Author:
MBCL Member (name withheld)
Date:
mid September 2004
We feel that a Vision
for the future of Mordialloc must have, as its main focus, an objective to
retain and enhance all those features that together constitute the uniqueness
and appeal of Mordialloc, and we are pleased that, in many respects, this Final
Draft attempts to do so.
To achieve this Vision,
we need to think about each of the proposed changes and assess how individually
and jointly they may affect the special atmosphere and appeal of the area for
residents and visitors. If we
thoughtlessly adopt all the current fashions in town planning and building,
there is a risk that the area will lose the historical and cultural qualities
that make it special. We hope that future residents and visitors will not look
back to our time as the period when the last distinctive features of Mordialloc
were destroyed forever. Indeed, we hope
they will look back and applaud today’s Council and residents for their efforts
to retain and improve all that is especially valuable about Mordialloc.
The structure plan is
likely to have effects outside of the Study Area in relation to a number of
issues, such as future building heights, density, and traffic flows.
In principle, this
applies throughout the study area.
Inevitably, developers will apply for similar heights in nearby areas,
and, because of precedents set in the study area, Council will be powerless to
prevent these developments.
It is, therefore,
important that before any of the proposed plans for increased building height
within the study area are finalised and approved by Council, some protection
for nearby residential areas needs to be put in place. How this will best be done we do not
know. However, one option would seem to
be a broad statement of planning policy:
“that building heights within the Mordialloc Structure Plan
Study Area will not at any time or under any circumstances be regarded as
precedents for development in adjacent or nearby residential areas”.
Density. Areas that are too great a walking distance
from the rail station, such as White Street, should not be targeted for higher
density.
Traffic. Proposed changes to parking and land use
close to the Albert Street/Bear Street junction are likely to hinder free
movement of vehicles. This may deter
drivers from entering or transiting Mordialloc via Governor Road, Park Street
and Albert Street. We need to consider
whether this side-effect of the Plan is positive or negative in relation to our
aspirations for Mordialloc.
Similarly, proposed
additional pedestrian crossings, with traffic lights, in Main Street would
inevitably slow traffic and deter some drivers from using Main Street if they
have an alternative route to their destination.
We need to consider how this may affect business in the village and
whether the likely changes to traffic flows are in line with the City of
Kingston’s traffic plans for the Mordialloc area.
1. are a modern feature incongruent with heritage
building character
2. unnecessarily contribute to greenhouse gases
from coal used in power generation
3. will contribute to reduced vision of the night
sky - many people visit Mordialloc Pier and open areas to enjoy the night sky
4. disrupt the natural cycles of both nocturnal
and diurnal creatures, especially the uplighting of palm trees
5. are not
necessary for safety and security reasons where street lighting is properly
designed, installed and maintained.
Built Form – Building Height (Fig 6)
The Structure Plan
states on p32, ‘…Mordialloc landscape and topography marks it as a place along
Port Phillip coast’. Presumably this
refers to the relatively natural coastline and low-rise, low-scale buildings. We would like these features to remain, and
do not wish Mordialloc to be marred by dominant building mass or
high-rise. The village can accommodate
3-storeys in some locations, and setbacks would retain openness.
Beach Road (Fig 6)
The 2-storey DDO up to
Centreway should remain. To prevent
high-rise development and building mass dominating the foreshore landscape, our
preference is for 2-storeys to continue round to Main Street/Nepean Highway,
with space for small gardens and canopy trees.
If 3-storey buildings are permitted, then the 3rd level
should be recessed.
Mordialloc Railway
Station (Fig 6)
The building to the
immediate north of the forecourt is single-storey and should remain
single-storey to prevent overshadowing of the public space, especially from
spring to autumn.
Main Street, and Albert
Street, north of McDonald Street (Fig 6)
Please keep to
2-storeys. Three-storey buildings here
will set an inevitable precedent for the spread of 3-storeys amongst this
predominantly single-storey area. Upper
level outdoor decks and verandahs would be out of character and should not be
incorporated in new development, unless a verandah is an integral part of a
building’s original character.
Again, please keep the
Albert and Bear Streets corner at 2-storeys; 3-storeys is unacceptable.
Albert and Park Streets
- Timber Yard (Fig 6)
It is also not
appropriate to have 3-storeys abutting parkland; there needs to be a reduction to
single or at most 2-storeys next to George Woods Reserve.
No more than 2-storeys
frontage to Main Street, with 3rd storey setback, as proposed for
the east side of Main Street. We must
not allow high-rise to dominate the creek area.
We are delighted that,
in general, Mordialloc’s heritage is acknowledged and respected. We would like the Heritage Overlay extended
to include Mordialloc Primary School, Barkly Street Church, Masonic Hall,
Latitude, Bridge Hotel (which may all have regional significance), and the
Government Aboriginal Reserve site in Attenborough Park (which should have
national or state significance).
Apparently, a location needs to be found for the Mayfield
artefacts. Mordialloc is the most
appropriate location, since Mayfield was located in Mordialloc. We suggest the ground floor of the Masonic
Hall as an ideal display location, if it were possible to lease space or
purchase the building.
Mordialloc Railway Station (Fig 8)
We support most of the
suggestions for the Railway Station Precinct, especially the upgrade of the
garden cottage style Railway Station, upgrade and landscaping of the water
tower, retaining the Victorian character of Bell’s Antiques and adding shop
fronts and corner landscaping, and opening the laneway (Fig 8, Item 4) which
will add to the village character.
Railway station
landscaping (Fig 8, Item 2)
It would be preferable
if narrow landscaping were extended along the front of the station to
complement the garden cottage style building.
(Mordialloc historical records could be checked for any photographs that
show the original landscaping.)
Station uplighting (Fig
8, Item 7)
Appropriate conventional
lighting would be more suitable.
Uplighting of the station buildings would be out of character with a
building from an era that did not use uplights.
Station forecourt (Fig 8, Item 8)
Rounding the building
edges is a good feature. The station
forecourt is an excellent area for community seating or gathering, and for
taxis. A central peppercorn tree would
complement the era of the building and would be an attractive feature.
Station underpass
upgrade (Fig 8, Item 6)
Good to improve this
public access. Suggest historic murals
or mosaics of steam trains, etc.
Pedestrian path to Bear Street
(Fig 8, Item 11)
Please retain peppercorn
trees in the upgrade.
Bus pull-in (Fig 8, Item
9, Options A & B)
This is not a good spot
for buses; it was tried in the past but diesel engines left running caused
noxious fumes to build up on the pavement and in the shops, which was
unpleasant and unhealthy for shop staff and customers. Diesel fumes would be trapped in the proposed
small landscaped seating area nearby because it is almost enclosed on three
sides. We suggest bus parking
at the rear of the station in Albert Street, or in the lower section of the
west service lane (see Central Precinct).
Perhaps all buses could terminate at the rear of the station in Albert
Street, away from shops and housing, which would leave more parking available
in Main Street.
Demolish existing
building (Fig 8B, Item 13)
We consider this proposal to realign the station entrance and
improve views to and from the rail station is a good idea, if it is
achievable. That is to say, we prefer
version B.
centreway (Fig 9)
We strongly support
these suggestions, and agree with improving views to the clock tower, station,
and Masonic Hall. But we disagree with
balconies and open-air decks, unless they are recessed 9m, because they do add
to building height and mass.
In the Final Draft Plan
it is proposed that Centreway be a one-way street in the east-west direction.
But, we feel a better arrangement might be for Centreway to be west-east only
and for Owen Street to be one-way east-west.
This would mean that (1) traffic from Beach Road would have an
alternative access road to the main shopping area and car parking, (2)
congestion at the Beach Road/Main Street roundabout would be reduced, (3)
access to the new 2-storey car park would still be easy from Main Street, and
(4) the traffic flow around this one-way system would correspond to traffic
flow directions on the roads at each end, i.e. the Main Street service road and
Beach Road.
Mixed-use residential
(Fig 9, Item 1)
We agree with such
development on the vacant block on Montgomery and Owen Streets, but consider
that future 2-storey dwellings should have a set back for a garden and canopy
tree, which is consistent with the character of Montgomery and Owen Streets.
Maintain residential
edge (Fig 9, Item 2)
We agree with the
proposal to maintain the residential area between Montgomery Street and Beach
Road.
Car parking deck (Fig 9,
Item 5)
Please allow some
setback for landscaping and canopy trees to avoid a ‘canyon’ look.
Changes to Safeways car
park (Fig 9, Items 7 & 10)
We support these
proposed changes to the Safeways car park. We especially like the suggestions
for trees and other plantings to improve the ambience of the car park.
Bus stop in Centreway
(Fig 9, Item 9)
As noted elsewhere in
this submission, a bus stop is not a good idea in a pedestrian shopping
precinct, especially if it is near a confined area and has on-street
dining. Past experience for shopkeepers
on the east side of Main Street has been that shoppers do not like the diesel
fumes that collect on the pavement on still days and drift into shops. A recent study referred to in the ABC 7.30
report (details available) established that particulates from diesel engines
are not only unpleasant, but are also very harmful to health.
We consider that a more
appropriate location for this bus stop would be on the west side of Main Street
in the service road on the median strip between the two most southerly palms.
The service road is very wide here, so a bus stop would have the least effect
on other vehicles and pedestrians. The
bus could then be routed to Beach Road via Epsom Road with a second stop on
Beach Road for people visiting the Scullin Reserve. This would make Centreway less congested and
more pleasant for shoppers and café users.
Redevelop car park area
west of Safeways (Fig 9, Item 11)
This is a great
idea. Adding shop frontage and plantings
will add a great deal to the pleasure and functionality for users of this area.
Encourage improvements
to Safeways façade (Fig 9, Item 12)
Excellent.
Timber Yard Redevelopment (Fig 10)
90 degree parking on
Albert and Bear Streets (Fig 10, Items 4 & 11)
If it is correct that this
junction is accident prone (p55), then parking should not be concentrated
here. 90 degree parking will cause
problems and likely accidents because of the heavy traffic flow at peak times
and the speed at which drivers enter from the southern part of Albert Street
around a blind corner. Currently, there
is no parking on Bear Street between the rail line and Albert Street, and none
should be permitted because it would be unsafe.
Water Tower Court (Fig
10, Item 1)
We think the proposal to
create a court around the old water tower is a great idea. However, the tower needs investment in
cleaning and regular maintenance. The
interior of the water tower could perhaps become a small museum with volunteer
staffing.
This is a logical
location for a small kiosk or café, but any new building should not overly
block views to the historic rail station.
‘Key stone edges’ at the
Albert/Bear Streets junction (Fig 10, Item 2)
Three-storeys on three
corners at the Albert/Bear Streets roundabout is too high because it will (1)
detract from the presence of the Masonic hall, (2) overlook nearby residences
unacceptably, (3) constitute a height precedent that will spread into adjacent
residential areas, and (4) excessively enclose the area.
We like the proposal for
round edges to new buildings.
We consider that a
second supermarket would be a great asset for Mordialloc, attracting more
shoppers, and thereby helping the viability of small shops, particularly on the
east side of Main Street. However, we
are concerned that the proposed location close to the Bear Street junction
would cause excessive congestion and risk of vehicle collisions, and would be
too close to existing residences across Albert Street. We would prefer to see any new supermarket
located a little further south at the junction of Albert and Park Streets,
because of better on-street visibility, and because it is further from housing.
We suggest the section
of Albert Street close to Bear Street is ideal for professional suites such as
architects, or speciality shops.
3-4 Storey
higher-density residential on Albert/Park Street (Fig 10, Item 16)
It is not acceptable to
have 3-4 storeys directly opposite existing single-storey residences across a
relatively narrow street. A compromise
here might be a maximum height of 2-storeys with a 3rd level setback
so as to be invisible at street level.
Please allow a setback for landscaping and canopy trees.
It is also not
appropriate to have 3-storeys abutting parkland; there needs to be a reduction
to single- or at most 2-storeys next to George Woods Reserve.
Balconies, bays, or
porches of residences should not be allowed to project over the footpath or
other public space.
Aged housing (Fig 10,
Item 17)
This does not seem an appropriate location for aged housing
between a busy road and a rail line that is fairly busy until late evening and
very noisy at night because of the long diesel trains carrying heavy loads of
steel products. Vehicle fumes from busy
Albert St and the large car park are also a concern for the health of elderly
residents.
In the previous Draft
Mordialloc Structure Plan we supported the excellent proposal to replicate
throughout the pier, creek and foreshore area, the existing art deco style
lighting on the promenade. This proposal
seems to be missing from the Final Draft.
We would like to see this very attractive art deco style lighting
replicated along the pier, on the foreshore, and along the creek in Hazel
Pierce Park, Attenborough Park, and the Pompei site. We hope this proposal will be reinstated in
the Mordialloc Structure Plan.
Peter Scullin Reserve
(Fig 11)
New path between
promenade and Beach Road (Fig 11, Item 1). There is an existing path opposite Owen
Street between the promenade and Beach Road; therefore, there is no need for an
additional path and removal of vegetation.
Existing trees and
shrubs (Fig 11). We are very concerned that Fig 11 omits to
show the existing row of vegetation east of the former car park in the middle
of the Reserve. Sophie Beasley assured
Mary Rimington, and ourselves, that this row of vegetation would not be
removed. We strongly support retention
of this vegetation, which provides a necessary windbreak and sheltered picnic
area, and prevents the setting sun from blinding northbound Beach Road drivers.
Palm trees. We object to the introduction of palm trees
on the foreshore opposite Centreway.
Community members have discussed this issue with David Digby and Sophie
Beasley, and they agreed that palm trees should be restricted to Main Street,
and that only indigenous species will be planted on the foreshore and creek
area.
We are pleased that the
existing palm trees on Pier Road are being moved to Main Street, where they do
contribute a distinctive feature to Mordialloc.
Please limit all foreshore vegetation to indigenous types.
Floating kiosks (Fig 11,
Item 9). Definitely
not three floating kiosks alongside Hazel Pierce Park, not even one should be
here, because, (1) floating kiosks would spoil the creek views, (2) even more
litter will end up in the creek, (3) there are already three kiosks nearby: in
the car park blue stone block, at Blue Line Boats, and at Windows on the
Bay. Also, we feel that replacement of
mooring spaces with floating kiosks will irrevocably alter the quality of the
harbour and yuppyise the existing modest and practical hobby/working boat area
that people love.
Loading and restricted
parking for Sea Scouts and Motor Yacht Club (Fig 11, Item 12). It is completely unacceptable for any
additional part of Peter Scullin Reserve to be taken for parking. There is already parking available on Beach
Road beside Hazel Pierce Park. We have
an agreement with Council that no more creek-side or foreshore reserve will be
taken for parking. So allocating additional
parking space for club members in Hazel Pierce Park is definitely not on!
Public access to the
island is unnecessary because (1) club security will be a problem, (2) there
are ample attractive areas nearby for the public, and (3) a bridge from Hazel
Pierce Park would interrupt the creek views.
We consider it would be
preferable for any new bridge to connect the island to Bowman Street or near
the Mordialloc Sailing Club, and be closed to the public.
Can anything be done to
improve the appearance of the Sea Scout and MMYC buildings? No doubt they are examples of buildings from
their era, but the square shape and grubby pebbledash would seem to have little
appeal or historic merit. Maybe, at
least, something could be grown up the side of the buildings in places.
Blue Line boat hire and
kiosk (Fig 11, Item 19 and Fig 11A, Item 2)
There seems to be some
ambiguity about whether the Blue Line boat hire shop and kiosk is to be
moved. Fig 11 (Item 19) shows Blue Line
boat hire further from the car parking in Scullin Reserve, which does not seem
a good idea. However, Fig 11A (Item 2)
shows Blue Line boat hire in its existing location. Surely the boat hire facility needs to be close
to parking, therefore, we consider that this facility should remain where it
is, but that there is scope for improvements to its appearance.
Expansion of Mordialloc
Sailing Club (Fig 11, Item 10)
We agree with an upgrade
of the building (please retain murals), but definitely not with any
expansion. The building footprint on the
foreshore must not be increased.
Pedestrian bridge
attached to existing Nepean Highway Bridge (Fig 11, Item 20)
We strongly support this
proposal for a pedestrian bridge attached to the Nepean Highway Bridge, which
we have advocated for several years. This
would allow two lanes on the highway in each direction and physical separation
of pedestrians from vehicles for enhanced safety and enjoyment. In fact, there
needs to be a pedestrian bridge attached to both sides of the existing bridge.
Many people, including Mordialloc College students, shoppers and
cyclists, regularly cross from Main Street east to Attenborough Park, and a
pedestrian bridge needs to be provided for them on the east side of the road
bridge. The proposed floating pedestrian
underpass would not satisfy their needs.
(See our comment below.)
Public pedestrian
creek-side access next to Doyles and the Bridge Hotel (Figure 11A, Item 8)
Yes, this pedestrian
boardwalk is in need of maintenance!
Even more importantly, by signage, or other means, it needs to be made
clear to visitors that this public walkway does not belong to Doyles, as it
appears to do now.
Another problem with
this pedestrian walkway is that, at present, it leads only to the boats moored
to it, the private bridge to the island and the Bridge Hotel carpark. This walkway would become a wonderful asset
and would be more widely used if some way could be found to link it to the
foreshore south of the Pier and North Aspendale beach.
Any commercial
development over the Doyles car park should be limited so that it does not
adversely affect the amenity of residents.
Floating pedestrian
underpass - Attenborough Park/Doyles linkage (Fig 11, Item 22). As we previously commented in response to the
earlier Draft Plan and on other occasions, a floating pedestrian underpass on
the south side of the Creek is impossible.
This is a silly idea, proposed by consultants and adopted by Kingston
staff that have not checked the tide data.
There is insufficient clearance for walking under the bridge at most,
possibly all, states of the tide. This
is why the underpass on the north side was built low! There is not enough clearance on the north
side under the bridge, nor is there sufficient clearance on the south side of
the Creek.
Improve
indigenous garden (Fig 11, Item 24). A great idea, if the indigenous community
agree. We would also like to see
historical reference to the Bunurong, the Government aboriginal reserve here,
Chinese settlement on the banks of Mordialloc Creek, etc.
Pompei’s Landing (Fig 12)
We are concerned that
any changes to Pompei’s Landing should not result in sanitisation of this
site. Whilst nautical sculptures may add
general appeal, we do not want real maritime activities replaced with pseudo
nautical structures. This area of real
informal maritime activity has long identified Mordialloc’s character and is a
great attraction. Pompei’s Landing could
do with a bit of tidying and landscaping, but please don’t replace the Pompei
boat operations with generic pseudo structures that can be seen anywhere!
We do think the existing
casual overnight truck parking should be discouraged, and a toilet block at the
rear of the site is a useful addition.
In principle, we
disagree with any further loss of Main Street median and aesthetic green
buffer.
Redevelop existing boat
sheds (Fig 12, Item 3)
This development is
visually far too large so close to the Creek.
It may be only slightly higher than the existing boat sheds, but its
visual bulk would be enormous in comparison to them. The heights in this area should, at most, be
a continuation of those to the north, with 2-storeys to Main Street and a
possible 3rd level setback, but no higher than the existing 10.5m
barn. We should not allow the proposed
development at the old police station to set a precedent here. The 4-storey development at the police
station site has not been built and may never be built. If it is built it should not legitimise, or
be legitimised by, 3- to 4-storeys on the boat-shed site.
We disagree with general
retail premises so close to the creek.
We suggest this building incorporates a Mordialloc historical museum or
a maritime display (which could be run by volunteers), maritime clubrooms and
offices, and a small boat accessories store at ground level. Accommodation could be provided above but
height should not exceed 3-storeys, and the 3rd level should be
recessed.
Extend line of Main
Street planting (Fig 12, Item 5)
We are delighted that
this area is to be landscaped with trees.
However, we feel that it would not be appropriate to plant palms
here. This area is transitional between
the palms lining Main Street and the Monterey Cypress at Pompei’s, and the
plantings here should be chosen so as to appear as a natural transition. This might be done with lower or less showy
trees, such as Sheoaks or Coast Manna Gums.
We like the proposed
layout of paths, which seems visually and functionally satisfactory.
Café and boat building
museum (Fig 12, Item 10)
It would be a great
shame to see this area ‘tidied up’ by putting a café and museum close to the
creek, and we strongly object to this suggestion. The untidy boat works area is unique in Port
Philip Bay, as residents say ‘it is the heart and soul of Mordialloc’, a place
where ordinary people can muck about with boats. To plonk a cafe here would be an act of
vandalism of the very worst sort. It
would be destruction of Mordialloc village culture and heritage, and would
inhibit ordinary people from working on ordinary boats here. A commercial building on the creek bank would
add an out-of place modern element to the creekscape, and will add to litter in
the creek. We have little enough left of
the original Mordialloc, so hands off
the boat works on the creek bank!
We accept new boat sheds
in this location, but consider a 2-storey building too dominant next to the
creek. The building should be
single-storey. A completely transparent
building seems out of character with the area.
Pompei’s 100 year shed
should be retained and restored, and some boat-related use found for it.
Slipway (Fig 12, Item
13)
We consider that the
existing slipways and facilities should be retained and upgraded, and boat
repairs next to the creek retained and encouraged. This will enormously enhance the tourist
attraction of the area, because there is nowhere else people can see these
activities. The word ‘unique’ appears
repeatedly in the Final Draft Plan, but we actually have little that is truly
unique. This boat work area and the water tower are probably the only features
of Mordialloc that are unique in any real sense, so let’s retain them both.
Provide
a pedestrian walkway under the rail bridge adjacent to the creek (Fig 12, Item
16)
We strongly support the proposal
to close the existing ugly concrete tunnel under the rail line, and move the
footpath away from the rail yards. This
would improve the amenity of the area and probably reduce vandalism in the rail
yards because the yards would soon be out of sight and out of mind for vandals.
We feel that a solid
footpath under the rail bridge, as on the south bank of the creek, would more
aesthetically link the landscaped area by the moorings with the parkland to the
east. But we accept that a floating walkway
under the rail bridge would be less costly to install and maintain, and feel
this is an acceptable alternative.
We suggest murals or mosaics of creek scenes or Bunurong
activities would improve the visual presence of the rail bridge.
Main Street (Fig 13)
We suggest historical
murals (Coffee Palace, Grand Hotel, stage coaches, etc), or appropriate
maritime mosaics or images, on bland buildings such as Safeways. Some covered facades, such as the Good Guys
building, could be uncovered and restored.
Improvement is needed overall in consistency of façade colours, rhythms,
textures, and shop signage.
Infill development (Fig
13)
We agree with infill not
exceeding 2-storeys or adjacent building heights, and following existing
alignment. But we prefer all 3-storey
additions to be recessed 8m to avoid a jumbled look and to reduce the impact of
3-storeys on the predominantly 2-storey streetscape.
Remove streetlight on
Main Street/McDonald Streets roundabout (Fig 13, Item 1)
We agree that this
streetlight is not appropriate on the roundabout at the northern entrance to
the village. But, if there is to be a nautical sculpture on the southern
roundabout, there should be something similar or compatible on the northern
roundabout. This could add to the sense
of entry and the unity of the village, as well as being a strong statement
about the history of Mordialloc.
New northern ‘gateway’
replacing the Not Quite Right block (Fig 13, Item 2)
This area does need
improving. We suggest no more than 3-storey
buildings here, with a recessed 3rd level and space for landscaping
or canopy trees. This would be an
excellent hotel site with a view down McDonald Street to the Dandenongs.
Additional pedestrian
crossing points (Fig 13, Items 3 & 10)
We like the suggestion
of additional crossing points. They might help to better connect the two sides
of Main Street, and make shops nearer the north and south ends of the street
more viable and vital than at present.
Psychologically, the end shops would seem more part of a pedestrian loop
rather than extremities of an ‘H’, as they are now.
Four pedestrian crossings seem too many for this distance. Three pedestrian crossings could be provided:
1.
opposite the laneway that links Main Street to
the station car park (Figs 8, Item 4)
2.
the existing crossing linking the station to
Centreway
3.
slightly south of Bear Street.
Integration of
telecommunications (Fig 13, Item 4)
If this means
under-grounding power supply, we agree.
Hiding mobile towers is also worthwhile but it is unclear how this will
be done.
Reduce height of highway
lights (Fig 13, Item 5)
We like this suggestion
to lower the lights to below the tops of the palms. Aesthetically, this would improve the view by
making the palms a stronger feature.
Obviously, this would have to be subject to maintaining and improving
the level of lighting at street level.
The low-energy highway lighting proposal is also excellent, but the
energy economies would be negated by proposed up-lighting or spotlights.
Object to further loss
of median strip and green buffer.
Bus stop (Fig 13, Item
16)
A bus stop in front of shops near the station is not a good idea
because of problems with noxious fumes on the pavement and in shops. (See our previous comments.)
Central Mordialloc (Fig 14)
We are very pleased with
the hardy coastal planting themes, and improvements to the various
laneways. We would like to see more
consistency in street furniture.
New mixed-use
development (Fig 14, Item 10)
Care must be taken that
old building stock is not replaced with bland generic buildings, however, the
office block on Beach Road arc could be replaced or improved. Also, any Beach Road development should have
variable set backs with space for landscaping and canopy trees.
Community Housing (Fig 14, Item 10)
We are happy for an
upgrade to buildings, but we would not wish disadvantaged people to be forced
into housing elsewhere.
Excessive height would be needed to gain views to the Dandenongs,
which would be unacceptable.
We sincerely hope that
matters raised by the Mordialloc community will be fully considered, discussed
with the community, and resolved.
Mordialloc and its special features and character are important to
us. So we appreciate this opportunity to
express our views on aspects of the Final Draft Mordialloc Structure Plan. The Final Draft Structure Plan is long and
complex, and demanded a great deal of time and careful thought. We hope you find our comments useful and
constructive, and take them into consideration in finalising the Mordialloc
Structure Plan.
Back to the MBCL
Resource Page