Report comment

In Brunswick East VIC on “Demolition of existing...” at 495-497 Lygon Street, Brunswick East VIC 3057:

Margaret Chigros commented

www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/1760702

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re Application Reference Number MPS/2020/57

As the owner of 15 Stanley St, Brunswick, I am writing to strongly object to the building application referenced above.

Contrary to the Design and Development Overlay, which values the maintenance of the character and appearance of adjacent buildings, and the streetscape, this development will be twice and high and inordinately bulky and imposing than any other building on the block.  In addition, its height is not in keeping with the adjacent Dan Murphy's building which is of 'individual heritage significance'.
Schedule 19 of the Design and Development Overlay states the "building height should not exceed the preferred maximum height".  The Moreland Council's preferred height for this site is 17 metres.
Schedule 19 also aims to "ensure highly visible development is limited to identified key redevelopment sites and responds to specific design objectives".  But this site is not an identified strategic redevelopment site.
Schedule 19 states that the council must consider "whether the maximum building height is achievable having regard to the heritage significance of the site or an adjoining site within the Heritage Overlay".  As already noted, the Dan Murphy's site is a building of "individual heritage significance" on a prominent gateway position to Lygon St.  The height of the proposed development will undermine its heritage value.
The Moreland policy on apartment developments of 5 or more storeys aims to "ensure buildings are located and designed to reduce overlooking into habitale rooms and private open space areas".  The height, design and location of this building mean there is significant "overlooking" of gardens, balconies and living spaces on Stanley Street and in 457-459 Lygon St.

This form is for reporting comments that should be removed. Reasons can include that the comment is spam, abusive, unlawful or harassing — in other words, where people are going out of their way to cause harm. Please explain clearly why you think the comment should be removed.

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts