Despite their previous misgivings about the use of Car Stackers, even after the developer of a 15 storey development refused to install them, Council officers still recommended approval of a car stacker system for resident parking in a four story apartment proposal at 19-23 Bayley Grove, Doncaster.

Click to enlarge

As far it can be ascertained this will be the first major development on Doncaster Hill that is likely to proceed using a car stacker system for its entire resident parking. Residents adjacent to the development have complained that they had no way of knowing the method of parking until after the period for objections had expired because the notice board on site did not reveal that stackers were proposed….this is standard practice according to the Doncaster Hill Residents Group. A leader of the Friends of Hepburn Group said there were three previous developments where council had approved mechanical parking, two did not proceed and the developer of the third went ahead without the use of stacker parking. With most councils car stacker parking systems are only acceptable where Continue reading MANNINGHAM STILL BACKER OF THE CAR STACKER →


“You can rule out Doncaster rail to the City via the freeway because Vic Roads want the the median strip reserved for dedicated Bus lanes”.  26/8/2016                                                   

No Railway– Buses Only

The release of the North East Link last Friday has officially ended any hope of a rail line being extended to Doncaster Hill after it was confirmed the freeway centre strip would be replaced to provide dedicated bus lanes.

Both Liberal and labor  governments had always regarded buses as the only public transport solution for Doncaster Hill and had repeatedly advised Manningham to “stop tugging in other directions”.  That didn’t stop an opposition party proposing a $6.5 Million study, as an election campaign ploy, which  was only half completed after it won office.

What surprised residents was how easily Council could be sucked into believing the politicians by providing a false hope to Doncaster residents and investors by embarking Continue reading BUS LANES TAKE CENTRE STRIP PLANNED FOR RAIL →


Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together. Burning fuel to produce fertiliser to grow feed, to produce meat and to transport it -and the deforestation and land clearing for grazing – produces 9 per cent of all emissions of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas. And their wind and manure emit more than one third of emissions of another, methane, which warms the world 20 times faster than carbon dioxide. What makes animal agriculture so inefficient? In short, animals consume more food than they produce. Or put another way, Continue reading LESS POPULATION=LESS MEAT=LESS METHANE GAS →


Residents in the lower scale development zone, abutting the Doncaster Hill precinct at 810 Elgar Rd, are questioning why council have prescribed such high buildings (32.5 metres) on their boundary line without there being an appropriate height step down to avoid overshadowing of their properties. 

Shadowing Diagrams

All buildings and works should be designed to avoid casting shadows upon any adjacent properties (including public open spaces) outside the area covered by the DDO6 (Doncaster Hill Precinct) between 11am and 2pm on  22nd March or 22nd of September  (ACZ1 updated from amendment C33)



Microplastics in sea threat to human health, United Nations warns  (copy to browser to open)

BBC Video link above captures the moment plastic enters the food chain

Pacific Garbage Patch                  Click to enlarge

Microplastics are created when larger plastic debris breaks down by sunlight and wave action into rice-sized bits that measure five millimeters or less.  They have turned the world’s oceans into what scientists call a “plastic soup,” but their impact on the marine ecosystem in our oceans is not fully understood. A 2015 study had attempted Continue reading FROM PLASTIC GARBAGE PATCH TO DINNER PLATE →



Highlight then right click on the above link then go to the 1 hour 22 minute mark of the video to hear the Councillor’s rationale in support of their unanimous decision to reject the officers recommendations.

Council Meeting 26/9/17

The petitioning of the councillors and objections by the beneficiaries/stakeholders all played a major role in the abandonment. A great deal of credit must go to the councillors especially Anna Chen who raised the motion of abandonment and Mike Zafiropolous, the seconder, who stressed the importance of written assurances, given by a previous CEO specifically to the beneficiaries of the Glen Towers estate, advising that council would not support the removal of  covenants outside the Doncaster Hill precinct.  Advice On Restrictive Covenants   Geoff Gough, Dot Haynes and Andrew Conlon also spoke to the alternative motion. The aforementioned stressing that it was entirely a matter for the applicant and the beneficiaries. Continue reading COUNCILLORS DUMP PLAN TO REMOVE COVENANTS →



Manningham is among several Melbourne councils who have been asked to identify apartment buildings with flammable cladding, particularly those less than 25 metres (up to 8 storeys) high where there is no legal requirement to install a sprinkler system. This follows inspections previously conducted by the VBA, which investigated 170 buildings in Melbourne for non-compliant cladding where 51% of those assessed were found to be non-compliant  Councils are to investigate the presence of aluminium cladding in apartment buildings, the same product that caused the Lacrosse apartment building to catch fire in 2014 and the recent London fire where at least eighty residents had perished in the inferno. 

Whole Building  Crumbling    Click to enlarge

The Combustible cladding on the Lacrosse high-rise apartment building will have to be removed from the building at the apartment owners expense after it was found that the cladding posed a “significant and unacceptable” risk to hundreds of residents. In January this year the Building Appeals Board again ordered the owners to remove the flammable cladding. It dismissed a bid by LU Simon Builders to keep the cladding and instead install more sprinklers, saying the equipment might fail  with “catastrophic” results. “The risk posed by the current cladding is so serious that it is necessary to have a building order which requires the owners to remedy the situation,” it found. This means the owners of the Lacrosse apartments could be left with an $8.6 million  Continue reading COUNCILS TO REPORT ON COMBUSTIBLE CLADDING →


Yarra Valley Water appears set to compulsory acquire council land to construct a Sewer Treatment Plant for the purpose of supplying water extracted from the main sewer line to all new dwellings on Doncaster Hill.  This comes after the Manningham Council had refused to issue a building permit and resolved that it would not lease or sell council land for the purposes of a Sewer Mining Plant.           Further Info this link .. ………..   Consultation On Sewer Plant Location  

The 47 hectare Eastern Golf Course, located immediately to the west and downstream from Doncaster Hill, was to be the ideal location for the Sewer Treatment Plant on one of several open space reserves on the estate close to the sewer main. Just when it was thought it was being finalised, the Tram Road reserve, 1.4 kilometers away, became the preferred option. Geraldine Sharp was a supporter of the Golf Club option; “It flattened me when I heard that Council had changed their minds Continue reading SEWAGE PLANT WILL PROCEED DESPITE LAND BAN →


“Support for covenant removal ONLY within the Doncaster Hill precinct”

Council pledge to ninety beneficiaries                                               Advice On Restrictive Covenants

“This latter piece of the advice is totally consistent with previous officer advic relating to properties ‘within’ the Doncaster Hill precinct where it would be beneficial for the property owners by consent or agreement to meet the objectives of the Doncaster Hill Strategy and under these circumstances *only*Council is likely to support removal of a restrictive covenant”. ..*Authors bold emphasis* 

Glen Towers Estate

(Author in conclusion) “I can advise that Council has never discussed any intent; holds no plan or desire; and, has not foreshadowed any intention or interest at any time to take any action that would interfere with the protection that beneficiaries enjoy with Restrictive Covenants. A related question seems to be -is anyone else likely to do so? Council is not able to speak for the Minister or his Government but again, it makes no sense legally, practically or politically for any Government to contemplate such action (unless it relates to an Order under section 2010 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987” ..CEO 

Officer’s report in minutes below, item 3.27  “It is considered that the intent of the CEO’s assurance letter (when he used the word support) was really to convey that Council would not initiate any process to remove a covenant from land outside the Doncaster Hill precinct”.                Council minutes 26th Sept

Walker Street (Click)

There are still growing concerns among the ninety beneficiaries of the Glen Towers Estate’s restrictive covenants that the Manningham Executive may dishonor the above pledge by recommending that it’s councillors support this application for removal of restrictive covenant, be put before a special government panel for decision, the last place you would want to go for an impartial decision, instead of honoring its promise and advising that it be abandoned and thus setting a precedent for refusal of any similar application outside the perimeter of the Doncaster Hill precinct. Various previous attempts by landowners to  remove or vary covenants in the heart of the estate by way of a planning permit have been thwarted due to the vigilance of beneficiaries and other neighbours.

The landowner of 42 Walker Street, Doncaster whose previous two planning permit attempts were unsuccessful has now gone down a different path. He is now attempting to remove the covenant by way of a planning scheme amendment enabling the owner to build in accordance with the current high density zoning of sub-Precinct A. (up to 3 storeys)  A planning scheme amendment gives the Council as planning authority very wide powers to remove the covenant as long as it can be demonstrated that the removal of the covenant results in a “net community benefit” after the interests of beneficiaries have been considered. The test of “net community benefit” is far less strict than the detriment tests under the planning permit regime. The definition of community is much wider than the Glen Towers Estate and extends to the citizens of Manningham and Victoria. Hence, under the guise of improving housing choices and increasing housing supply in Victoria Councils are able to remove covenants through a planning scheme amendment.

What you must do if you wish to object to this amendment



Manningham annual rates were among the highest in the state because it depended almost entirely on them for its survival during the nineties and had come very close to being carved up among adjoining municipalities, as part of the government’s amalgamation plan, before it agreed to build a high-rise activity centre as part of the Melbourne 20/30 program. Now, twenty years on, according to the Committee for Melbourne research, one council, or a hand full of regional  councils for greater efficiency and would make economic sense by providing a better approach to planning.

Click to enlarge

Alojs from Cooma, whose father had worked for the Snowy River Authority, had moved to Doncaster in the period when Manningham council had prepared a number of medium density plans for a town centre in anticipation of the opening of the eastern freeway which was expected to ease traffic volumes in Doncaster Road. “We wondered what the hell was going on when buildings up to 15 storeys, as part of the Doncaster Hill Strategy, were  foisted upon us”. “No one wanted them because we did not have the infrastructure or street network for such a large undertaking and the area was too remote especially after the Cain Labor government had cancelled the railway line nearly a decade earlier”. Continue reading MANNINGHAM PART OF SIX IN MELBOURNE’S EAST? →