PlanningAlerts

5 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. This is hardly in keeping with the existing neighbour hood. Houses we could understand but to build 65 extra townhouses with a potential 120 extra vehicles, on this part of Church Road will result in a traffic nightmare for the rest of the the residents that live in and off the street, with only one entry and exit piont and the school traffic from the Lutheren school, the main intersection is allready an issue to negotiate during school drop off and pick up.
   There are confirmed fire ant nests within 350mt of 107 church road so what will the soil management program be? And are all parties concerned aware of this?
   We talk to people that live on Station road past the rail lines who have the same issue of road infrastructure that is not designed to take this sort of traffic, when will council consider this when approving these sorts of developments? And with the amount of open undeveloped land in this area, this can only become a much bigger problem with future construction projects.
   So good bye to beautiful Church Road, what a shame.

2. I am extremely concerned with the plans for this block of land. The road is not equipped for this volume of traffic. The intersection at the top of Church and Station Roads are already dangerous, congested and ill planned for the amount of town houses being crammed along station Rd and over the train line. Church rd is already busy and congested during school times, funerals, church services ect due to 2 churches and a school on our street. The traffic generated by 65 townhouses will turn a suburban street into a commuters nightmare.
   The proposal to continue Church rd through to Edens Landing via the park will exacerbate congestion further with traffic cutting through from Edens Landing.
   The zoning of the area is actually low density residential and it is zoned for this for very good reason. The property borders a sewerage treatment plant with dangerous levels of Acid Sulfate throughout the surrounding areas. It is a Bushfire hazard area with a buffer. It is next to Heritage listed sites and borders Ridgewood Reserve. The property and surrounding area floods considerably and lets not forget proximity to a rail corridor.
   There are confirmed reports of fire ants in our street as we have had them on our property. It seems Council and Phillip Usher Development want to cash in yet again by cramming as many townhouses as possible onto a piece of land in order to furnish their own pockets financially. There is no consideration for surrounding infrastructure, residents, safetly and wildlife.
   I would also like to know how a Council whose officials have all been sacked is able to make decisions on development in a community with no Council representation. Who is making these decisions within a Council with no official Councillors, only stand ins holding together a broken entity until the next election. The current Town Planners are obviously deeply steeped in corruption with a history of approving a controversial crematorium right next to a busy overpass that virtually passes over the building and in the middle of suburbia with a school less that 5mins walk away.
   This has everything to do with greed with nothing constructive to the living standards of a community.

3. I object to the proposal for 65 townhouses to be built at the end of Church rd.
   This will seriously impact the environment and residents and owners' right to enjoy our lifestyles we are used to. The destruction by stealth of all the trees for the Station Road units and the impact of the builders and the erection and filling of the 120+ units have already had negative impacts on Church and Station roads and roads and intersections in the vicinity. This gives even less reasons to accept these 65 unnecessary town houses.

   Church road cannot deal with the impact of 65 townhouses in a street designed for houses. At a minimum of 2 residents per townhouse, 130 extra residents and their vehicles will seriously impact current house residents' quiet enjoyment of their environment and access to greenspace and the natural environment.
   I believe it will devalue our lifestyles and house prices and wonder who on the council, in which we have no representation, could even contemplate such an adverse proposal for this Division's residents.
   Negative impacts, such as those stated by myself and others include; Fire ants, floods, the railway maintenence issues and hugely increased volume of trucks, eath moving equipment and motor vehicles, noise and increased population and change in the demographic of this neighborhood .
   The school, church and cemetery and street will lose all contemplative ambience.

   I heard about the proposal to push Church rd. into Eden's Landing 30 years ago, but was assured this would not happen, for all the obvious reasons already noted.
   Positive impacts? None, except those for greedy self- serving developers . Let us vote on this according to the standpoint on this issue of the new councillors elected in the next elections early next year.

4. Hi all this is a copy of my official objection to council and an email to our local councillor.

   Good morning Councillor,

   For your consideration. 

   My name is Toni Last I am a resident of 103 Church Rd. Bethania, I am writing to you with concern over the proposed development of 107 Church Rd. My wife and myself have spoken to many residents in our area regarding the above mentioned site whom have all expressed their concerns with this development, and others in this part of Bethania 

   I have attached my formal objection to council below.

   I wish to formally object to the development and construction of 65 dwellings on 107 Church Road Bethania.

   MCU/27/2019

   This site not only contains one of Logan city's dwindling heritage sites which should be preserved for all future generations and not just replaced with a plaque for residents of this complex, but also, on this section of Church Road, all residences are single story on acreage blocks with a rural outlook,  however plans for this development show planned two story dwellings on blocks at 260sq metres, which is far below council approved block size in a low density area, which the developer claims will "improve the street amenity" this is not the view of existing residents 

   While we are not 'anti development' we believe this type of development should not be approved as there is already an over abundance of the proposed dwellings in the area, many while despite being sold, remain empty of rental tenants, despite being supposedly 'affordable housing'. Some consideration should be given to construction of family homes with private yards on the appropriate size blocks of 500sq. metres as an alternative to what is currently being constructed all over this part of Bethania, and considering the existing dwellings on Church Rd. 

   While being on a transport corridor I believe people who wish to live in this area should have a choice of enjoyment of lifestyle with regards to the availability of new homes.

   The street scape planting of Cupanniopsis anacardioidies, (Tuckeroo's) is definitely ill considered as this species of tree grows very poorly in this area, see Bunnings and Aldi car park plantings also has a very aggressive root system which may cause substantial damage to private driveways and footpaths in future which council will be liable for, alternative species should be considered possibly, Tabebuia argentia, Acmena smithii which will be suitable under power lines.

   The increased traffic flow from not only the construction period but also future residents and visitors vehicles from this estate, and potential future housing on remaining lots combined with traffic flow from existing residents and school traffic will render the intersection of Church Road and Albert St. impossible to navigate considering how difficult it is to exit Church Rd. already especially during school hours.

   Also consider the additional traffic from the estates existing and under construction on the Eastern side of the rail line which is redirected through the emergency access next to the Lutheran church on Church Rd. whenever there is an incident at Bethania train station or an issue with the boom gates on Station Rd. this increased traffic flow will make it nearly impossible for emergency vehicles to access residents in need and exit Church Rd particularly during school drop off and pick up. 

   Bethania train station is not adequate for existing population and certainly not adequate for future proposed additional populations at this time, who are expected to utilise Bethania station as a transport corridor, this is a major health and safety issue which will make the use of the emergency crossing on Church Rd more likely.

   Please consider rejection of the proposed development in favour for a more appropriate plan that considers residents and heritage values and offers a choice of lifestyle rather than the developer.

   End of objection 

   As I have stated we are not against the development of this block, but only with the type of development proposed, As there is already multiple multiple medium density town house complexes and semi detached housing built or under construction or in the development process in this area.

   Why is there not an alternative for families who would rather purchase homes with back yards on reasonable sized blocks to raise their families, much as you yourself would have called home in Logan growing up. While we realise It is inevitable that Bethania will be the centre of future development in this area due to the proximity of not only the rail corridor but also schools, shops and Logan Hospital, it appears that the great Australian dream of owning a home where you can have a BBQ, play back yard cricket, soccer with your children or just relax and enjoy your lifestyle with friends and family has been hi-jacked by developers intent on crowding as many houses as possible on minimum sized blocks.

   Also the destruction of one of the few heritage buildings in our suburb to the highest bidder, this is totally unacceptable and should be preserved not only as a monument to our suburbs past, but as a place of interest on Logans heritage trail, this structure is a local landmark and much loved by the people who live in this area

   Unfortunately, many residents we speak to believe that this proposed development is already a foregone conclusion and no amount of objection will alter the type of development proposed for this site.

   As our duely elected representative for division six we would ask that you speak on behalf of the residents against the construction of 65 town houses and propose a more family friendly alternative development.

   Kindest regards

   Toni Last and Jeanette Baker

   Residents of 103 Church Road 

   Bethania 

   Sent from Samsung tablet.

5. This development has not been thought through at all. The infrastructure surrounding it cannot support this. It is firstly a dead end St, there is a local school which results in traffic blocks at pick up and drop off and the dodgy intersection at the end of the street. No thought at all has gone into this development and no concern for safety.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Logan City Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment