193 Queens Parade


The pictures above show the air space above the site where the new building will appear in the streetscape, and a cut and paste from a perspective in the plans developer supplied plans. You can use the Lonergan Funerals building on the right to get a feel for the size of the new building.

Some of the points of objection the Hodgkinson Street folk have to this development are :

  • Clause 22.10-3.2 - Urban form and character. - the proposed building's visual bulk is completely out of character for the neighbourhood. 126 Hodgkinson Street and surrounding homes are in the Western Clifton Hill Heritage Overlay. This application if approved, would fly in the face of that ruling. 
  • The proposed site of 193 Queens Pde is in Queens Parade heritage overlay.  The existing buildings on that site, one of them a single level cottage, should not simply be demolished at the whim of this developer.
  • Clause 22.10-3.3 : the height of new development abutting land in a Heritage Overlay shoulda) Adopt a façade height to the street frontage which is no higher than the adjacent building within the Heritage Overlay; b) Design and site taller structures so that they do not visually dominate surrounding heritage places; and c) Match the floor levels of the adjacent heritage building.
  • Clause 22.10-3.3 The height of any portion of the new development which is located on the secondary setback should be guided by its’ visual impact and off-site amenity impacts on surrounding properties such as overshadowing, visual bulk, day lighting to habitable rooms and overlooking 
  • Clause 22.10-3.3 New development which abuts a laneway should be no higher than 2 storeys and should not affect the amenity of neighbouring residential properties.
  •  193 Queens Pde proposed development abuts a laneway. Therefore it should be NO higher than 2 storeys . If approved it will dramatically affect the amenity of the neighbouring residential properties. 
  • Clause 22.10-3.3 The overall height of new development (including the height between the primary setback and the secondary setback) may exceed the prevailing building height of the area IF the site does not cause off-site impacts and is either: a)  Located on a corner site of a main road; or b)  Of substantial land area.
  • The development site is neither located on an corner nor of substantial land area. The development site is neither located on an corner nor of substantial land area. The overall height at 193 Queens Pde should therefore NOT exceed the prevailing building height of the area.
  • If approved this would be overdevelopment of a small block (374m2) of land. The proposed building height is obviously excessive.The application aims for maximum height, maximum number of apartments, short tern gain for one person at the expense of current residents.
  • The obvious visual bulk would affect the skyline for all Hodgkinson Street residents and all those who frequent or travel along Queens Pde. Surrounding residents are concerned it would set an alarming precedent for the Queens Parade strip between Turnbull and Gold Street, 
  •  The setback on the application is incorrect. The setback should be from the rear (southern) border of the proposed development site. The plans submitted uses the northern border of 126 Hodgkinson Street as the setback. This is the boundary of our property, on the other side of the laneway.
  • Clause 22.10-3.8 - Off-site amenity. The development plans clearly show negative impacts on off-site amenity including overshadowing, visual bulk and overlooking private open space.  
  • 55.04-6 Overlooking objective. To limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. The level 3 balcony balustrade is 1m. It should be 1.7m as per Yarra planning scheme to avoid overlooking our private open space. It is not clear why the corners of the balustrades on two levels are raised height rather than the full length of the balcony.
  • Overshadowing - The 191 Queens Pde residence loses almost all their sun. A 5 storey apartment building constructed on the northern boundary of our home (126 Hodgkinson and our neighbour at 124) will create long shadows year round...September 22 included. It will in short reduce of the enjoyment of living in our home considerably for years to come.

  • 22.10-3.4 - Street and public space quality - The pedestrian experience on Hodgkinson would certainly not be enhanced...the scheme requires new development to 'enhances public safety and the pedestrian experience'. 
  • Our garage opens onto the laneway.  If this proceeds the laneway will no longer be a safe environment for children (often on bicycles) due to increased laneway traffic --approx an additional 60 movements per day. 
  •  Peak periods in the laneway will be particularly congestewith residents needing to use it simultaneously. This constitutes further loss of amenity.
  •  Clause 22.10-3.10  Parking Traffic and Access -  There is currently insufficient parking in the street  Current residents will testify to that affect.  Please conduct a further investigation into what appears to be a highly misleading Traffic Management Report.
  • Traffic Report recommended 17 car spaces as opposed to the 8 proposed. It is unclear how an additional 9 car can be accommodated. Parking by those using Clifton Hill train station and the swimming pool/gym facility already fills all available space day and night.  Permits will be required by residents if this proposal proceeds.
  • There is NO guest parking provided by the applicant. The traffic assessment report states (p17): the development is expected to generate an off-site visitor parking demand of up to one space (per dwelling) at all times which will need to be accommodated by the surrounding road network.  The proposal assumes 18 new parks per day can be found in already congested area.
  • For over 100 years Lonergan funerals have loaded (20mins) and unloaded (20mins) hearses in the laneway. On occasion they need to leave the hearse in the laneway during a funeral. These vehicles are not easily manoeuvred. This existing funeral establishment merits more respect and consideration.
  • Clause 22.10-3.10  States: site to ensure adjacent sensitive land uses such as residential use will not be negatively impacted by noise, light spill and traffic generation;  Ancillary services should be appropriately treated to reduce noise that may interfere with the amenity of adjoining land, especially residential use.
  • Loss amenity for residents will occur as result of increased traffic congestion and noise pollution, particularly from trucks and delivery vans constantly utilising the laneway.  The traffic report suggests over 60 new movements per day.  The suggestion that vehicles meeting is low is absurd. Use of the laneway will become quite hazardous.
  • Visibility Issues - Hodgkinson is a tree lined street with limited turning space, primary school children walk up and down the street daily to use the pool in Mayor's Park. Increased laneway traffic will put them (and ours) at risk as cars drive in but must reverse out.
  • The planning scheme requires: Adequate circulation to allow waste and recycling collection vehicles to enter and leave the site without reversing.  This seems implausible  - the laneway is narrow.  Waste and recycling collections vehicles will require access from the Queens Pde to comply with the planning scheme.
  • Loading Zone waived - why? This makes little sense for all three commercial premises to have zero loading zones? Vans will elect to park in the laneway and further prevent movement in or out of the lane.