensive proposals in the same short residential street can collectively change traffic patterns, parking availability, building scale, tree canopy, drainage demand, construction disruption and the overall character of the area.
6. Planning reform context
Recent Victorian planning reforms are a root cause of this application. They have made developments of this scale possible by reducing the practical force of local judgement, street-by-street assessment, neighbourhood character, cumulative impact and physical constraint. The impacts at 57 Wattle Road are therefore not accidental side effects; they are predictable consequences of a planning framework that allows oversized proposals to be advanced in unsuitable locations.
The concern is not abstract opposition to change. The concern is that this reform framework enables an over-scaled outcome on a constrained local street, then transfers the burden to existing residents through increased traffic, loss of privacy, reduced sunlight, construction disruption, parking pressure, tree loss and the steady erosion of Wattle Road’s residential character.
57 Wattle Road is therefore a clear example of how broad planning reform can produce poor local outcomes. A development may be presented as acceptable against high-level housing objectives, but it remains unsuitable if the street cannot physically or reasonably absorb the scale, traffic, amenity loss and cumulative change it creates.
7. Requested outcome
For the reasons set out above, the proposal at 57 Wattle Road should be refused. Minor conditions or cosmetic changes would not resolve the fundamental problem: the scale, intensity and cumulative effect of the proposal are unsuitable for a constrained residential street already under redevelopment pressure. This is not a marginal or technical concern; it is a direct example of an oversized development being enabled in a location that cannot reasonably absorb it. The application should be rejected on its direct impacts on Wattle Road, including traffic, parking, privacy, sunlight, construction disruption, tree loss and cumulative neighbourhood change.

I object to the proposed development at 57-59 Wattle Road (PP26/0946) and respectfully submit that the current application of 6 storey building with 35 apartments should be refused.

I acknowledge the need for additional housing and increased residential density in appropriate locations, and this is currently happening in Wattle Road with the replacement of single dwellings be replaced by townhouse/apartments with 8 to 10 residences with a height of 3 storeys. I accept this.

However, this proposal of 55 apartments creates essentially an additional 100 - 108 cars in Wattle Road.

Wattle Road
- is a narrow throughfare, approximately 5.7 metres at its widest and 3.9 metres at its narrowest. Nearby connecting streets (including New Street, Burton Avenue and Carson Crescent) are also narrow and already affected by parking and traffic pressures.
- functions as a transit road for traffic entering from Power Street and Glenferrie Road
- has a primary school and aged care facility that draws in significant traffic, and significant increases in traffic may also be dangerous for elderly residents and children.

Coupled with the ever-increasing traffic of delivery vehicles to residences (a sign of the times of today) and the continued use for access of waste management vehicles, Wattle Road will not be able to cope with the additional traffic. In fact, it will reduce road safety for pedestrians, school children, cyclists and the elderly residents.

The planning framework does not reflect local conditions and local voice for expressing these concerns does not seem to be available under the latest planning schemes imposed by the State Government. It feels that someone from afar saw it being a called 'ROAD' and immediately thought that that 6 storey buildings can be accommodated. In reality, Wattle Road is a 'LANE' and should have been called 'Wattle Lane'.

I am asking for decision on this application to be based on better planning; housing that is sustainable, liveable, safe, supported by infrastructure, and respectful of the people who already live here.

Wattle Road can accommodate more people. But it should not be overwhelmed by repeated
maximum-envelope developments that shift the costs of growth onto local residents

I support the objections already lodged against this proposed development and for the reasons given, which are fully justified.
I also ask (as submitted directly to the Traffic team) that Council specifically have regard to the massive impact on local residents, traffic, amenity and infrastructure of the actual process of construction of these massive developments in such a narrow, congested laneway.

I oppose the development of such a high number of apartment units on Wattle Road. Wattle Road is a very narrow street allowing one car to pass at a time. It is already very congested during morning and evening peaks, and Glenferrie Primary school drop off and pick up times. I am concerned that Wattle Road is not designed to handle the additional traffic that will result from the high density development, and will result in heavy congestion for all Wattle Road residents and Glenferrie Primary school parents.