PlanningAlerts

4 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. Trees along the Parade cannot be replaced if they are destroyed.
   This development must NOT destroy the tree outside on council land (See picture)
   A housing development a few doors down has done a great job of working around the tree on the nature strip and there's no reason that this development can't do the same.

2. Agree with Micheal Grant too many trees of size are being lost on public land as well as private land in the area. There should be more protection for trees of a given size.

3. I support the need to conserve trees on public land, especially mature trees.
   Every effort to conserve our fragile environment should be essential in both private and public land development today. It appears that to do so is possible, and therefore the effort must be made to achieve that outcome.

4. The following Objections / Issues are being raised by the residents at: 134 The Parade in relation to:

   The construction of two (2) dwellings exceeding 7.5 metres in height, proposed alteration of access to Road Zone Category 1 and Two (2) Lot subdivision, at 132 The Parade Ocean Grove. City of Greater Geelong Reference: 316/2020.

   Building Height

   Of principal concern is the proposed height of the construction, being above 7.5 meters, and the subsequent shadow / shade aspects this will have on our existing family home at 134 The Parade. We have a well-established existing garden and have significant concerns and reservations as to the loss of afternoon sun reaching this family garden area.

   We are also very troubled about the potential / probable ‘overlook’ into our home from the second story of the construction and also the roof-top deck etc. We do not believe the planned 1800 paling fence with a 950mm privacy screen added will negate ‘overlook’ into our property. We also do not believe that the proposed privacy screens, as per the existing plans, are able to negate ‘overlook’ from the second story middle and rear decks into our property.

   Pool

   As the proposed pool is to be constructed very close to the boundary, we have the following objections pertaining to this:

   Noise – Principal concerns are the significant noise impacts that will be associated with the use of the relevant water pumps, filters and heaters that will no doubt be necessary for the pool’s operations etc. This is especially significant that, as per the proposed plans, the pool is to be constructed immediately adjacent to what is an existing child’s bedroom of our home.

   It would be very preferable to have all pumps, filters, heaters etc located / situated in a sound proofed facility at the rear of the development or on the roof or if not possible, they are to be suitably sound deadened etc in location.

   Footings & Retaining’s – Of concern is that if the building of the pool were to go ahead that said construction, given how close it will be to the existing boundary etc, does not subsequently undermine, destabilize our property etc.

   Fence

   The Plans state that the existing boundary fence is to be replaced by a 1.8-meter paling fence with a 950mm privacy screen added. Given that the existing boundary fence is in very good condition and was only recently replaced we respectfully decline having to meet any costs associated with the replacement of the existing fence.

   Landscape Plan

   While we are generally happy with the Landscape Plan, we raise the following for your attention:

   We note the wish to plant Bellarine Yellow Gums. Of concern is that Bellarine Yellow Gums can grow up to from 5 to 10 metres in width so therefore they may not be a viable prospect for a property border unless you place these 2.5 metres from the fence line. If the intent is to place them 2.5 meters from the fence line, in which case, these are a good choice.

   Another option is that you could chose to plant a selection of Grevillea and Callistemon on your side of the fence at 132 The Parade, and we would complement this by also growing a selection of Grevillea and Callistemon on our side of the fence at 134 The Parade.

   Please note we are considering removing the Cydonia oblonga (Quince) and the Prunus armeniaca (Apricot) trees, given their proximity to the border. However, it is our intent to retain the Prunus Persica (Peach) tree and will subsequently keep it pruned to within our boundary. We will also maintain the Syzygium (Lilly Pili) tree to ensure minimal overhang etc. It is also our intent to remove the Cotoneaster (Red Berry Tree) at the front of the property and will replace it with a native species tree (TBA).

   Front Tree (nature strip)

   The established Corymbia ficifolia (Flowering Gum Tree) on the nature strip in front of 132 The Parade has been there for decades and is one of only a few trees remaining along The Parade and therefore this tree must be retained and preserved.
   The location of the existing tree should in no way hinder and or influence the development and or construction of the site and it should be noted that the destruction and or removal of the tree would result in considerable protest and objection from the surrounding neighbours.

   We hope and trust that this tree will be retained and preserved.
   

Have your say on this application

You're too late! The period for officially commenting on this application finished over 3 years ago. It lasted for 22 days. If you chose to comment now, your comment will still be displayed here and be sent to the planning authority but it will not be officially considered by the planning authority.

Your comment and details will be sent to City of Greater Geelong. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment