Its now or never folks to start petitioning to save these 2 sites
Community members are campaigning to protect the former Southvale Primary School site in Noble Park and the former Maralinga Primary School site in Keysborough from residential and social housing development.
The lands that once housed these schools have been rezoned from educational use for housing and mixed development projects by the Victorian state government, sparking local concern over the loss of limited open green space and future educational infrastructure in the City of Greater Dandenong.
Key Details of the Campaign
Southvale Primary School (Noble Park): Located at 30-40 Athol Road, the former school site was slated for surplus government land programs to build social, affordable, and market housing.Opened April 1966 Closed December 2009
Maralinga Primary School (Keysborough): Closed in 2014 and later demolished, the site sits adjacent to the Chandler Road Reserve, leading to local opposition over reduced open space and the removal of mature trees. Opened February 1975
Community Concerns: Residents argue that the City of Greater Dandenong already suffers from low tree canopy coverage and minimal open space (around 4% in most wards), making the retention of these vacant blocks vital for the area's environment and population growth.
Action Taken: Local advocates have organized petitions, such as the Change.org Petition to Preserve Southvale PS & Maralinga PS Land, to urge authorities to keep the former school grounds vacant or preserve them for future community and educational needs.
The Southvale housing development refers to a proposed medium-density residential estate located at 30–40 Athol Road, Noble Park, on the 2.3-hectare site of the former Southvale Primary School.
The project is being fast-tracked through the Victorian State Government's Inclusionary Housing Pilot program.
Current Status & Local Discourse
As of September 2026, the application is under active assessment by Victorian Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny. Because the project falls under the state's fast-tracked pilot framework, the state planning minister dictates the final permits, which removes standard third-party appeal rights. [1, 2]
The project has drawn formal criticism and concerns from the Greater Dandenong Council and local community advocates regarding a lack of explicit detail in the public planning submission. Notable areas of local debate include: [1]
Social Housing Mix: The planning documents have not specified the exact percentage or number of social and affordable homes allocated within the 95 townhouses. The developer has maintained that keeping these numbers confidential is intentional to protect the privacy of future vulnerable residents.
Environmental & Infrastructure Impact: Community members and the council have raised issues regarding the removal of native vegetation—specifically affecting a portion of the 127 identified trees on-site—as well as traffic management, neighborhood open space deficits, and overland stormwater flooding infrastructure.