Application for Planning Permit D/766/2009 - 254-256 Murray Road, Preston VIC 3072
Application for Planning Permit D/766/2009 - 254-256 Murray Road, Preston VIC 3072 which is for the demolition of existing dwelling, construction of a three-story building comprising 16 dwellings and a basement car park directly next door to my property at 252 Murray Road.
For the benefit of those cc’d on this e-mail, I have summarised some of my objections below:-
• There is no precedent on Murray Road for atriple-story development and the proposal is completely out of character with the present streetscape. My property is an Edwardian weatherboard cottage which would be completely dwarfed by the proposed development.
• The shadow diagram at 3.00pm would block light and winter sun on the West-side of my property.
• Windows will overlook my property invading my privacy.
• The basement car park with entry/exit via rear laneway would cause extra noise and congestion in an already busy and narrow laneway.
• Visitors will be forced to park on Murray Road creating further competition for already limited spaces.
• There is very little open-space proposed. Of what space is proposed, it is around the perimeter of the building only creating potential for more noise.
• Proposal is set too far forward from existing house street frontages along Murray Road.
In summary, the proposal is too big, too modern and too ugly.
View Larger Map
Yours faithfully,
David Isdale
posted by KOZ @ 9:00 AM
5 Comments:
Your views have been noted.
I suggest that in future that the correct process is to send the objection in writing to the Planning Department City of Darebin Gower Street Prestin 3073.
On a side note, I would not suggest that your plan to publically shame people is the correct one, infact I feel it somewhat immature. Constructive criticism is welcomed but I have a low tolerance of veiled threats.
Ben Morgan
The objection was sent in writing on the 13 February, 2010 to the nominated e-mail address - clearly it is now acceptable to object via e-mail, hence the reason it was nominated.
The public shaming was in my having to re-send the same e-mail to the original recipients because none of you as I see it were doing your job properly. I'm not sure I like the snooty tone of your correspondence either.
David
I am not sure how or why your previous email was not responded to, however, please be advised that the planning committee considers each and every objection received from constituents residing within the municipality. Additionally, please be advised that your concerns have also been forwarded to the appropriate persons for consideration.
Kind regards
Nick Katsis
Cr Katsis has responded to your request, can I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the planning process beore you intend to ' publicaly shame ' anyone.
Cr. Vince Fontana
Cr Katsis has only just responded to my request today. The objection was lodged on 13 February, 2010. The public shaming was in my having to re-send the same e-mail to the original recipients because none of you as I see it were doing your job properly. I’m not sure I like the snooty tone of your correspondence.
Regards,
David Isdale
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home