All recent comments on applications from Boroondara City Council, VIC

Traffic flow in AuburnRoad is very high and growing.
On street parking is tegularly full.
There is absolutely no reason why this development should be constructed with reduced off street car parking

This proposed development is in the Camberwell Junction precinct.nt which already has an on-street parking crisis.
It is absolutely unconscionable that a reduction in on site parking would be considered

This permit should not be extended, nor should a four storey building ever have been passed for this location. It’s over development at its best. These smaller streets should be limited to two levels (over a basement) to protect the access to sun and privacy of the adjoining neighbours.

There is insufficient on street parking in the area and this is a big increase in housing density. By removing a slot of the limited off street parking, this causes further congestion on the road for the other local residents. The guest parking requirement should remain and not at the expense of soft landscaping.

Within 150 meters of 125 Greythorn Rd there are two childcare centers and within 4 kilometers there are approximately 15 childcare centers?

Does the area really need another childcare center?

The proposal responds appropriately to the City of Boroondara Planning Scheme and Council's other planning policies and should be supported.

The proposal responds appropriately to the emerging character of the surroundings.

The proposal responds positively to the strategic context.

The proposal responds appropriately to the Clause 65 matters within the Victorian Planning Principles.

The proposal is an "acceptable planning outcome" as related by the following:
Gordon Avenue Investments Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC [2021] VCAT 1005
Knox CC v Tulcany Pty Ltd [2004] VSC 375

It would be insane to reduce the on-site visitor parking requirement for a development su h Z this on major arterial road with parking restrictions such as ClearwYs.

Heritage overlay should simply mean “this property, including the established garden cannot be demolished “.
Time for Boroondara Council to step up and ensure that these properties are saved.
So many of our significant historic properties have been lost already, not to mention the enormous negative environmental impact by creating hundreds of tons of trash, loss of established trees and gardens, to create cement box-like flats or McMansions that do not fit the character of the street.
We bought here because of its beauty, period character and green canopy at a time when Camberwell Council valued thus; Boroondara is not protecting the neighbourhood from destruction and should be. They have a responsibility to all residents, the history and future of our neighbourhoods and the environment.
If folks want to build new, go and live in a new suburb.

This is a very significant property in Boroondara, one that the council should be fighting to save.
It’s time for all Heritage listed properties to be protected from developers and demolition. Renovate yes but nothing else.
These magnificent properties should not be viewed as cash cows for replacement with flats or more McMansions.
Every demolition equals hundreds of tons of unnecessary trash, destroying trees is totally unacceptable; the huge negative environmental impact of demolition should be addressed immediately. Do something Boroondara to address this negative impact on our local area and the environment at large. We did not purchase in Boroondara to be surrounded by flats, constant noise, destruction of neighbourhood, roads, pavements, gardens, lifestyle and our privacy.

We bought into Boroondara because of the heritage homes and established gardens.
It is tragic how the landscape has changed, to be replaced by identical “French Provincial look alike’s” that take up the whole blocks with little or trees.
This is a beautiful home and should be preserved for future generations to admire.
The council needs to act now and at least try to retain what heritage homes remain.

To lose this outstanding property would be a tragedy for Boroondara. If this is allowed to happen, the council should be ashamed of themselves.

1. The heritage value of the current building. It is an excellent example of heritage architecture and a visually appealing apartment block in an art deco style. I feel any development should preserve all of the existing structure
2. Traffic effects.The area is swamped with vehicles and there is inadequate street parking as is. Cars of visitors and residents will add to congestion as they seek parking. The proximity to public transport does nothing - trams are much slower than the more distant trains - the majority of Australians own cars and need car parking. The commercial premises require parking for patrons.
3. Inadequate green space
Boroondara has been inundated with ugly new multi level developments. The majority of residents if asked are firmly opposed to these. However, Malvern and Toorak provide examples of multi level development performed at a higher standard although not brilliant, or even properties in Hawthorn West. Most save a strip of land at least 2-3m wide at the perimeter of the property and plant trees and other greenery, also planting greenery on rooftops.
4. Shadowing of neighbouring buildings.
this adds to the fear that these towers are becoming the slums of Boroondara.
5. Inappropriate height and density for Boroondara.

Seven storeys is a ridiculous height for this area of Camberwell.
Traffic effects.The area is swamped with vehicles and there is inadequate street parking as is. Cars of visitors and residents will add to congestion as they seek parking. The proximity to public transport does nothing - the majority of Australians own cars and need car parking. The commercial premises require parking for patrons.
3. Inadequate green space
Boroondara has been inundated with ugly new multi level developments. The majority of residents if asked are firmly opposed to these. However, Malvern and Toorak provide examples of multi level development performed at a higher standard, or even properties in Hawthorn West. Most save a strip of land at least 2-3m wide at the perimeter of the property and plant trees and other greenery, also planting greenery on rooftops.
4. Shadowing of neighbouring buildings.
this adds to the fear that these towers are becoming the slums of Boroondara.
5. Inappropriate height and density for Boroondara.

What an absolute waste if this goes ahead
A high quality, renovated heritage house in what has been an important heritage area - although sadly many. buildings are being lost.

The heritage value of the current building. It is an excellent example of heritage architecture. I feel any development should preserve all of the existing structure

Inadequate green space
Ugly new house

Why on earth would someone buy a heritage house in a heritage area with a heritage overlay then try to demolish it?

The house is solid and has significant embodied energy in its solid brick construction
Renovation would be preferable

No demolition should be permitted of any heritage material

In the words of the selling agent

Steeped in history and tradition while also offering exceptional standards of contemporary living, Heyford is a remarkable estate spread across 3089sqm (approx) of exquisite gardens, with an outdoor entertaining sanctuary, swimming pool, guest house, floodlit north-south mod grass tennis court and even a vineyard.
Positioned in Canterbury's most prestigious pocket within a stroll of Maling Road Village, it has long been admired as a residence of great stature and importance. Designed by architect Herbert Black in 1908 for wealthy businessman Louis Cooper and elevated across three lots of the exclusive Griffin Estate, today Heyford is a beautifully preserved and expertly renovated family home of impeccable quality with five bedroom, four bathroom accommodation.

Should not allow 2 dwellings
Increased traffic, increased pressure on services e.g. sewers, plumbing, electricity

A solid brick house could easily be updated or renovated, rather than having materials wasted and the significant environmental impact of constructing a new house
Boroondara should halt subdivision of land and multiple dwellings on a lot - boroondara should pride itself on greenery and amenity

There should be no demolition of heritage material
In an area swamped with traffic and cars circling looking for a park, no reduction in car parking should be granted

This should never have had demolition approved - very sad to see the loss of another boroondara heritage building
Any new building should allow plenty of green space, and not be physically imposing from the street

Should be only one dwelling, unless the developer is happy to contribute to sewer and road/public transport upgrades

1. The heritage value of the current building. It is an excellent example of heritage architecture. I feel any development should preserve all of the existing structure
2. Traffic effects.The area is swamped with vehicles and there is inadequate street parking as is. Cars of visitors and residents will add to congestion as they seek parking. The proximity to public transport does nothing - the majority of Australians own cars and need car parking. The commercial premises require parking for patrons.
3. Inadequate green space
Boroondara has been inundated with ugly new multi level developments. The majority of residents if asked are firmly opposed to these. However, Malvern and Toorak provide examples of multi level development performed at a higher standard, or even properties in Hawthorn West. Most save a strip of land at least 2-3m wide at the perimeter of the property and plant trees and other greenery, also planting greenery on rooftops.
4. Shadowing of neighbouring buildings.
this adds to the fear that these towers are becoming the slums of Boroondara.
5. Inappropriate height and density for Boroondara.

Important heritage buildings - covenant removal should not signal development

This is a totally unacceptable heritage outcome.

This is a unique building in a unique area with a proud heritage. We do not need low quality additional high rise in this area, or increased density in an area already groaning under the strain of additional traffic courtesy of multiple developments.

A few other inappropriate developments have been allowed, but these should not serve as a precedent.

Other comments:

1. The heritage value of the current buildings - including the facade of one building inappropriately demolished previously.
It is an excellent example of heritage architecture. I feel any development should preserve all of the existing structure
2. Traffic effects.The area is swamped with vehicles and there is inadequate street parking as is. Cars of visitors and residents will add to congestion as they seek parking. The proximity to public transport does nothing - the majority of Australians own cars and need car parking. The commercial premises require parking for patrons.
3. No provision for sewer/other service upgrades
4. Shadowing of neighbouring buildings.
this adds to the fear that these towers are becoming the slums of Boroondara.
5. Inappropriate height and density for Boroondara.
6. Multiple previous applications have been made at these addresses over a number of years - all rejected

In addition:

I find the appearance of the extension visible from Broadway pretty poor for such a wonderful heritage area

I echo the objections of a previous person via planning alerts:

on the following grounds:

And

1. The size of the extension visible from Broadway - the visible bulk is enormous, and detracts significantly from 13 Broadway. The extension is bigger than the neighbouring 13 Broadway when viewed from Broadway. It also is likely to cause significant shadowing into 13 Broadway. The height and width are such that it detracts from the appearance of the original 'Calrossie' at 15 Broadway

2. The gate and new crossover on Broadway is not sympathetic to the heritage of the area - the gate is too high. I note the fence is described as 'vine covered' however these vines have already been removed.

3. When viewed from Berwick St, the new addition is not set back far enough from Berwick St and therefore detracts from the original fabric of 'Calrossie' - on such a large block, building adjacent to the fence is unnecessary.

4. The design is, in my opinion, hideously ugly when viewed from Berwick St - a collection of poorly matched designs, with a pitched roof in one section, what looks like a fake chimney, and random arches. There is no continuity when compared with the original design

5. The side fence on Broadway - renovating should be an opportunity to replace with a new fence sympathetic to the heritage of the area, not to extend a fence not fitting of the era and character of the surrounds.

6. Lack of greenery - for a 1200+ square metre block there is a significant lack of garden space. I also see no need to extend the house to all corners/boundaries at such a high cost to the visible amenity of the area.

7. I'm also concerned by the timing of the permit applications - the 'back to back' applications have resulted in continuous notices on the fence and I am sure most people have ignored the updated notice, thinking it was the same notice as before

To improve the design
1. Please fix the rear design when viewed from Berwick St - it looks awful
2. Please reduce the size and visual bulk of the extension when viewed from Broadway
3. Please address other concerns as above