Shop 216 Charman Road, Cheltenham, VIC

Develop the land for the construction of a five storey mixed use development

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website over 2 years ago. It was received by them 1 day earlier.

(Source: Kingston City Council, reference KP-588/2017)

9 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Leonie commented

    2 main concerns are
    1. visibility into Primary school from upper level appartments (Primary should have a level of privacy particularly within reasonable visible distance where children may be easily identifiable).
    2. Parking. It won't be just enough to have allow for parking for residents - they will need to accomodate guest parking also given proximity to train station, shopping precinct, school and funeral parlour. Parking in the area is already difficult and almost non-existent at times.

  2. Arkie Vee commented

    I am still reeling at the proposed FIVE STORIES!! It may be legal, but it is a huge overdevelopment of a site in a local neighbourhood area.
    I agree with Leonie's concerns. Primary schools require privacy - check their charters for clarity. Parking is already a huge problem in this area where current parking spaces are inadequate. This proposed development would make that a nightmare. To somewhat alleviate this, several visitor parking spaces would have to be provided onsite by the developer to cater for the increased parking demand. But I am hoping this proposal is not approved owing to the sheer overdevelopment.

  3. Alicia Brown commented

    This is a huge height for such a small corner block. Will definitely overlook, overshadow and impose on the residential homes both across the road and behind / in Barrett street. Not appropriate level of development for this zone of charman road. Developers clearly trying it on hoping residents will be happy to see 3 or 4 storeys approved but realistically the most should be 2 with basement carpark.
    Also consideration must be given for outdoor space and planting of native trees on the site. The local community can not continue to support the constant overflow of apartment dwellers into local Bayside and Kingston recreational parks when our local councils are not setting any more land aside for this and also not building more outdoor entertainment facilities to accommodate this assumed imposition.

  4. Derek Screen commented

    5 storeys at this location is inappropriate.

    There are no other buildings of this size or anything closely resembling it close by including the shops it is in the strip off.

    The visual bulk and over looking of this building would be enormous for residents in and around the area but even more so for those in Barrett Street and Glebe avenue but it would over imposing as far away as Higham, Coape, Sydney and Blagdon to say the least.

    More importantly the overlook would be inappropriate for the students at Cheltenham Primary school just across the road and half a street away. A similar application for the corner of Blagdon Street was knocked back for similar reasons. As a parent whose child goes to Cheltenham Primary School I would not be happy in the knowledge that people could be overlooking the children in their classrooms and in the play ground.

    As this is a shopping strip, I have on issues with a 3 storey development being shops on ground floor and 2 levels of residential above as is similar for the entire Charman road and Station Road shopping area.

    A development such as this - on such a small single block is simply greedy and would set a precedent in the area and it is not acceptable.

    If this proceeds I would be objecting to it all the way.

  5. Chris Stewart commented

    Traffic is already a major problem around Cheltenham. I believe there should be at least 2 car parks per apartment.

    Having said that, I note a development at 500 Elizabeth Street, Melbourne CBD the builders "forgot" 2 level of underground parking.

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/ooops-developer-fails-to-build-two-promised-levels-of-underground-parking-20151028-gkkhxv.html

    Council needs to get tough on developers who blatantly flout the law.

  6. Arkie Vee wrote to local councillor Rosemary West

    When I was young and needed ten shillings for an excursion into town, I'd ask my father for a pound. I knew he'd give me half of what I asked for, and he always did. Developers play my game. Alicia (above) makes some good points: realistically the highest development in our local area should be two floors with basement car park. And consideration must be given for outdoor space and planting of native trees on the site. Did you know that trees take in carbon dioxide and emit oxygen? but that's another story ...

    Delivered to local councillor Rosemary West. They are yet to respond.

  7. NL commented

    I agree with the previous comments. Five storeys is incredibly high for the surrounding area and will impact upon the liveability of the area. Not enough car parking, surrounding streets already filled with cars. It will overlook the school and surrounding streets. Will be a blight on what will potentially be a lovely village street when the train line goes underground.

  8. Ian Curnow commented

    Disgusting money hungry developer that has no care for the area or the local residents whatsoever.
    Nothing like it in the length of Charman Rd from Nepean Hwy to Beach Rd.
    Overdevelopment
    Insufficient parking.
    Parking can enter and exit via Charman Rd as they are Charman Rd properties
    The residents in Barrett St should not have cars lights shining into their properties as they leave or the loss of privacy with traffic from Charman Rd properties.
    And the existing businesses are to be evicted when they thought they had secure long term leases.
    Disgusting
    I would like to think the council would not even consider this proposal.
    I look forward to the Council meting with the greedy non caring developer and one would assume VCAT after that because this one will probably have to go all the way as that is what happens when greed is involved.

  9. Arkie Vee commented

    I agree whole-heartedly with comments from Ian Curnow and NL.
    The entire proposal is disgusting and would impact on the liveability of the area.
    This is a developer with no care for the area or the local residents whatsoever.

  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