Development or Devastation?

My walk to work, a mere 2.5km through Glen Waverley’s northern corner, is increasingly challenging as I negotiate yet another broken, illegally fenced, car blocked, mud covered or flooded footpath as another home site is bulldozed of every last blade of grass before being swamped under a monstrous concrete box.

Council has reached an “in-principle” position on Amendment C125 which is supposed to provide some degree of control over what gets built where and what happens to the vegetation which comprises the “garden character” of the City of Monash.  You can see the position they reached and how it changed on March 29, 2016 on page 7 of the meeting minutes of the Council meeting.

On May 3, many residents attended the public submissions evening to offer their opinion on the “in-principle” position.***  There are no minutes currently published on Council’s website but it is fair to say that a significant percentage, probably a significant majority, of speakers were strongly opposed to the weakening of the controls by Cr Lake’s amendments to the proposals in the original C125 report.

Council is due to adopt, or amend then adopt, the “in-principle” position at the next meeting on May 30.  After that, the amendment goes before a State government planning review panel before being finally presented to the Minister for Planning for his approval.

NOW, is almost your last opportunity to influence the outcome of the process.

***Editor’s note:  Check out the comments to read one of the presentations to Monash Council on 3 May.

“The area in question should remain NRZ4”

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Development or Devastation?”

  1. Here is one of the presentations to Council on 3 May. Thank you to Lynnette for permission to publish this on the EM&U site:

    C125 Submission from Monash Ratepayers

    Lynnette Saloumi e: Lynnette.mri@gmail.com

    Specific Objection to the proposal to “j’ to alter the C125 Amendment as follows:-

    Reducing the extent of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 4 by removing the area of land generally bounded by Highbury Road, Springvale Road, Waverley Road, Gallagher’s Road, Westlands Road and Camelot Drive, Glen Waverley from the proposed Neighbourhood Residential Zone Schedule 4 and placing it in the proposed General Residential Zone – Schedule4

    Monash Ratepayers is in support of the original published C125 Amendment proposal to include the area of Glen Waverley (bounded by Highbury, Springvale, Waverley, Gallaghers and Westlands Rds and Camelot Dr) in the NRZ4.

    Our Argument to retain this area in NRZ4 addresses particularly Traffic, Schools, Character and Environmental issues.

    TRAFFIC

    By placing this land, split into two effectively by High St Rd, into General Residential Zone will only serve to increase density and cause more pressure on infrastructure i.e. with traffic, parking and drop offs and pick-ups in school zones.
    To put this area, into GRZ, demonstrates the proposer’s lack of local knowledge for the streets are already at capacity especially at peak times. The neighbourhood streets are generally narrow and are not geared to accommodate high levels of traffic.

    These areas are highly utilised by school children attending primary and secondary schools.

    The traffic restrictions that are in place are already onerous with many streets disallowing turns between 7am and 9am for absolutely no reason save the signs have sat there for 20 plus years.

    These two areas already feed significant traffic through to local amenities such as Highvale Secondary College and the GWPAC – especially the Glen, the Station and the GWSC.

    With higher density there will be more strain on the intersections at Springvale Rd and each of Waverley/ Glen / High St and Highbury Roads. Significant delays already exist at these intersections at peak times and with the high rise apartments (x 900++) and the Glen redevelopment with its 3800 car spaces, traffic congestion is already set to increase to perhaps unsustainable levels .

    Has Vic Roads been consulted?

    Springvale Rd Glen Waverley is for the third year in a row the highest traffic accident hotspot in Melbourne according to AAMI.

    CHARACTER

    There is no reason to denude the character of Glen Waverley any more – already enough damage by the over development occurring in the GWPAC without waiting to see the impact of these approvals. The Garden Character is diminishing rapidly and the recent decision to create an Open Space Strategy now shows it (open space) was never considered in the first place. This proposed change minimises open space. A sad reflection on Monash Council’s greedy priorities – development first; liveability an afterthought.

    THE SCHOOLS

    The pressure on the schools is already obvious to the educated.

    THE ENVIRONMENT

    Monash should have an Environmental Science Officer whose expertise is recognised and is able to challenge Councillors’ inept proposals when they impact negatively on the environment.

    Whilst smart minded individuals are accepting the values of open space on liveability it seems Glen Waverley Ward Councillors do not.

    Unless one had a death wish one wouldn’t get a lawyer to perform a heart operation. Using this rationale, why should residents accept the proposal by a Councillor who is not himself a planning expert; nor an environmental expert; nor a resident; to determine what planning strategy is acceptable in an area with which he is unfamiliar?

    When offered a walk through the escarpment to experience the terrain, the Glen Waverley Ward Councillor/s declined. Yet in blissful ignorance we have a proposal to change the C125 Amendment from Council officer’s recommendation of NRZ4, to GRZ.

    There is a lack of acknowledgment of the value of environmental diversity, flora and fauna and the natural waterway and creeks systems.

    The desire to cover every piece of land with concrete will produce more surface run off; flooding and strain on storm water pipes and waterways.

    IN CONCLUSION

    With zero understanding of consequences this proposal “j” is driven by person / persons who are obsessed with satisfying developers rather than the community who reside in the area in question.

    The area in question should remain in NRZ4.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s