257 Neerim Road
August 24, 2015
Before And After
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[11] Comments
[11] Comments
Archived Entry
- Post Date :
- August 24, 2015 at 9:24 AM
- Category :
- Councillor Performance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
- Do More :
- Both comments and pings are currently closed.
August 24, 2015 at 10:30 AM
Welcome to the vision for our neighbourhoods courtesy of council – trashed!!
August 24, 2015 at 12:42 PM
beautiful view over the primary school. No WWC required!
August 24, 2015 at 1:01 PM
Assuming this is zoned rgz, then says a lot about not being “visually obtrusive” that’s in the planning scheme. Forget setbacks, overshadowing and god knows what else.
August 24, 2015 at 1:56 PM
Don’t worry folks those two single storey brick residences have been sold for development. The owners were pretty much forced out as Council has approved 4 storey units on either side of them and they would have been left as a little sunless enclave subject to constant passive surveillance (aka overlooking).
Admittedly it wasn’t a choice they wanted to make but at least they had one. The folks who bought into the single storey strata title residences (they were a great downsizing alternative) in Kookarib Street are the ones I feel sorry for.
They have lost access to afternoon sunlight and will be subject to constant overlooking and the incessant noise of reverse cycle heaters/ac’s. Unless they all join together and sell up as one they are pretty much stuck.
August 24, 2015 at 6:42 PM
If true all will be four storey along here so no one has to worry about overlooking. They can eye each other off in a straight line across a 2 metre divide.
August 25, 2015 at 7:35 AM
The 2 metre divide will be above a boundary to boundary carpark so no need to worry about trees being planted or even a shrub and it probably won’t even be covered with synthetic turf. All views into other apts. will be a straight shot.
August 24, 2015 at 6:18 PM
anyone seen the big secure core sign on the queens avenue gate of the racecourse. Not exactly welcoming to the public park. Maybe too many people have been using it
August 24, 2015 at 6:40 PM
It is physically intimidating to walk past too—goes way beyond reasonable pedestrian scale in a minor street on the very fringe of the Carnegie urban ghetto. I expect the next edition of Glen Eira News will carry photos of all our councillors posing in front of it to promote their contribution to the built form outcomes they have sought. Big as the Truganini development is, it’s dwarfed by Cr Pilling’s pet project, 2 Morton Av. BTW officially Council’s vision extends only as far as 2004, and is based on the 2001-2004 Community Plan.
August 25, 2015 at 8:35 AM
When this Truganini development reaches the landscaping stage we’ve been promised that all the trees planted in above ground concrete boxes, (because of the basement carparking) will miraculously bring it back to pedestrian scale.
Bullsh*t!!!!! Trees need time to grow (years) and they also need soil, water, fertilising and pruning. Despite a world of exhaustive literature re the climate mitigation benefits of planting large canopy trees in high density areas being available and Council has deliberately chosen to permit basement carparking to extend beyond the building’s enevelope and ignores enforced landscaping plans.
By allowing basement carparking to extend beyond the building envelope (i.e. setbacks only apply to the building, not the carpark) there is no soil depth for trees to grow in or to catch surface run off. Hence the root system required for large and medium canopy trees cannot be accommodated in above ground concrete boxes.
Further, by not making landscaping plans enforced, it’s only the developer that “has to deliver” (the inverted commas are because Council does not bother to check that what was promised was presented) and the subsequent body corporate is under no obligation to ensure that the trees are watered, fertilised and pruned. Only if the owners band together to ensure that grounds and tree maintenance are specifically spelt out in the Owners Corporation Rules and Regulations will any specific attention be given to the boxed trees. Given that most of the apartments will be sold to investors (rather than owner occupiers) the required “banding together” is unlikely to occur and without an enforced landscaping plan Council cannot ensure (ie. impose pecuniary penalties) that the planted trees will be maintained and replaced if necessary.
August 25, 2015 at 10:24 AM
Permeability is just one more aspect that is completely broken in the planning scheme. Standard B9 specifies 20% but doesn’t have a purpose. The objective is only to reduce stormwater, not to support landscaping and crown trees. Council ignores it in RGZ. There IS a landscaping “standard”, which is B13, and it is utterly useless as it is completely unenforceable: both Council and VCAT ignore it other than on the rare occasion where a fuss is made over a significant existing tree. B13 does talk about planting of trees, but only where it is “part of the character of the neighbourhood”. Since Council and VCAT have decided that their preferred character is to have no trees, there is little enthusiasm for insisting on trees to soften the lines of the huge concrete boxes sprouting up.
August 26, 2015 at 1:16 AM
Two teachers from goverment schools in the area have questioned the safety of children(from overlooking perverts) in the Carnegie Primary School playground with the multi-storey units immediately to the north.