Help save essendon's heritage treasure

save

north park

Objecting to the Proposal

raise your voice against inappropriate development

A formal planning permit is required through Moonee Valley Council for all works associated with the proposed redevelopment.

Objections to the proposed development are now OPEN until September 3, 2020, and we encourage all concerned Melburnians and Moonee Valley residents in particular to have their voice heard.

Here's how YOU can have your voice heard through the formal planning process and help the community to Save North Park.

save north park essendon group

the arguments

See "How to Object" immediately below for our tips on how you can incorporate these talking points (and any of your own) into your objection.

If you're already confident in your obection, click the button below to go straight to learn how to lodge it.

Neighbourhood character

The proposed height, scale, massing, finishes and materials, and colour palettes of the new buildings do not respect the surrounding built form or heritage context, also contrary to the Moonee Valley Planning Scheme.

The siting of the proposed development along the perimeter of the heritage property is detrimental to the landscape setting and will cause unreasonable impacts on the amenity of the adjoining properties.

The proposal does not appropriately respond to the preferred neighbourhood character of the area as outlined in the Moonee Valley Neighbourhood Character Study, Planisphere, 2012. More specially, the proposed architectural styles, building height, form and layout, building materials, design and details, roof styles and landscaping response do not respond to the preferred character statement for Garden Suburban Precinct 6.

Treatment of the proposed townhouses is highly repetitive and fails to provide adequate visual interest.

The proposal will cause unreasonable impact on the amenity of the adjoining properties through visual bulk, overlooking, overshadowing, light spillage and noise emission.

Heritage

The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the prevailing subdivision pattern of the area and will adversely impact on the heritage significance of the historical mansion.

The construction of three storey townhouses around the site perimeter will destroy sightlines to the property (specifically constructed on the highest point in Essendon) and adversely affect the community’s ongoing ability to appreciate this highly significant heritage place, one of only 24 sites in Moonee Valley listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, and arguably the most significant of those.

The loss of up to 45% of the existing grounds, combined with the removal of 120 mature trees – including four trees identified as being of “high arboricultural significance” (one Eucalyptus and three Ficus) plus the construction of extensive access roads across the property will adversely affect the significance of the remaining heritage fabric.

The construction of three storey townhouses around the site perimeter will destroy sightlines to the property (specifically constructed on the highest point in Essendon) and adversely affect the community’s ongoing ability to appreciate this highly significant heritage place, one of only 24 sites in Moonee Valley listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, and arguably the most significant of those.

The property’s heritage fencing is a protected attribute of the site under its citation on the Victorian Heritage Register. The insertion of new access driveways and construction of “modern interpretive” fencing should not be supported.

Relocation of the historic gardeners shed and bird bath, which are both cited in the heritage report as providing historical context for the mansion building will result in a loss of heritage context for both structures.

The property’s heritage fencing is a protected attribute of the site under its citation on the Victorian Heritage Register. The insertion of new access driveways and construction of “modern interpretive” fencing should not be supported.

The proposed three storey “Residential and Accomodation Village” adjacent to and within sight lines of the manor house, replacing a low rise 1960s building will detrimentally impact the significance of the remaining heritage fabric.

The development will result in the historic Coach House being physically and visually separated from the mansion grounds by both subdivision and fencing, further degrading the significance of the heritage place.

Overdevelopment

The proposal represents an overdevelopment of this important heritage site, and the proposed intensity and scale is against Council policy on these matters, as set out in the Moonee Valley Planning Scheme.

The proposal includes extensive hard surface for circulation and car parking, which would diminish the gardenesque setting of the heritage property and limit opportunities for landscaping.

The proposal will generate additional traffic movements that may adversely impact on the traffic conditions of the area, with Woodland St in particularly already busy, with likely flow-on effects for parents and staff at the adjacent St. Vincent de Paul Primary School and retailers at Woodland St shops.

Bad Development

The proposal does not provide future occupants with a high level of internal amenity. For instance, the living/kitchen/dining area of Townhouses 6 – 12 and 15 – 22 are south/southeast facing, with minimal solar access. Many of the proposed secluded private open space will be overshadowed for an extended period of time throughout the day.

The proposal includes limited opportunities for landscaping along the western, southern and eastern boundaries of the subject site.

The historic garden setting, so important to the site context will be mostly reduced to a line of single trees wedged betwen hard surfaces. The development proposes the removal of no fewer than 30 canopy trees, and one 1 street tree, with a further 15 canopy trees to be impacted.

Downloadable plans

It is NOT necessary to download any of these documents in order to make your objection, they are included for the benefit of anyone looking for the comprehensive detail of everything that is proposed. Please note some of these documents are VERY large files, and the information is of a fairly technical nature.

How to object

Council needs to hear the full and genuine range of the community's concerns over the development proposal. We encourage all concerned community members to take action by putting their concerns in writing TODAY.

The window to be heard is CLOSING SOON, with objections due by September 3, 2020.

1. Write up your arguments

We’ve outlined above the case why we believe the development needs to be rejected. Readers should feel free to copy/paste any or all of that content in drafting their own written objection.

However, it is MUCH more powerful for the case to reject the development, if Council heard from you FROM THE HEART, in your own words. We recommend taking the arguments that you feel best reflect your concerns from the above outline and putting the argument briefly in your own words.

Try to maintain a professional and polite tone in all correspondence, as rational argument will win the day. You do not need to address your objection as a formal letter, simply outline why you object to the development, give as much detail as necessary to make your case, but try to keep your arguments succinct. Use of dot points is fine.

There is no specific limitation on the format of any documents that you submit with your application, but we suggest if submitting electronically, a MS Word document or PDF is recommended.

moonee valley city council

2. Fill out the submission form

We’ve pre-filled some of the detail for you in a downloadable PDF version of Council’s submission form, which must accompany your objection.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE SUBMISSION FORM

If you are submitting electronically, you can either print, fill in and scan the submission form, or simply type the nessary information directly into the form using any PDF viewer capable of editing documents. Apple users will find Apple’s default  “Preview” application performs this task easily. For Windows users, we’ve provided links to an easy to use freeware app below, which will do the job for you. Contact us if you need additional assistance with this.

Unless your submission is unusually brief, there is no need to enter anything in the “Details of Your Objection” section. You can rely on your supporting documentation to serve this purpose.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD XODO PDF EDITOR (WINDOWS)

3. EASY WAYS TO SUBMIT YOUR OBJECTION ...

You may include as many documents as you wish with your submission, but please remember at minumum to include;

1. Your Written Submission
2. Your Completed Submission Form

north park essendon

via Email

In the subject heading please write ‘Objection to Planning Application MV/3/2020, 45-69 Woodland Street, ESSENDON'

icons8-circled-2-100

via Post

Moonee Valley City Council
Statutory Planning Unit
PO Box 126
Moonee Ponds, VIC 3039

save north park woodlands essendon strathmore

in Person

Moonee Valley City Council
Civic Centre,
9 Kellaway Ave,
Moonee Ponds, VIC 3039

1 Moonee Valley City Council

A formal planning permit will also be required through Moonee Valley Council for all works associated with the proposed redevelopment.

Objections to the proposed development are now OPEN until September 3, 2020, and we encourage all concerned Melburnians and Moonee Valley residents in particular to have their voice heard.

We are urging Moonee Valley Councillors to reject the prospect of inappropriate development on a site that is of such enormous value to the entire Moonee Valley community.

Furthermore, we believe that Council has a role to play in the preservation of this historic community asset, and will be asking Council to actively involve itself in the process

heritage victoria

2 Heritage Victoria

Approval is required from Heritage Victoria to make significant alterations to a place on the Victorian Heritage Register.

SCMS have applied for a formal permit from Heritage Victoria, supported in their application by the developer’s standard “heritage” consultant of choice – Lovell Chen.

Applications have closed for submissions to the Heritage Victoria hearing, and hearings have been delayed due to COVID-19, but a decision is expected in the coming weeks.

Heritage Victoria is able to attach specific compliance conditions to any permit issued, however our hope is that Heritage Victoria will reject the proposal outright.

save north park moonee valley strathmore essendon

read about our fight

In 'The Age' online

More Ways You Can Help

FIVE EASY WAYS YOU CAN CONTRIBUTE FURTHER ...

north park essendon

Connect with SAVE NORTH PARK on Social Media

icons8-circled-2-100

Sign & Share the Online Petition

save north park woodlands essendon strathmore

Join Our Mailing List

Loading
north park estate mansion strathmore woodlands

Share This Page on Social Media

icons8-circled-5-100

Donate to Our GoFundMe

What is at risk?

SCMS propose to subdivide the property into four main lots for sale, one of which will be the retained Manor house within approximately 45% smaller grounds.

Two parcels of land will also be subdivided via strata title, allowing construction of 27 mostly 3 storey townhouses, most with basements as well.

This will result in the destruction of the property’s heritage grounds, with the removal of over 120 trees from the gardens, four of which have been identified as being of “high arboricultural value” and the building of access roads, surrounding the remaining gardens with tarmac.

north park estate grounds
north park grounds manor essendon heritage
north park grounds manor essendon heritage

New Residential village

SCMS also propose to retain one of the four lots adjacent to the heritage property for construction of a "Residential and Accomodation Village", replacing a low rise 1960s building with a bulkier three storey office and residential wing.

This will result in the further degradation of the significance of the heritage place, as indicated in the supplied indicative render.

What is Proposed?

27 x 2-3 Level Townhouses

The property’s heritage grounds are proposed to be subdivided to allow construction of 27 townhouse units, all at three storeys, except  the four along Woodlands St at two storeys.

While SCMS alleges the townhouses will be sited to retain sightlines to the Manor House, plans clearly show that the historic “garden” so important to the site context will be mostly reduced to a line of single trees wedged betwen hard surfaces.

120 Trees Removed

The proposal would also see the removal of numerous trees from the property’s heritage landscape, including four trees identified by Tree Logic Pty Ltd as being of “high arboricultural significance” – including one Eucalyptus and three Ficus trees.

Extensive New Access Roads

The proposal requires the building of extensive new access roads to the newly subdivided properties, further reducing the significance of the heritage place, and bounding the remnant garden with asphalt.

45% Loss of Open Space

Under the proposed changes, 45% of open space, and 120 mature trees will be lost, reducing the property’s “garden” to mostly a mere sliver of single trees wedged between drive and pathways, certain to provide inadequate screening for the bulk of 27 two to three storey townhouses.

New Entry Points to Woodland St

The proposal would also see three new entryways added to the property’s historic external fence.  A new section of “modern interpretation” fencing will also be built along Woodland St giving more access from the property onto the already busy Woodland St, directly opposite St Vincent De Paul Primary School.

Heritage Context Lost

The proposal would also see the relocation of the historic gardeners shed, which is cited in the heritage report as providing historical context for the mansion building, resulting in a loss of heritage context for both structures.

save heritage future generations
once heritage is gone it is gone forever
120 trees marked for removal
save north park essendon group

What We are asking

OUR COMMUNITY IS BRIMMING WITH POSITIVE IDEAS FOR NORTH PARK'S FUTURE

1. Reject Inappropraite Development

We want to see to see the whole of North Park Estate remain in its current state,becoming a public treasure for all to enjoy. 

The possibilities are plentiful… an Art Hub, Community Gardens, Library, Wedding Venue, playground/park etc (think Ripponlea or Abbotsford Convent).

We call on Council, and on Heritage Victoria to reject the current development proposal, and for all levels of government to cone together to find a future for the park in North Park.

2. secure alternative owners

SCMS claim the redevelopment is required to ensure their ongoing viability as a care provider, and that should the redevelopment be rejected, they will be forced to sell and vacate the property entirely.

Whilst we agree this would be regrettable in light of SCMS’ long term association with the property, if that is their position, we must take them at face value and seek to find alternative owners for the land who WOULD be willing to reinvest in and retain the mansion and the historic gardens.

We believe that both State and Local Government have an obvious role to play here, however we would welcome any private investor who equally intended to retain and preserve the property’s heritage values.

Contact us

Got questions? Need to speak to a representative? Drop us a line here, or connect with us on social media.

SAVE

North Park

(c) 2020 Save North Park – website design by Rattling Tram Marketing
1st, Circled 2 and other icons by Icons8