[200William-EC SP67851] New view impact study letter
Craig Laforest
cscl at optusnet.com.au
Wed Oct 12 13:05:21 AEDT 2022
Dear Natalie,Thank you very much once again for contacting us
regarding this.
I totally agree, as does the EC, that the approach you recommend is to
be followed. Kindly contact the rep from the council and follow
through with the other points you have mentioned.
Thank you and best wishes,
Craig
----- Original Message -----
From:
"Natalie @ NRP" <natalie at natalierichterplanning.com.au>
To:
"Matthew Perkins - Private" <matt at perkins.id.au>, "Matthew Guy"
<matthew_guy at hotmail.com>
Cc:
"Craig Laforest" <cscl at optusnet.com.au>, <ec at 200william.com>
Sent:
Wed, 12 Oct 2022 11:00:58 +1100
Subject:
RE: [200William-EC SP67851] New view impact study letter
Hello All.
I have been thinking about this.
I think I am best to actually speak to the Council Officer about the
situation and say that we have a view study and that the letter does
not include extensive details and seems to have only been sent to some
people (I understand other stratas many not have received anything so
it may be ‘selective’ ie not what was required by the Council
letter).
Also, that we would like to be seeing a version of revised plans
before we let anyone infringe on privacy with drones or visits.
It is worth seeing what the Officer says.
Do you agree with this approach?
I thought over night that it may be best not to approach the
consultant directly as this request has come from Council.
Thanks, Natalie
FROM: Matthew Perkins - Private <matt at perkins.id.au>
SENT: Tuesday, 11 October 2022 8:27 PM
TO: Matthew Guy <matthew_guy at hotmail.com>
CC: Craig Laforest <cscl at optusnet.com.au>; ec at 200william.com; 'Natalie
@ NRP' <natalie at natalierichterplanning.com.au>
SUBJECT: Re: [200William-EC SP67851] New view impact study letter
Hi Natalie,
We are happy for you to call the people on the attached
notification.
Matt Perhaps I should get Darren to post a notice through each door
tomorrow that the note is not from the building and is not official
communications.
Matt
On 11/10/2022 8:55 am, Matthew Guy wrote:
I am more than happy for Natalie to contact them and suss them out.
Matt
On 11 Oct 2022, at 9:35 am, Matthew Perkins - Private
<matt at perkins.id.au> [1] wrote:
What's your opinion Matt & Craig. I dont have any objection in
Natalie contacting this view consultant. We might have an issue
stopping them using a drone as they will just do it on the street and
not over private property and likely when we are not expecting it and
are in a position to prevent them.
Matt.
On 11/10/2022 8:27 am, Natalie @ NRP wrote:
Thank you all for letting me know about this.
The letter does seem a bit strange, not being on a letterhead, not
referencing the DA etc.
I have seen Urbaine’s work in the past. It would be handy to be
able to look up a web address for you all. Interesting that they have
changed view assessment consultants..
We did the view impact assessment yes. What they will be wanting to
do now is to model a revised design and provide the montages to show
what is proposed. Using the CAD drawings from the architect to overlay
into the photo frames – which we were not able to do without further
expense. A modelling expert would need to apply all the RLS and
heights and setbacks of the buildings into our photo study.
At this stage, I would be like to see the/a revised building design.
I would not be permitting them to use a drone. We would not have any
ability to determine where the photos are taken from or what height
etc. They are invasive as well.
The following is a paste from what the Land and Environment Court
considers when they look at a rigorous view impact assessment.
One idea is that I could call this person on your behalf and suss
them out and ask at what stage they are at as to the revision?
If they are simply trying to peddle the current design (which I
don’t think they can) then we wouldn’t be needing them to come to
homes.
It can be a catch 22. If it is a revised design, we _do_ want a
montage and proper architectural analysis done (as they have been
asked to do) to show the form of the building within the view frames
and ensure the best view protection and to see what the impact is.
We could also seek the advice of a planning lawyer on this. This may
be prudent.
I can also speak to Reinah, the Council officer. Some Councils do
their own assessments once a proposal comes in.
Again, it comes back to that if they propose an amended design, we
would want the view modelled (with an architectural block overlay in
front of the views) to know what the impact is.
The benefit of what we did, is to use the camera at the specified
height and marked the locations and so they could theoretically use
ours. Of course, it would be up to that company though - as it would
be their authored work and they would need to be comfortable.
Please let me know what you think and if you wish to discuss.
Regards, Natalie
_Use of photomontages _
_The following requirements for photomontages proposed to be relied
on as or as part of expert evidence in Class 1 appeals will apply for
proceedings commenced on or after 1 October 2013. The following
directions will apply to photomontages from that date: Requirements
for photomontages 1. Any photomontage proposed to be relied on in an
expert report or as demonstrating an expert opinion as an accurate
depiction of some intended future change to the present physical
position concerning an identified location is to be accompanied by:
Existing Photograph. a) A photograph showing the current, unchanged
view of the location depicted in the photomontage from the same
viewing point as that of the photomontage (the existing photograph);
b) A copy of the existing photograph with the wire frame lines
depicted so as to demonstrate the data from which the photomontage has
been constructed. The wire frame overlay represents the existing
surveyed elements which correspond with the same elements in the
existing photograph; and c) A 2D plan showing the location of the
camera and target point that corresponds to the same location the
existing photograph was taken. Survey data. d) Confirmation that
accurate 2D/3D survey data has been used to prepare the Photomontages.
This is to include confirmation that survey data was used: i. for
depiction of existing buildings or existing elements as shown in the
wire frame; and ii. to establish an accurate camera location and RL of
the camera. 2. Any expert statement or other document demonstrating an
expert opinion that proposes to rely on a photomontage is to include
details of: a) The name and qualifications of the surveyor who
prepared the survey information from which the underlying data for the
wire frame from which the photomontage was derived was obtained; and
b) The camera type and field of view of the lens used for the purpose
of the photograph in (1)(a) from which the photomontage has been
derived._
_ _
Natalie Richter Planning
PO Box 59 Mt Colah NSW 2079
m. 0438 828 972
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. The contents and attachments are not to be altered or
reproduced without our consent or used for any other purpose. If you
have received this email in error then please delete the email and
inform us of the error by return email. We are not liable for any
loss arising from the receipt or use of this email or attachments. It
is the responsibility of the receiver to be satisfied that this email
and attachments contain no computer viruses.
_ _
FROM: Matthew Perkins - Private <matt at perkins.id.au> [2]
SENT: Tuesday, 11 October 2022 9:00 AM
TO: Craig Laforest <cscl at optusnet.com.au> [3]; ec at 200william.com [4]
CC: info at natalierichterplanning.com.au [5]
SUBJECT: Re: [200William-EC SP67851] New view impact study letter
Hi Craig given that It does sound like the developer.
Matt.
On 11/10/2022 5:49 am, Craig Laforest wrote:
Hello EC,
I didn't contact Daniel Knight and I don't believe we should contact
him or any company engaged to take pictures from inside our properties
or agree to a drone taking a video.
We had a complete view impact study done as part of the complaint
we lodged through Natalie Richter and included pictures from many of
our apartments. I have included Natalie in this email as it doesn't
appear she was included in Matthew Guy's email.
Regards,
Craig
----- Original Message -----
FROM:
"Matthew Perkins - Private" <matt at perkins.id.au> [6]
TO:
<ec at 200william.com> [7]
CC:
SENT:
Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:42:00 +1000
SUBJECT:
Re: [200William-EC SP67851] New view impact study letter
I assume this is from the developer. I dont think it's from us.
(unless it's something Craig has done) Given that are you better
off refusing. They have no right to access your premises. They will
be using this to try and prove you are not loosing a view so any
photos they take will be edited/sorted in the favor of the
developer. I dont know if it's in our interest to cooperate. The
Council asked them to do a view impact study as part of the DA.
In the end i would say we would need to do our own study that will
try and discredit theirs.
Matt.
On 10/10/2022 7:33 pm, Matthew Guy wrote:
Hi EC and Natalie,
I have received a letter from Daniel Knight at Urbaine requesting
access to conduct a view impact study for the new development, see
below.
The letter was not addressed and not in an envelope. I am afraid
it’s possible many people would have missed it or thought it was
junk.
We definitely need to engage. Is this something we should do as a
building or individually?
Regards,
Matthew Guy
405
_______________________________________________
EC mailing list
EC at 200william.com [8]
http://200william.com/mailman/listinfo/ec [9]
--
Matt Perkins
0403571333
-------------------------
Email sent using Optus Webmail
--
Matt Perkins
0403571333
--
Matt Perkins
0403571333
--
Matt Perkins
0403571333
-------------------------
Email sent using Optus Webmail
Links:
------
[1] mailto:matt at perkins.id.au
[2] mailto:matt at perkins.id.au
[3] mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au
[4] mailto:ec at 200william.com
[5] mailto:info at natalierichterplanning.com.au
[6] mailto:matt at perkins.id.au
[7] mailto:ec at 200william.com
[8] mailto:EC at 200william.com
[9] http://200william.com/mailman/listinfo/ec
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://200william.com/mailman/private/ec/attachments/20221012/c60f36a3/attachment-0001.html
More information about the EC
mailing list