Another Nightmare on Bay Road

This 4089 square metre property was advertised for sale using the quote: 

"Its one acre of land zoned for hiugh density apartments on a main road, close to shops and you can get four (4) levels without having to go to VCAT."

Note: The misspelling of "hiugh" in the advertisement has been left intentionally... it seems like a appropriate Freudian-slip ie a compilation of high & huge!!!

This shows a Plan-View of ONE Storey of a FOUR Storey Development at 218 Bay Road, Sandringham. It shows about 40 'apartments' on the ONE storey, each averaging about 42 sq. metres internally. There are another TWO similarly configured stories... plus the ground floor.
The development 'boasts' about 115 apartments, 1 shop and room for about 128 cars, mostly to be 'stored/parked' in car-stackers!

• 'Advertising' of the Planning Application has been  completed.
• ONLY THREE objections were apparently received by Council ! This is VERY surprising, considering over 1000 objections were received against the development at 220-228 Bay Road! This apparent lack of 'objectors' seems to indicate that either (or both), 'advertising' was comprehensively inadequate, or many people of the community are 'exhausted' from dealing with the 'bully tactics' regarding 'enforced planning' at a State Government level!
• The Planning Application was 'refused' by Bayside Council and a VCAT hearing has apparently been set for October 2011.  But, alas, past experience of VCAT hearings does not bode well for the local community.

Amongst other things, including loss of amenity for the local community, the implications for traffic movement in Bay Road & 'surrounds' are almost UNIMAGINABLE, considering the 'cumulative effect' of traffic from other nearby high-density developments!

It is hoped that the future residents enjoy the VERY close 'social interaction' this 'dormitory style' development will provide. Current media reports on 'high-density-living' suggest they will have MAJOR problems.

New 'Mini-Suburb' Planned for Bayside?

Is this a 'joke'?
It would be, if it were NOT an emerging and outrageous reality!

Planning in Melbourne is resulting in an increasing number of frighteningly high-density areas throughout our suburbs.  Suburbs that had previously evolved 'organically' over time into suburbs of character!
Now, an irreversible 'densification experiment' is destroying the character and amenity of those same suburbs.

One area in Bayside being transformed by this 'densification experiment' is circled in the image above.

This 'new mini-suburb' could be jokingly named 'Highdensityham' (Highett+Density+Sandringham)... but it is NO JOKE to those residents who have made it their neighbourhood community.

Consideration of the outrageous implications of such 'suburban densification' has either, not been given or has been totally ignored by so-called 'planners'.

Such unbalanced and ill-conceived planning needs to STOP!

ALSO... the Government policy of promoting the sale of residential properties to Non-Resident (overseas) buyers should STOP.  It increases home prices AND reduces home availability for Australian residents!

A VCAT Win? Yes... BUT NO!!!

Proposed Development Site: 29-33 Beaumaris Pde & 34 Tibrockney St, Highett


The local community won an earlier VCAT battle to stop a 26 apartment development on this site in Highett!
"Hooray!!!" cheers the local community.


BUT NOW... a new development application, by the same developer, for the same site  has 'ballooned' the apartment number to 40 !!!

Plans for a proposed 40 Apartment Development at

29-33 Beaumaris Pde & 34 Tibrockney St, Highett

A VCAT 'win' for the community = the developer proceeds to 'teach the community a lesson'!?

September 2011 Update: VCAT has AGAIN refused permission for a Permit to proceed with this 're-designed' development! We will now 'hold our breath' to see how the developer (Gillon) proceeds!?

The Push for Consistency

Bayside Leader-Page 10   7 Jun 2011

In the latest in our series on population boom and development in Bayside, Marnie Reid speaks to the Planning Minister

DEVELOPMENT is becoming a dirty word in some parts of Bayside. Between July 1, 2010, and May 17, 2011, developers had appealed to the state planning tribunal 64 proposed developments that were for various reasons denied by Bayside Council.

Andrew Esplan wants a more thorough planning procedure.

Hampton high rising furore

33 Crisp Street Development -VCAT Hearing 17 August 2011 (10am)
By Jon Andrews 26 Apr 2011

DEVELOPERS are paving the way for a Bayside population boom, with plans for another multi-unit development dominating the April 19 council meeting.
Nearly 100 people complained about the massive 28-unit proposal just 350m from the busy Hampton St shopping strip.
They say the three-storey Crisp St application is yet another overdevelopment trying to cash in on the area’s wealth, while causing nothing but detriment to locals.

Sandringham development outrage

220-228 Bay Rd, Sandringham/Highett
By Marnie Reid  4 Jan 2011

THE Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has approved Bayside’s biggest ever development.

The decision to allow an eight-storey, multiple tower complex on Bay Rd, Sandringham, has outraged Bayside Council, residents and Sandringham state MP Murray Thompson. There were more than 1100 objections to the proposal for 453 apartments, 873 car parks, shops and a medical centre.

One of the towers, 29m at its highest, will be by far Bayside’s tallest building.

Cash saved on Sandringham's Bay Rd appeal

220-228 Bay Road, Sandringham
By Jon Andrews 14 Dec 2010

BAYSIDE Council has spent just a fraction of a budgeted $100,000 to get the best legal help in a fight against a controversial Sandringham planning proposal.
In September, the council pledged to protect the community against plans for a then 11-storey tower at 220-228 Bay Rd with $100,000 of ratepayers’ money.
But at a state planning tribunal hearing held in late November, Bayside’s requested senior counsel was unable to appear.