- Target:
- City of Moonee Valley
- Region:
- Australia
Thank you. Council is evaluating the proposal in January.
The council is currently evaluating a proposal to demolish an existing single-storey period house at 35 Roseberry Street and replace it with a large two-storey ‘contemporary’ house.
This proposed dwelling would represent none of the period character of Roseberry street and does not adhere to in any way to the typical street-scape. It is most uncomplimentary both in dwelling and fencing to the street and reflects a lack of appreciation to the cultural aspect of this unique street.
Features of new proposed development:
Double storey from front - Around 10% of the houses on the street have a double story. Of these, the vast majority have the double story erected on the back portion of the property. This gives a better profile from the street and integrates well with scaling to the other neighbouring properties.
Non-pitched roof - Overwhelmingly the profile of Roseberry street is pitched roofing. Properties with pitched roofing aesthetically look and are keeping with a period feel of the street.
“Contemporary” architectural style - The architectural style of a block square-on-top-of-square construction does not appear anywhere else on the housing of the street.
Bulky construction - The proposal is for a 3 bedroom with a fourth “studio loft” on the rear two storey garage (which purposely could be used as another bedroom). This is on a single frontage less than 6.5 metres width. The side profile shows a substantial proportion of the block being two storeys high which would be highly overbearing and blocking much of the solar energy to surrounding single storey houses as well as casting deep shadows.
Front Fencing - Housing in the immediate vicinity surrounding the block is picket or iron clad fencing. The proposal is for a solid brick wall which will not integrate well with appearance of street.
We the residents of the surrounding area of 35 Roseberry Street oppose the development as applied to in application MV/21409/2010.
We believe that the development is in violation of the Victorian Residential Code provisions:
54.01-1 Neighborhood and site description and design response
In relationship to the neighborhood:
- The build form, scale and character of surrounding development including front fencing
- Architectural and roof styles
- Any other notable features or characteristics of the neighborhood.
This proposed dwelling would represent none of the period character of Roseberry street and does not adhere to in any way to the typical street-scape. It is most uncomplimentary both in dwelling and fencing to the street and reflects a lack of appreciation to the cultural aspect of this unique street.
Specific objections are based on the following critique :
Against the double storey from front - Around 10% of the houses on the street have a double story. Of these, the vast majority have the double story erected on the back portion of the property. This gives a better profile from the street and integrates well with scaling to the other neighbouring properties.
Against a Non-pitched roof - Overwhelmingly the profile of Roseberry street is pitched roofing. Properties with pitched roofing aesthetically look and are keeping with a period feel of the street.
Against the “Contemporary” architectural style - The architectural style of a block square-on-top-of-square construction does not appear anywhere else on the housing of the street.
Against the bulky construction - The proposal is for a 3 bedroom with a fourth “studio loft” on the rear two storey garage (which purposely could be used as another bedroom). This is on a single frontage less than 6.5 metres wide. The side profile shows a substantial proportion of the block being two storeys high which would be highly overbearing and blocking much of the solar energy to surrounding single storey houses as well as casting deep shadows.
Against the front Fencing - Housing in the immediate vicinity surrounding the block is picket or iron clad fencing. The proposal is for a solid brick wall which will not integrate well with appearance of street.
The Against 35 Roseberry re-development petition to City of Moonee Valley was written by Peter Vinogradoff and is in the category City & Town Planning at GoPetition.