Tell us what you think of the Quality Design Guidelines

over 1 year ago
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.
  • Suki Ibbetson over 1 year ago
    First of all at a lengthy, wordy document of 160+ pages it certainly isn't designed for your average community member to make light of but rather as a tool to justify your own development proposals.I am unsure of just how you will apply these 'quality design guidelines' to future building developments and how your guidelines stack up to VCAT.
  • Amanda over 1 year ago
    These guidelines are 167 pages long which will make an already complex planning process even more difficult for both residents and developers. The existing planning scheme is difficult enough to understand and includes provisions designed to address many of the issues in these guidelines.The concepts should be included in local policies in the planning scheme (eg an urban design policy) which gives them more statutory weight. I understand you will include them as a reference document in the scheme but Councils can't use reference documents to explain how they will exercise their discretion when deciding an application.Whether Council likes it or not, the planning system is a performance based system. These guidelines seemed to be aimed at getting around it and I'm not sure what weight VCAT will give to them, or a planning panel in the first instance. I think you are doing some good strategic work but I'm not sure these guidelines are what is needed.
  • LouiseW over 1 year ago
    Anything that helps to co-ordinate an approach to the aesthetics and function of the suburb are to be applauded but the constant granting of waivers to inbuilt parking are a concern. Finishes on buildings are not good quality and are weathered and cracked within 18 months. Traffic in an out of side streets leading into Neerim Rd has become dangerous.
  • vijay over 1 year ago
    Have written three times on this forum and my comments keep getting marked as spam. Not sure what is going on. In short a massive lack of awareness by council to the community surrounding the project. Buildings are far too tall at 8-12 stories and massive impact on surrounding neighbourhood from visibility and also traffic congestion etc. More consultation and time please.
  • vijay over 1 year ago
    Have written three times on this forum and my comments keep getting marked as spam. Not sure what is going on. In short a massive lack of awareness by council to the community surrounding the project. Buildings are far too tall at 8-12 stories and massive impact on surrounding neighbourhood from visibility and also traffic congestion etc. More consultation and time please.
  • vijay over 1 year ago
    I think there is a better option than both 1 and 2. 8-12 stories is far too high and the impact on surrounding residents with regards to visibility, noice and traffic flow will be too great. There will be a massive increase in traffic through St James, Elster and surrounds if the project goes through in its current form. Where are the traffic flows and studies? Surely they have been completed by this stage but i couldnt find anywhere?The process of consultation seems to have a lot of flaws and i didnt receive any notification of anything going on until a fair way down the planning track and only once our neighbours alerted us. Needs to be much more community involvement and the council should be more proactive with this rather than just leaving it to concerned neighbours. Please be more transparent with the residents you represent. Not fair and quite sneaky to put through so quickly. Thank you for reading.
  • Giuliano Gava over 1 year ago
    Firstly, congratulations for starting the discussion. Greater consultation with the community will result in a better outcome. I do however suggest that a kiosk or two around the local shopping strips would assist in capturing many more residents and business owners thoughts. 14 comments to date from a community of thousands isn't a great statistic. It's pretty simple to me - give existing homes (not houses) the privacy and respect they currently enjoy and design and use building materials that respect the local area. These principles aren't being adopted at the moment in some areas as it's all about greater density for less cost. Establish OVERLAYS which will ensure everyone is aware what is and isn't able to be built. Current Planning controls isn't working that well and leaving decisions to be made by VCAT isn't either. Cheers
  • Janetgd over 1 year ago
    Both option 1 & 2 do not fulfill the heritage and village feel that is supposedly being protected by placing high density living along the highway corridor. The village that currently exists along McMillan, Alexandra, Oak and Elm seems to be being sacrificed to fulfill government pressure for increased density living. Yet these are the very homes and residents that have developed and contributed to the village feel that is supposedly being protected. Council needs to show a commitment to better protect traditional low scale residential areas from dense apartment developments. There is a significant residential footprint already in existence along the urban renewal corridor and it appears to be being surrendered. Poor traffic management planning and vision has not accounted for the inevitable increase in vehicle flow through to Glenhuntly Road in both Option 1 & 2. The bus and railway facilities in the area (Elsternwick and Gardenvale) are already stretched and without significant upgrade will not cope with the proposed development. I would also ask the Council to consider other areas to be ‘growth areas’ such as along Glenhuntly Road, as there are many (15) multi-level developments with planning permits along the Elsternwick area alone.
  • vixmillan over 1 year ago
    I don't believe option 1 or 2 are viable options for Elsternwick. Glen Eira council needs to take a more conservative approach in order to maintain the heritage and village feel that drew residents to Elsternwick In the first place. While I am not averse to change and I do believe that geographically etc the Elsternwick fringe is the logical place for this change to take place, I just believe that the proposed change is far too drastic and is at the expense of current residents who chose Elsternwick as our home because of the safe village feel. With these proposals we will be living in a concrete jungle with overshadowing, high traffic conjestion and a loss of the village feel that the we came here for. We embrasé change and only ask That council takes a reasonable approach to the change! Nothing over 4-5 stories please!
  • Rod Dilnutt over 1 year ago
    Both options ignore the residential nature of well establishes streets adjacent to the railway lines i.e. Sherbrooke, McMillan, Oak Avenue, Elm Avenue, Alexandra Avenue. These streets feature heritage style homes some dating from the 19th century that would be lost is the multistorey developments are permitted. Not only would the residential nature and amenity of these streets be destroyed the volumes of new residents and subsequent traffic/parking would create a high rise ghetto which is totally out of character with this suburb. These problems would spill over the railway into the heritage areas and have a compounding effect.
  • RPD over 1 year ago
    Option 1 looks ok, subject to the quality of the design of the buildings and sufficient car parking. We don't want a long row of shabby apartments like the ones along Horne Street. Option 2 is totally inappropriate. The high rise buildings (8-12 storeys) should not be built at the southern end. This is too close to the Elsternwick heritage residential areas around Orrong Road and Riddell Parade -the southern end of the proposed Elsternwick activity area - separated by a railway line but very close as the crow flies. This would ruin the look and amenity of the residential area. The high rise buildings of 8-12 storeys should be limited to the built up area near Elsternwick station. They will require ample parking as the Glenhuntly Rd precinct is already suffering congestion and parking problems.
  • Colin Sichlau over 1 year ago
    The Elsternwick draft structure plan still lacks sufficient detail to make an accurate assessment. The best option at present for the activity centre zoning, heights and overlays is option 1. There is still insufficient car parking spaces proposed for the Elsternwick shopping strip. The part of the Strategic Site A in Stanley St which hasn't yet been build on needs to be a multi story car park for the shoppers and customers of all the eateries and food outlets. Car parking spaces need to be increased ten fold for the railway uses and shoppers.Details of traffic movement and flow have not yet been demonstrated and will affect all residents' quality of living and needs to be planned and hard decisions taken to keep it manageable. Turning right from Glenhuntly Rd into Riddell Parade has become a nightmare because of pedestrians walking to and from the Railway station. It is probably busier than the current pedestrian crossing outside the railway station crossing Glenhuntly road. Cyclists should be banned from Glenhuntly Road as cars and cyclists don't mix when there is a pedestrian safety zone painted down the centre of the road. The road is too narrow as marked to safely negotiate people opening car doors without the ability to straddle the tram tracks where poor braking results in wet conditions with wheels on the tram rail. Restaurant tables on the street should also be banned unless the street is closed to traffic. Again this is a huge safety issue as a car traveling at 40 km/hr will still create horrific damage if it runs off the road. Monash University should be contracted to come up with a safe solution to this issue. Obviously Elsternwick will become an overcrowded concrete jungle with insufficient additional green spaces planned for the near future. The Victorian government forces other people to sell their homes for the East West link and the completion of the Ring Road but will not do it in the inner suburbs to improve traffic flow. A long term traffic plan needs to be developed for Elsternwick and the government needs to buy land/ homes to make it feasible. The long term plan needs to be in place so homeowners will know if they will be affected and can plan accordingly.
  • John Saunders Architect over 1 year ago
    1.Council should 'limit' their involvement with applications to the building envelope and allow architects to be innovative and creative. I find that they also ask for unnecessary information just to delay an application: possibly just to placate their team leader or make them feel more powerful.2.Council get too involved with trying to enforce outdated/ mock/ pseudo appearances of buildings. Tiled roofs are not in favour at present and are not incorporated in most quality designs.3.Council should develop simple guidelines for one-on top-of-the-other dual occs as they are in demand from the aging population4. Objectors need to be told clearly when their objections/ concerns are not well founded5. Council has never been honest in their attitude to Town Planning applications. They lead applicants 'on' , waste every-ones time and end up with numerous Conditions of Permit culminating in either poorer layouts or VCAT applications
  • rayz@3163 over 1 year ago
    In regards to minimum change areas whereby 2 units can be built side by side. It is critical the air conditioning units are drawn on the plans submitted to council. This allows neighbours to see where they are placed in relation to their own home. We had 2 units built next door and although 2 storey and totally overlooking with very large western facing windows which only have a small upper window to allow air in - meaning they would clearly be hot boxes in summer - no air conditioning units were on the plans. When built they placed 2 large noisy units adjacent to our bedroom windows. These run 24/7 and we cannot have our windows open due to the noise. We hear the noise all night. The overall design of these units have not met any sustainability or environmental codes, yet were passed by the Glen Eira planning department. This has to be more regulated.
  • rayz@3163 over 1 year ago
    A little too late, but at least Glen Eira Council are recognising the mistakes the over development has made so far. Too many cheap apartments with no or little parking. The idea of increasing the population is fine, except the public transport and open space available does not and will not support this increase. We have lost the local Carnegie community vibe shopping strip to cheap student eating places, and a transient student population with dodgy overseas postal shops selling stolen baby formula and food outlets breaking health and safety regulations. (I would not risk eating these foods after seeing what goes on in the kitchens at the rear of Koornang road). No sense of community anymore, Carnegie was once a lovely relaxed community minded shopping strip. Forget even getting a park most of the time at Woolworths behind Koornang Road, it is taken up by the units residents parking and cheap eat customers. It has become an overheated concrete jungle. All the "lovely' pictures of green open space and mature trees the developers and SkyRail put in brochures are rubbish. I wonder where these 'artists' who draw up the 'impressions' get the idea we have such potential create these lovely green open spaces. Carnegie is just an overheated, concrete, crowded slum now, with overflowing smelly skip bins in the car parks full of rotten food waste.
  • Paul T over 1 year ago
    A comment on the Minimal Change residential area dwelling type. I understand that the intent of these side by side arrangements is to increase density and provide gardens to both and minimise driveway length. I have yet to see examples of this type of development that work well visually - the design is usually poor and non contextual. Good north aspect is almost impossible to achieve for both units: at least one unit is mostly deprived of solar access. These dual unit developments usually replace existing houses that were better constructed, built of more durable materials, and that have paid their carbon debt many times over. SO apart form increased density and finacial return, little community value is achieved. Large trees are lost and are almost impossible to replace in the new configuration. It would be better to lose this type of development and instead encourage good medium density multi unit solutions.
  • Jane Krause over 1 year ago
    Yes I definitely think that there are going to be some positive changes in the area around Carnegie & I am happy with what the design concept is is going to look like but as long as it doesn’t end up spoiling the character of the area to much & we just end up living in a concrete jungle . So hopefully they have also included some great parks in the design .
  • Beena over 1 year ago
    Totally agree that sensible and enforceable guidelines are put in place. Koornang Road needs greater diversity and parking! Don't bother trying to do your shopping at Woolworths at lunchtime on a Sunday because you won't find a park - it's take by people eating at the restaurants. Also, sick and tired if the one look concrete box apartment complexes - all white (which will stain and crack in 5yrs). Over the years I've heard, the word 'sympathetic' used over, and over again by Glen Eira Council - haven't seen an example yet!!!!!!! Don't give us 'warm and fuzzy' words - have the guts to mean what you say - that would be a nice change.
  • Leonie mccausland over 1 year ago
    Removed by moderator.
  • Michele Kennedy over 1 year ago
    I agree that the current quality of design of apartment blocks that are being built in Murrumbeena and surrounding suburbs are of poor taste visually and will date quickly. I also strongly disagree with the height of 4 & 5 story being permitted. with the continuation of this to be granted will clearly affect the visual aspect, the feel of the suburb and destroy the quality suburb nature and turn the area into a concrete jungle. The mix of shops, more to do with the numerous one type of ethnic restaurant in Koornang Road permitted, is turning the street into a cheap low quality area. If Council allow this to continue i believe the area will drastically decline that can only have a flow on affect concerning demographic and sustained investment.
  • Bennyboy248 over 1 year ago
    Apartment design quality is a huge thing, they need to have some design features a lot of the apartments around Carnegie and Murrumbeena are already looking old and outdated. The quality look of these buildings affects the look of the surrounding homes and streets, if they look ugly and old the rest of the area will look the same!