LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Countering councillor’s conclusion on Casey Street

DISAGREE: Central Western Daily reader and Casey Street resident Liz Rogers penned this Letter to the Editor.
DISAGREE: Central Western Daily reader and Casey Street resident Liz Rogers penned this Letter to the Editor.

I LIVE in Casey Street and my house was built in 1927. I question the assumption by Orange City councillor Glenn Taylor that a modern, ‘box-shaped’ renovation is unacceptable.

Box shapes are not unusual or a modern concept. My 1927 house is a box shape and so is the 1970s addition at the back.

I am not quite sure what Cr Taylor thinks we can replace the offending box shape with? A sphere or a pyramid perhaps?

And what is wrong with a renovation of modern design at the back of a 100-year old house? The juxtaposition of the old and the new can be the basis for exciting design and innovation.

Orange City Council - please don’t go down the path of insisting all renovations, particularly those behind the house and off the street, must be traditional.

RELATED COVERAGE:

It is just plain boring and inconsistent with the varied styles of architecture already in Casey Street.

I also don’t understand the argument for Casey Street to be in the heritage conservation area. Casey Street has a mix of styles from fibro cottages and 1960s brick veneers to the early 20th century double brick house.

Many of its original large blocks are now filled with modern (there’s that word again) town houses.

We should be celebrating Casey Street’s eclectic nature rather than waste time and energy trying to shoehorn it into a traditional heritage theme.

Liz Rogers, Casey Street

Comments

Discuss "LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Countering councillor’s conclusion on Casey Street"

Please note: All comments made or shown here are bound by the Online Discussion Terms & Conditions.