Recent comments on applications from Kingston City Council, VIC

  1. In Parkdale VIC on “Building & works...” at 275-295 Nepean Highway, Parkdale, VIC:

    Jasmyn J commented

    Good morning Council,
    I respectfully request reconsidering placing a telecommunications facility at this site. There is a primary school and busy sports grounds located at this site, and the possible risks of exposure to children and other people in a highly central and much used facility area does not in any way meet community expectations.
    Thank you.

  2. In Parkdale VIC on “Building & works...” at 275-295 Nepean Highway, Parkdale, VIC:

    Sarah Neilson commented

    Put it elsewhere
    The community have been more than vocal about this so I’m surprised it’s still even being looked at
    Children play and people live here.
    Find somewhere else
    I’m certain we are ok with forgoing a few bars more of connection in order to not fry our brains
    Please start listening to your community for goodness sake

  3. In Clarinda VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 30 Springs Road, Clarinda, VIC:

    Chris commented

    Re: KP 2019/716
    Any reason why this application is not displayed at the front of the property?
    Thank you.

  4. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 1217-1219 Nepean Highway, Highett, VIC:

    Arkie Vee commented

    I read recently that the Amazon rainforest provides 20% of the worlds oxygen. This is now at risk. Trees are like lungs which consume poisonous gas emissions and produce oxygen. What buffoons would destroy them? particularly beside a busy highway where they are SO NEEDED! (that's me shouting). EVERY TREE MATTERS! not just for it's aesthetic appeal. What's this got to do with this development? Well go figure.

  5. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 1217-1219 Nepean Highway, Highett, VIC:

    Cathy Hall commented

    Its a disgrace that mature trees are being destroyed for a fast buck. We complain about the Amazon alight but are our "developers" different?

  6. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 1217-1219 Nepean Highway, Highett, VIC:

    Ian Redfern commented

    As I attend the local medical centre which is virtually next door to this property, I used to admire the four superb mature towering old cypress trees in the front garden. I became concerned about these when I noticed that the orginal 1940's (?) red brick house on the site was vacant and looked as though it might be demolished. Sure enough, when I next went past the property, every tree had been removed. As a result I contacted Kingston council to try to find out why. The response was that the 'trees were affected by rot' but I'd checked the trunks carefully and there was almost none visible and no apparent dieback considering their age. I had to contact the council three times to discover that the council arborist who examined the trees had left just after this - it sounds as though he did a rush job before he took off. It's appalling that these mature trees - which take years to grow - were callously removed by the developer. If a developer tried this in an area like Spindrift Road, Monterey California (the site of Eastwood's 'house' in the Play Misty for Me film) they would have been lynched. The building erected since looks as though it was a joint design venture between Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin - it looks positively Orwellian, and hello - it has west facing windows with no solar protection. This type of tree destruction and poor design does nothing for an area like Highett...nothing.

  7. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for three...” at 56 Matthieson Street, Highett, VIC:

    Lesley and Michael Lyons commented

    I'm very concerned about developing 3 double story town houses on a 697 sqm.block.There is a protected gum tree on the block!!!
    Parking is limited to one side of the street and with 3 single units directly across from no.56 the middle unit is unable swing into the garage and that is a small car. We are also concerned with privacy looking into our back yard etc.
    Alot of trees have already been cut down can you let us know which ones are protected?

  8. In Moorabbin VIC on “Partial demolition and...” at 40 Healey Street, Moorabbin, VIC:

    Felicia Brown commented

    No problem with the intended usage for the site but parking is already under pressure in the area so new development should include a larger area for car parking. I feel for both residents and businesses in the area if car parking is reduced.

  9. In Moorabbin VIC on “Partial demolition and...” at 40 Healey Street, Moorabbin, VIC:

    Peter Theodosiou commented

    Please don’t reduce the car parking requirements, the redevelopment should not be forcing the surrounding residents and commercial property’s to bear the brunt of the development’s shortcomings.

  10. In Bonbeach VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 39 Broadway, Bonbeach, VIC:

    Melody Bryan commented

    Hi there

    I am resident at 35 Broadway, Bonbeach and am requesting to see the plans for these proposed dwellings. Could they be emailed to me please?

    Thank you
    Melody Bryan

  11. In Mentone VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 88 Beach Road, Mentone, VIC:

    Antony Falkingham wrote to local councillor Rosemary West

    This must be rejected it is a sly and dishonest way of creating a two step planning process to get through controversial applications that the community do not want

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

  12. In Dingley Village VIC on “Use of the land for a...” at 321 Old Dandenong Road, Dingley Village, VIC:

    Brian Nicholls commented

    Fantastic to see this land being put to good use.

  13. In Bonbeach VIC on “Development of the land for...” at 20 Williams Grove, Bonbeach, VIC:

    Adrian Quaife wrote to local councillor Rosemary West

    This subdivision will create overlooking concerns for our units at 16 williams grove. The change of use of the right of way from one premise to two via the ROW on 16 williams grove will exceed the situation approved many years ago - two 4 bedroom premises will generate excessive traffic on the ROW.

    Use by a single dwelling would be reasonable use under the ROW that currently exists.

    The 3 storey development up to the boundary line will also exceed building regulations in the area.

    I ask that the local councillor and the planning authority consider these requests - the many and repeated changes to attempt to maximise development at this address is another concern.

    Thank you

    Adrian Quaife

    Photo of Rosemary West
    Rosemary West local councillor for Kingston City Council
    replied to Adrian Quaife

    Hi Adrian,
    Actually, I am a Central Ward councillor and I suggest you should contact your Ward councillors, David Eden, Georgina Oxley & Tamsin Bearsley.
    It wd be a good idea to let them know where this application is up to.
    Also a good idea to ask for a planning consultation with the developer & councillors.
    If you have six objections, you will automatically get a PC.
    I will keep a lookout for this and if none of your Ward CRS can get to the PC, let me know & I'll do my best to get there.

    Also, if you are in a Grz3 area and this is a proposed two storey in the backyard development or if you are concerned about your neighbourhood character, you may like to attend the kingston residents association meeting this Thursday as these topics are on the agenda.

    Allbest
    Rosemary West

    Sent from my iPad
    DISCLAIMER
    This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential,
    proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege
    is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error,
    please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any
    hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly,
    use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not
    the intended recipient. Kingston City Council and any of its subsidiaries each reserve
    the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.

    Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where
    the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the
    views of any such entity.

  14. In Parkdale VIC on “Subdivide the Land into...” at 6 Parkers Road, Parkdale, VIC:

    Louise McLean commented

    We received a letter from Kingston Council saying they opposed the building of the 4 Townhouses. We let it go as it was not going ahead. We now see they have been approved and are building 4 townhouses?????? What has happened and why were we not notified it was now going ahead. We have serious issues with regard to our privacy in our backyard and pool area. Can someone please contact us as to why we were not notified they were going ahead. 0402396752.

  15. In Chelsea VIC on “Develop the land for an...” at 36 Jacksons Road, Chelsea, VIC:

    Cassandra M commented

    This property is in a area known as Chelsea estate. The properties in this area are all single level dwellings, managed by multiple body corporates and some properties share common walls. The area has a village feel due to the above mentioned reasons as well as a lack of footpaths, fences and road markings. This is a factor that affects the price of properties in the vicinity and if a precedent is established that permits an extention that affects the village feel, the area will become congested with serious implications and improvements of council services.

  16. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 1090 Nepean Highway, Highett, VIC:

    Maggie Stewart wrote to local councillor Georgina Oxley

    This construction has too many apartments. We already have congestion - roads not able to take increased traffic, not enough parking in the area, lack of infrastructure. The service roads are not made for this amount of traffic - having more traffic trying to feed into Nepean Highway will increase congestion, especially in rush hours very difficult to manage.
    We do not need 76 apartments - all the apartments being built in and around the area have not been sold!

    Delivered to local councillor Georgina Oxley. They are yet to respond.

  17. In Oakleigh South VIC on “Use and Develop the Land...” at 19-71 Carroll Road, Oakleigh South, VIC:

    Sahar Armanious wrote to local councillor Steve Staikos

    We object to your proposal.

    For over 30 years we have endured
    the stench
    anxiety felt in living with the smell and having to constantly call to have this dealt with
    we inhale this toxic stuff
    we could not go out in our garden
    the amount of dust has often stopped us putting out our washing on the line. We felt like prisoners in our home with no choice.
    the dust that covers our house windows and covers our cars (we have sent photos) is unacceptable.
    the hardship this has on us financially to have this cleaned for years.
    our family member endured a severe hardship with critical illness and we were not able to open the doors or windows and still the dust got into the house.
    this then caused a downward spiral in health because they were not able to sit outside in the garden for a bit of respite.
    The noise of the trucks and works, the mounds of dirt etc encroaches on any ounce of peace you would want living in your home
    we now live in a street where people ignore your signs and the opposing footpath is a dumping ground for people's rubbish. At the moment there is a mattress, dinning chairs, cans of paint, an abandoned trailer with rubbish in it.
    the toll of living this way for this long is causing our lives to drop to depression.
    Do you live in this street. Would you know how it feels?

    Please open it up to a garden green for a whole community to finally live well.
    There must be another venue or another way, elsewhere.
    It will be tragic to our family if you were to carry on regardless.

    Photo of Steve Staikos
    Steve Staikos local councillor for Kingston City Council
    replied to Sahar Armanious

    Dear Sahar

    This is not a council proposal, council is the planning authority dealing with the application lodged by the proponent.

    This waste facility not not owned or run by council.

    The application seeks retrospective approval for the previous overfill which occurred in 2015, and is not seeking to add more waste that is in there today or to reopen the landfill.

    The overfill is located on the southern portion of the site, the sandy looking hill near the park. In reality the appearance would change by moving that existing hill of landfill close to the park more to the rear (north) and make it slightly lower than it appears today, and then to landscape it.

    The application information can be found here:
    http://www.kingston.vic.gov.au/files/assets/public/building-and-planning-folder/planning/advertised-plans/180115/kp935158-advertising-documentation-19-71-carroll-road-oakleigh-south.pdf

    Kindest regards

    Cr Steve Staikos
    MAYOR
    City of Kingston

    d 9581 4706
    m 0447 896 643

    On 23 Jan 2018, at 18:36, Sahar Armanious <> wrote:

    We object to your proposal.

    For over 30 years we have endured
    the stench
    anxiety felt in living with the smell and having to constantly call to have this dealt with
    we inhale this toxic stuff
    we could not go out in our garden
    the amount of dust has often stopped us putting out our washing on the line. We felt like prisoners in our home with no choice.
    the dust that covers our house windows and covers our cars (we have sent photos) is unacceptable.
    the hardship this has on us financially to have this cleaned for years.
    our family member endured a severe hardship with critical illness and we were not able to open the doors or windows and still the dust got into the house.
    this then caused a downward spiral in health because they were not able to sit outside in the garden for a bit of respite.
    The noise of the trucks and works, the mounds of dirt etc encroaches on any ounce of peace you would want living in your home
    we now live in a street where people ignore your signs and the opposing footpath is a dumping ground for people's rubbish. At the moment there is a mattress, dinning chairs, cans of paint, an abandoned trailer with rubbish in it.
    the toll of living this way for this long is causing our lives to drop to depression.
    Do you live in this street. Would you know how it feels?

    Please open it up to a garden green for a whole community to finally live well.
    There must be another venue or another way, elsewhere.
    It will be tragic to our family if you were to carry on regardless.

    From Sahar Armanious to local councillor Steve Staikos

    =========================================================================

    Sahar Armanious posted this message to you on PlanningAlerts in response to the following planning application.

    Your reply, and any other response to this email, will be sent to Sahar Armanious and posted on the PlanningAlerts website publicly.

    Planning Application for 19-71 Carroll Road, Oakleigh South, VIC

    Description: Use and Develop the Land for a Solid Inert Waste Landfill

    Read more and see what others have to say here:
    https://www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/898101?utm_campaign=view-application&utm_medium=email&utm_source=councillor-notifications

    Best wishes,

    PlanningAlerts

    DISCLAIMER
    This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential,
    proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege
    is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error,
    please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any
    hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly,
    use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not
    the intended recipient. Kingston City Council and any of its subsidiaries each reserve
    the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.

    Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where
    the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the
    views of any such entity.

  18. In Oakleigh South VIC on “Use and Develop the Land...” at 19-71 Carroll Road, Oakleigh South, VIC:

    Sahar Armanious wrote to local councillor Ron Brownlees

    We object to your proposal.

    For over 30 years we have endured
    the stench
    anxiety felt in living with the smell and having to constantly call to have this dealt with
    we inhale this toxic stuff
    we could not go out in our garden
    the amount of dust has often stopped us putting out our washing on the line. We felt like prisoners in our home with no choice.
    the dust that covers our house windows and covers our cars (we have sent photos) is unacceptable.
    the hardship this has on us financially to have this cleaned for years.
    our family member endured a severe hardship with critical illness and we were not able to open the doors or windows and still the dust got into the house.
    this then caused a downward spiral in health because they were not able to sit outside in the garden for a bit of respite.
    The noise of the trucks and works, the mounds of dirt etc encroaches on any ounce of peace you would want living in your home
    we now live in a street where people ignore your signs and the opposing footpath is a dumping ground for people's rubbish. At the moment there is a mattress, dinning chairs, cans of paint, an abandoned trailer with rubbish in it.
    the toll of living this way for this long is causing our lives to drop to depression.
    Do you live in this street. Would you know how it feels?

    Please open it up to a garden green for a whole community to finally live well.
    There must be another venue or another way, elsewhere.
    It will be tragic to our family if you were to carry on regardless.

    Delivered to local councillor Ron Brownlees. They are yet to respond.

  19. In Oakleigh South VIC on “Use and Develop the Land...” at 19-71 Carroll Road, Oakleigh South, VIC:

    Sahar Armanious commented

    We object to your proposal.

    For over 30 years we have endured
    the stench
    anxiety felt in living with the smell and having to constantly call to have this dealt with
    we inhale this toxic stuff
    we could not go out in our garden
    the amount of dust has often stopped us putting out our washing on the line. We felt like prisoners in our home with no choice.
    the dust that covers our house windows and covers our cars (we have sent photos) is unacceptable.
    the hardship this has on us financially to have this cleaned for years.
    our family member endured a severe hardship with critical illness and we were not able to open the doors or windows and still the dust got into the house.
    this then caused a downward spiral in health because they were not able to sit outside in the garden for a bit of respite.
    The noise of the trucks and works, the mounds of dirt etc encroaches on any ounce of peace you would want living in your home
    we now live in a street where people ignore your signs and the opposing footpath is a dumping ground for people's rubbish. At the moment there is a mattress, dinning chairs, cans of paint, an abandoned trailer with rubbish in it.
    the toll of living this way for this long is causing our lives to drop to depression.
    Do you live in this street. Would you know how it feels?

    Please open it up to a garden green for a whole community to finally live well.
    There must be another venue or another way, elsewhere.
    It will be tragic to our family if you were to carry on regardless.

  20. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 34 Matthieson Street, Highett, VIC:

    Rohan Ladduwahetty commented

    Why is that Bayside Council takes almost 2 years to approve a planning permit? They are supposed to complete the process in 3 months. Is there any problem that Council is facing eg. Lack of staff

  21. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 34 Matthieson Street, Highett, VIC:

    Garey Lopes commented

    Hi there,

    Is this area going to be built as its been over 2 years and the weeds/creepers are damaging my fence already. It looks unattractive please mow the lawns and remove the creepers from the back fence so it does not damage my property.

  22. In Patterson Lakes VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 6 Schooner Bay Drive, Patterson Lakes, VIC:

    Monica and George Azzopardi commented

    1. We would like to know why on the permit says 2 of 2 story dwellings where as the plans shows 2 of 3 story dwellings.
    2. It also exceeds 9 meters.
    3. Parking is already a problem in the street.

    We feel that once 3 story dwellings start coming up in schooner bay drv it will crowd and will spoil our beautiful open space area.

  23. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 1054 Nepean Highway, Highett, VIC:

    A Banducci commented

    I too would like to oppose this development.

    Five storey, noise, parking, overshadowing will be an issue.
    Infrastructure in the area and traffic cannot cope.

  24. In Highett VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 1054 Nepean Highway, Highett, VIC:

    M Stewart commented

    I would like to oppose this development.
    *Too many apartments for 1 block land
    *Not in keeping with height of surrounding properties - consider over shadowing / lack of privacy / noise pollution
    *Traffic congestion - people trying to get onto Nepean Highway from service road
    *Car parking - where are 44 plus cars going to park?
    *Infrastructure - sewerage not built to cope with so many extra developments
    *Infrastructure - gas / electricity demands - will have power outage on hot days

  25. In Cheltenham VIC on “Removal of a significant tree” at 14 McIvor Street, Cheltenham, VIC:

    Jessie Brent commented

    How sad! We are getting more and more bricks, concrete and paving in the suburbs in a climate that is getting more extreme. I remember when people planted trees and shrubs to improve the suburbs and the wellbeing of the residents.

  26. In Cheltenham VIC on “Removal of a significant tree” at 14 McIvor Street, Cheltenham, VIC:

    James Ackroyd commented

    There is much very uneccesary removal of mature vegetation occurring in this area and very little mature tree cover in this part of Kingston - what remains is being stripped and leaving our suburb a less pleasant place to live. It seems very unnecessary to permit causal removal of what we do have whether native or historically introduced, fine specimens. I do not believe this tree should be removed.

  27. In Cheltenham VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at Shop 216 Charman Road, Cheltenham, VIC:

    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.

  28. In Cheltenham VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at Shop 216 Charman Road, Cheltenham, VIC:

    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.

  29. In Highett VIC on “Subdivide the Land into...” at 35 Tennyson Street, Highett, VIC:

    Arkie Vee commented

    Can this be serious? 21 lots where there has been a single dwelling?! Is there a strategy to this eg ask for 21 when you intend to develop into 15? It is appalling.

  30. In Cheltenham VIC on “Develop the land for the...” at 27 Parnell Street, Cheltenham, VIC:

    James Ackroyd commented

    I note that plans and the full application has not yet been published for this proposed development, as these seem not yet to be available for review via the council's portal.
    The property sits within the planning zone GRZ3 (Residential Incremental Change only). All properties in Parnell Street currently are single storey. Where two dwellings have been built on blocks in the GRZ3 area in this locality, the neighbourhood character has been to build the rear property on the block single storey. There are many such examples nearby. Double storey back to back townhouse developments are more suited to GRZ2 and west of Wilson Street, there are plenty of examples of the change in character to this type of dwelling. Where 2 storey development has been permitted on larger blocks in GRZ3, this has so far extended only to large single family homes. These incorporate appropriately sized set backs at front and rear, and landscaping requirements. Extreme care therefore needs to be taken to ensure this particular application, which differs from that previously permitted in this area, is assessed properly in reference to neighbouring properties, other nearby developments, and be reflective of existing neighbourhood character of the GRZ3 ; large single family homes or 2 homes on a block with the rear home being single storey or if a single double storey home, appropriately set back. it must also fully comply with the new landscaping requirements, visual amenity and privacy and prevention of overlooking of neighbouring properties. I look forward to receiving further details when available for consideration.

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