Mitcham neighbours fight plan to build 11 four-bedroom houses on their semi-rural street
UNMISSABLE signs protesting “inappropriate development” are posted outside nearly every house in a semi-rural Mitcham street.
East
Don't miss out on the headlines from East . Followed categories will be added to My News.
UNMISSABLE signs protesting “inappropriate development” are posted outside nearly every house in a semi-rural Mitcham street.
Members of the Glenburnie Road Residents Association, which has protected the area’s unique bushland quality for 80 years, have hung out the signs after hearing of a plan to build 11 four-bedroom houses at 42-48 Glenburnie Rd.
DEVELOPERS TOLD TO GO WEST BY LEAFY EAST
And it’s not the first time they have signed up to protest. The signs last lined the street when the property was for sale last year.
But they have been dusted off after but an application to subdivide the site, which hosts just one house and sheds, was submitted to Whitehorse Council.
The $3 million development, proposed by Golden Oak Mitcham, would create 432sqm lots, conflicting with the Bushland Environment Precinct’s guideline that lots should be a minimum of 650 sqm.
Association president John Read said it would bring “grossly inappropriate development” to the “unique bushland laneway” that is home to about 80 people. A meeting held by the association on June 9 was attended by 83 people from the street and neighbourhood.
Mr Read said all were against the plans, but not development itself.
He said attendees had expressed interest in buying a house at the property if it was instead “a premium offering with a substantial reduction in density”.
Extra traffic and need for parking that will be generated along the one-lane road is also a concern of residents.
Two car parking spaces are proposed to cater for visitors to the 11 houses.
Secretary Ross Gillespie said cars would be unable to park along the road without parking in the gutters and damaging them.
DOG PARK IS TOO SMALL AND TOO DRY, RESIDENTS SAY
But not all neighbours are against the proposal, with those behind the property saying redevelopment could only improve the area.
A Halls Parade resident, who didn’t want to be named, said her property shares a boundary with the site, and she had “had to endure five years of constant rubbish landing in [her] tiny backyard” from the “neglected mess” at 42-48 Glenburnie Rd.
“Not to mention the rat and mouse plague coming through the fence despite our best efforts to keep them out.
“Tastefully done, it would be wonderful.”