PlanningAlerts

9 Comments

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

1. 8 storeys is too high. There are already several 8 storey buildings in the area, ones going up.
   There is absolutely no need for so much high density living in such a small precinct.
   Freezing windy tunnels in the winter with no sun, and hot airless streets in the summer.
   Please don't ruin Brunswick for the existing residents.

2. Dear Moreland Council,

   It’s too high. Has COVID-19 in any way heightened your awareness that sunlight and the quality of architecture around us has a material impact on mental health and well-being? Have you visited the built apartment blocks that you've approved? Are there any lessons to be learned for future decision-making? Please don’t let the past approvals be the measure for future approvals, as the bar has been set way too low.

   Kind regards

   Claire

3. That is way too high and inconsistent with urban conservation principles of maintaining spaces to be enjoyed by the community and on a appropriate scale to the historical nature of the area. Once again the traffic flow here would be a nightmare, the monolith would dwarf it's surroundings and deliver a high density ghetto, not to mention the arrogance to remove easements and reduce parking requirements is jaw dropping.

4. Agree totally with above comments

5. Objection....This is clearly another example of MCC Planning department using ambiguous planning regulation to support another oversize private development within this 'mixed use' zone. State it for what it is. It's a residential tower and should support all residential building requirements and be fair to all neighbouring sites as do all other residential developments within a residential area. This clear miss-use of commercial building priorities over residential neighbours has to be clamped down to maintain some urban dignity. The heritage overlay within this zone should be adhered to.
   As stated from other objectors the building mass is too large with too many occupants planned for. The overshadow will disadvantage and devalue properties to the south. Their energy costs will increase as a result of near three winter months of living in shadow.
   This buildings design is another example of 'Legoland' style design that maximises profit over building quality and integrity. The shear lack of imagination sees no reason why it should be allowed to go ahead and why we the residents of the area should support it.

6. I’d have to suggest that after other recent examples, this is likely to be approved at 8 storey then subsequently modified by developers to instead reach an additional 3 storey in step set back. Extremely disingenuous planning game in action. I would object based on the published guidance in detail if anyone hopes to achieve meaningful alteration, eg specific over shadowing over 12 months, public amenity of spaces being impacted, inconsistent character of design with neighbourhood etc.

7. I am a resident of Jewell Station South. Whilst it is a beautiful building to live in and call home, as expected a number of defects continue with no evident plan to fix it. Residents are caught between the OC, the builder and the developer, all of who pass the buck around. On this basis the developer should not be permitted to entertain a construction until such time due diligence is followed and all or at least a majority of significant issues are addressed. In this case Vic Track is also party to the enterprising Neometro and its a nightmare to logically and swiftly address on going issues. There is no logic to this process that continues across the planning portfolio and all levels of government.

8. this development will add a 3rd building with car parking.. all vehicles will share a small lane way into Black Street. this is unreasonable considering safety and congestion and its impact on thoroughfare for vehicles, the added wait times including any emergency access required. how many cars in total will share the laneway ? there are also properties on the south side. how will this impact on them? where are waste and other service access points?

9. It seems strange that there's so much concern around parking and vehicle thoroughfare when the new development is next to a tram, train and shopping village residents would probably only drive on the weekends I imagine

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Moreland City Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment