19 Woodfield Avenue Bundeena NSW 2230

This application information provided by the applicant has some major elements of deception, misinformation and outright untruths in relation to much of the impacts upon local residents and the owners true objectives in achieving a separation of the two proposed residences. The proposal is set to build a raised home well beyond the building lines of all other homes in the street and will have massive privacy issues for all residents impacted. To say it’s barely visible is no where near the truth. I ask you come see for yourself and realise the proposed application is too far at the back of the property.
This area of low lying flood plain is and has always been subject to regular inundation, both by rainfall floodwaters and saltwater inundation. This is why the original house sits up above the flood prone area.
In addition the area is at severe risk of bushfires. The vegetation consists of large canopied Angophera and Eucalypts in the immediate area, a point conveniently missed by the studies undertaken.
The statement of environmental impacts states it is barely visible to neighbouring properties. Nothing could be further from the truth as the proposed home will apparently have no side windows. The drawings of the western elevation indicate otherwise.
I have taken images to highlight just how much privacy and the impact of the raised dwelling will have from our home. The new building and the windows will face our home including our dining and lounge room, our kitchen our downstairs bedroom, our decks and our entire back yard.
They claim to be out to preserve the fauna yet as I write trees in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development are dying both in the neighbouring property and outside in the back council lane multiple casuarinas are likely to have died in the immediate vicinity.
Also I went to view the proposed site from the Bonnievale Picnic grounds and it was immediately apparent that the new proposed building would indeed attain views over the picnic grounds and Port Hacking and therefore highlights the true intentions in bringing a development proposal to the rear of their block.
The existing deck is merely a mechanism to justify putting the home in the back yard and should be viewed as that.
I am of the opinion as discussed with most of the other neighbours, the degree of separation will see the property leased for short term weekend accomodation creating huge potential for loss of serenity both for residents and the adjoining park users.
I would like the opportunity to highlight in person the proposed site and its impacts on our privacy and loss of views.
Your consideration and time would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Stuart and Megan Buman and family.

Hi ,
We write to you in the hope to prevent this development application from being approved. Our family believe two major flaws exist. Firstly the building is indeed a seperate dwelling markedly separated from the old building that is only a couple of metres from the footpath. The second proposed building is well down the block and set much lower than the existing building thereby not at all adjoining the existing building or in alignment. It is so far down into the backyard that all the neighbouring properties will be looked into. The trees that are there now are dying off and will have to be removed. This will cause a complete loss of privacy for neighbours up to four houses away on both sides of the development. The fact that he new dwelling has been proposed to be so deep on the block increases the risk of bushfire impacts to not only the proposed development but all other properties in the vicinity as a more compact building pattern exposes the street and town to an increased chance the fire can burn from home to home should the adjoining bush land be ablaze. A similar scenario may occur should the property become under amber attack. The buffer that currently exists is of benefit to all homeowners in this very steep street subject to strong north westerly winds during severe fire danger periods as was evidenced on January 14th 1994. Please consider this when deciding the right decision.
Also the proposed home is way too high for neighbours to escape the gaze. We are not in an area suitable to planting privacy screens type trees as fire will likely eventuate. We have talked with neighbours who are of the opinion that it is best to remove the trees to mitigate fire risk and existing vegetation will likely be removed to achieve this, creating even more impacts should a high building approved. It is important not to set a precedence in this regard and rightly put the towns folk and neighbouring properties ahead of the need for this medium level development.
The map shows the home at nearly 6 metres and that does not include a chimney on the drawing. Smoke will be visible to all properties and polluted air quality for neighbouring children and newborn babies as well as elderly neighbours.. the proposed building is over 3 times higher than everyone’s backyard fences( not including. The smoke stack)! In addition to looking into peoples homes the raised nature of the proposed development will see it over look our backyard and cause a massive loss of privacy.
We believe it is in councils interest to deny the application on the grounds that too many sets of neighbours will be looked in upon by the raised floor level to avoid the flood zone.
My parents have worked so hard to attain their small piece of paradise and it would be an injustice for this proposed second dwelling to overlook their home forevermore.
We too are of the opinion the home should be added to the rear of the existing building so as not to adversely impact so many peoples happy private lives! Thank you very much for considering our situation and wish you all the best in protecting the lifestyle values we have always cherished in Bundeena since 1937.( when our family settled).
Best regards,
Jack Albert and Eve Buman
Kind regards