In February 2010 I posted about community action to save Hoskins Park in Dulwich Hill from a 3-storey development of 11 town houses next door that would remove 15 trees & which would ‘loom over’ Hoskins Park. Two development applications were submitted & both were refused. Council cited non-compliance with local planning controls & the huge community opposition to the development as reasons for refusal. The Marrickville Heritage Society also put in a submission against the development, particularly the intent to demolish two 1920s houses.
It was regarded as an overdevelopment back then & now another DA has been submitted, this time almost twice the size at 20 units. Currently the site is zoned 2A – low residential density, prohibiting multi-level & mulit-unit residential development in the Hoskins Park area. Half of the 20 units will be affordable housing (20% off market rent for 10 years). Perhaps they are hoping that the affordable housing component will ensure that the zoning requirements are ignored & the DA gets approved?
In the latest DA they want to do the following –
- Demolish parts of the historic Brooks Lodge. This building is being considered for heritage listing.
- Demolish 34 & 36 Piggot Street, two Federation houses that appear to be in excellent condition. 36 Piggott Street in particular has its original features, tessellated tiles, chimney & stained glass windows.
- 3-storey units will overlook Hoskins Park. As the land is on the hill directly above Hoskins Park, which slopes down towards the Greenway, the units will indeed ‘loom over’ the park.
- They also want to remove a mature Melaleuca street tree on Denison Road & an Evergreen Ash (Fraxinus griffithii) street tree on Piggot street. New trees will be planted here when the development is completed.
- They want to remove 4 trees from the front formal garden of Brooks Lodge & replace with a formal garden of their own design. 3 of the trees are of significant size & at least one is visible on the skyline from Hoskins Park & surrounding streets. A Frangipani will be relocated somewhere else.
- 4 small to small-sized trees inside the property will be removed.
- 1 mature Canary Island Palm will be removed. At the very least this tree should be transplanted somewhere into the streetscape of Marrickville LGA or a few metres across the fence & replanted in Hoskins Park. These trees cost thousands of dollars to source & are great sources of food & habitat for many species of birds as well as flying-foxes. They also handle transplanting well.
- All up this DA seeks to remove 11 trees.
Healthy Canary Island Palm - instead of chopping it down, why not relocate it across this fence into Hoskins Park or at the Cooks River or into a traffic island or somewhere else in Marrickville LGA?
I personally think there is much to be concerned about with this DA apart from the unnecessary loss of trees. To remove 4 healthy mature trees in a formal garden of an historic house to create another formal design is totally unnecessary in my opinion. The loss of these trees will have a major impact on the skyline & the leafy feel of this area. It will be also removing food sources & habitat for urban wildlife. Throwing away the Canary Island Palm is dreadful.
Local community group ‘Save Hoskins Park’ believes that the development, should it be approved, will have a significant detrimental impact on both Hoskins Park & the character & amenity of surrounding streets. They need others in Marrickville LGA to help them preserve the amenity, privacy, unique character & view corridors of Hoskins Park by sending Marrickville Council a submission opposing this development. You can contact ‘Save Hoskins Park’ if you would like a draft submission to make it easier at – savehoskinspark@yahoo.com
The DA (DA201100201) can be viewed here – http://www.marrickville.nsw.gov.au/ePropertyProd/P1/PublicNotices/PublicNoticeDetails.aspx?r=%24P1.WEBGUEST&f=%24P1.ESB.PUBNOT.VIW&ApplicationId=DA201100201
The deadline for submissions is 12 noon 19th May 2011. Submissions can be emailed to – council@marrickville.nsw.gov.au
I made a short video of the trees that will be lost & the houses that will be demolished if this DA is approved – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_yiq__xpAk
& a short video of Hoskins Park – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CoNGNX09Vc
Showing the front garden of Brooks Lodge - every bit of green including the street tree is going to be chopped down or removed to create a new formal garden. It is already a beautiful formal garden.
SAVING OUR TREES - Marrickville municipality 
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 16, 2011 at 2:56 am
ArchitectGJA (Ed)
In the spirit of “don’t get me started”, I present the following:
The designers of the proposed project have put a good effort into excavating to reduce the mass of the building and detailing the street elevation to be sympathetic to the period of the neighbourhood, but given the overall scale of this development, I doubt that this is enough. Conceptually, it appears to be far too much development for compatibility with the existing neighbourhood.
The section and elevation drawings provided by your link show the correlation of building height between the existing Brook Lodge and the proposed elevation of units 01 through 18 (Brook Mews) as they face Hoskins Park. However, much of the height of the Lodge is in its steep roof, sloping away from view, and the building itself sits far back from Denison Road, further visually reducing its height. In this manner the Lodge can be taller than its neighbors without overwhelming them.
The proposed building facade of units 01 through 18 as viewed from Hoskins Park, while having a similar above-grade height to the Lodge, will present all of that height in a vertical mass, essentially a 4-storey box with its lower level subterranean, and by far the least attractive elevation. The floor plans appear to be well modulated, but that modulation comes from the eroded shape of the outdoor decks/terraces which are vertically stacked and will contribute to the apparent bulk, although not as severely as would a vertical wall. This mass is then located very close to the property line shared with the park and presents itself along the full length of that property line. In my opinion, Brook Mews as proposed will indeed loom above the park.
This same proposed building, as the height increases, has been stepped back from the opposite property line as shared with number 32 Pigott Street. This provides a much gentler facade, the building stepping back horizontally as it increases in height (can be seen as similar to Section E on the drawings). This step back with height should have been provided as well on the facade at Hoskins Park, and if a more modulated footprint and greater setback were provided on that same park facade, there would be more available area for substantial replacement trees to be planted. The loss of mature trees in cities should be seriously discouraged, and if absolutely necessary, a 3 to 1 replacement should be required.
May 16, 2011 at 8:22 am
Jacqueline
Thanks for taking the time to have a look at this Ed. Your professional opinion is appreciated 🙂