PlanningAlerts

3 Comments

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

1. This proposed development will overshadow both the Carlton side of Nicholson street, and Roi apartments boxing in the west side, wand further compounding the effect of the development to the south. The proposal is simply too large for the site and must be reconsidered.

2. This proposed development is just too big for this part of Nicholson Street. Where the Roi apartments sit well within the area - back from the street, not imposing on too many other properties and not very high - this development will not only destroy the aesthetic of Nicholson St, but will overshadow existing housing, and the smaller existing apartment buildings. This needs to be reconsidered - for the sake of the neighbourhood and the aesthetic of Nicholson Village. In addition, the amenities is states it will facilitate are already available in the Village area, and those small businesses would be able to thrive with the extra customers of another small apartment complex - without the need for more services to be built to accommodate for a large complex.

3. OBJECTION TO PLANNING PERMIT NUMBER: PLN18/0172
   622-642 NICHOLSON STREET, FITZROY NORTH

   Let first explain why I am lodging an objection.
   My Sister-In-Law has an apartment on the 6th floor of the ROI Apartments, a very close friend has an apartment on the 5th floor in the same building. I live in Carlton, my house is one block west of Nicholson Street near the intersection of Palmerston Street. I am accustomed to “High Rise” apartments springing up around me.

   LET ME ADDRESS THE
   “FEATURES OF THE PROPOSAL INCLUDE:
   Paragraph 1
   In this Paragraph it states, in part, the establishment of a super market and a bottles shop. Can I point out to you, on the west side of Nicholson St, not that far from this development, there is a small family run “supermarket” and a few doors south from there is an independent liquor store. Also, in Best St is a very large IGA which addresses both of these needs.

   Paragraph 2
   In this paragraph it proposes a medical centre of 1,352 square metres. This sounds very grand, but to me it also sounds like a “factory”, get them in and get them out. I do not want to besmirch the medical profession, but there is history of these large “commercial” medical centres. By the way, there is a medical centre in St. George’s Road not that far from the IGA.

   Paragraph 3
   The second to ninth floor contains 8,471 square meters of offices floor space
   Do the developers have any commitment for potential rental of this space?

   Paragraph 4
   It talks about 157 car parking spaces with vehicle access from an altered crossover to Nicholson Street.
   Now I maybe wrong, but I think this proposed cross over will be very close to the tram stop 20 on the 96 route. How will this work.

   Paragraph 5
   A loading area with vehicle access from the laneway to the north
   Yes, that small stretch of road is labeled as “Lane”
   But not in the conventional way, where it ran behind houses and was used in years gone by for many purposes. Bik Lane is used for a great number of people to access their homes.
   They should not suffer the inconvenience of a parade of deliver trucks up and down their lane.
   By the way are you familiar with Flinders Lane, Lonsdale Lane in the City of Melbourne?
   That is my lot!

   I urge Councillors
   Misha Coleman
   Jakie Fristaclcy
   Mike McEvoy
   To get behind your constituents and take note of what is happening in your ward

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Yarra 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