PlanningAlerts

13 Comments

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

1. Blocking out the one open view of Lane Cove National Park with an 18 storey building is hardly the right balance between residential and corporate use of land. For the residential apartments in Macquarie Gardens who are sharing the view of the Lane Cove National Park, it would mean having sunlight blocked out by the 18 storey building forever, especially those in the lower floors which already have daylight compromised by growing gum trees in the complex. I am all for city development but the right balance and fairness to existing residential dwellers’ environmental well-being have to take priority. It would only be justifiable and a right balance to limit the proposed building height as with the other low rise buildings (not more than 6 storey) along Lane Cove Road. As well, with a high rise corporate building, the traffic at the Fontenoy Rd and Lane Cove Rd intersection would be much busier than it is already now. Great news that Eden Garden is expanding and it is welcomed but only if it does not disrupt the well-being of the residents of Macquarie Gardens whom will be directly impacted by an 18 storey building.

2. Does the City of Ryde need another office block? Especially so close to the National Park?
   * The traffic is horrendous along Lane Cove Rd at peak hour in the morning, and the evening, in both directions and this proposed development will only make it even worse. The traffic report for this development is very limited as it admits to only being accurate to 2018 and an inability to measure anything substantial last year due to the pandemic. A current measurement is essential.
   *It will block views from the already built residential buildings nearby which should have priority over an office building.
   * Is this going to be a sustainable development? Concrete is a substantial contributor to greenhouse gases so what offsets is the developer offering to compensate for this?
   * How is the development going to be an asset to the residents of the City of Ryde? It is the residents who will lose amenity by having more traffic, reduction in enjoyment of the National Park as the adjoining green spaces will be overshadowed by a giant building, increased impact on waste services, etc and basically an eyesore.
   * A significant reduction in height would be a better solution, considering the already, adequate availability of leasable space in the North Ryde vicinity.

3. Dear General Manager,

    

   Our household have received notification from the Ryde City Council in regards to the above DA submitted by Thunderbirds Are Got Pty Ltd.

    

   As home owners residing at Macquarie Gardens for over 10 years, we are deeply concerned and very upset with this application to say the very least. We will outline the reasons for our objection further in this email.

    

   Traffic Chaos:

   Firstly, traffic issues. You may be aware Fontenoy Road is one of the main roads to turn onto Lane Cove Road, therefore it is quite a busy road throughout the day. However during peak hours, like the name of this time of the day, it reaches its peak. My personal record of turning onto Fontenoy Road from the Khartoum Road intersection to get home was 25 minutes during peak hour traffic! All the cars and buses were trying to turn onto Lane Cove Road which consequently congested traffic in both directions. On top of that you have the frequent cars that turn into Eden gardens to make an illegal U-turn to drive onto Fontenoy Road. Talavera Road and Waterloo Road is even worse as it is mainly the commercial area over there. Trying to turn onto Lane Cove Road from Talavera Road or Waterloo Road during peak hour would see you taking at least 30 minutes! And this is just a sneak peak of the current traffic conditions. We DO NOT need an office building of cars or a multi-level carpark clogging up our roads and bring more unnecessary burden to this traffic crisis!  

    

   Noise Issues:

   Secondly, noise issues. Being one of the residential areas with two parks just on Fontenoy Road alone suggests this is a family oriented road in this commercial dominated suburb. This is something to be proud of, and that should be preserved. Before COVID-19, Eden Gardens use to hold occasional parties during the weekends and are no stranger to the annual Christmas parties. I personally have sent several complaint emails to the premises for their excessive noise due to these occasions as it deeply interferes with my little one’s sleep during night time. I can safely say we are not the only household who experiences this inconvenience. Yet now there are going to be months of construction, even more frequent functions from these companies, meaning more sleepless nights and anxious families which may impact on our mental wellbeing! Not to mention this new 18-storey building bringing more strangers to this area putting our families and young children’s safety at risk, has this even been thought of? Who are going to pay for the medical bills if it gets to that stage?  

    

   Parking Constraints:

   Currently, aside from cars occupying every single parking space along the streets during weekdays, there have been quite a few upgrades to the two parks which signals the council is finally listening to the community and are trying to preserve this family oriented space. Why ruin it by commercializing it? Should not the council be trying to seek resolutions on fixing the traffic issues instead? Should not the council be trying to preserve the environment instead? Eden Gardens is like a sanctuary in Macquarie Park, it is special because of its current status, its greenery, and does not need to be transformed into another office building like all the other ones around Macquarie Park! We have more than enough of them!

    

   Privacy:

   Finally sky space. We reside on the top level in one of the Macquarie Garden blocks. Building a 18-level story building directly in front of our window, blocking our entire view of the garden, the open space and further scenery not only inconveniences us, but it deeply upsets us! Before commercializing and capitalizing on absolutely everything, please consider carefully what the community actually needs. Ironically, we received the Ryde Connector along with the notification of this DA together in the post today. The Ryde Connector promoting what the Minister have achieved and is focused on doing for the community, accompanied with a DA application suggesting the drawbacks we are soon going to experience. We therefore strongly object for the DA to be approved and would appreciate your careful consideration on this matter.

4. I am deeply concerned about the development of Eden Gardens due to increased traffic around Fontenoy Road and Lane Cove Road. Peak hour traffic is already horrendous, and the development will worsen things.

   In recent years, Council has listened to resident feedback and improved the park facilities along Fontenoy Road for the use of the community. A disservice would be made to residents if the proposed development was allowed, which would impact the enjoyment of the parks.

   Street parking in the Macquarie Park is already tough as is from tradies and officeworkers. The development of Eden Gardens will worsen this.

   Please consider feedback from the residents who are all upset by the development application.

5. Dear public,

   I was originally involved in commenting first proposal at Eden Gardens in 2002 and again now.

   In short:

   Submission was sent to public for comments on 14th of April 2021, with deadline for
   submissions being 7th of May 2021. Counting the business days between receiving the
   LDA2021/0095 letter from City of Ryde and the deadline, there were only 15 days for an average person to read the documents and make an informed decision on 20 documents with 687 pages in total.

   They require highly-skilled people to review them properly.

   By not giving ordinary people enough time to digest this information or even be involved in some kind of on-line consultation forum with City of Ryde staff, appearance of discrimination and cover-up is inevitable.

   We spoke to number of owners who live in large strata complex at 1-15 Fontenoy Road and none of them understood that the proposed development was planned straight opposite their properties (primarily affected are owners in building Blocks B, C, and D). None of them were aware that the development seeks the following:

   18-storey building,

   4-storey carpark (whole site: 605 parking spaces in total, including 438 commercial
   staff spaces, 112 neighbourhood shop spaces, 15 nursery and 40 function centre
   spaces),

   Generate an increase of 314 and 262 vehicle trips per hour in the morning and
   evening peaks, respectively,

   Function/conference centre to hold 400 people with attached restaurants and a garden
   bar,

   Microbrewery,

   Child care centre,

   At full occupancy, 1750 workers would be on site during business hours Monday to
   Friday,

   Long-working hours for function centre and restaurant (till 23:00 hours seven days a
   week),

   No clear vision how many jobs will really go to local community,

   and much more.

   You can check what I wrote to Ryde Council:

   https://www.nswstratasleuth.id.au/Development-LDA2021-0095-Dusan-Baljevic-submission-to-City-of-Ryde-Council-5May2021.pdf

6. The key issues we are concerned about are highlighted from Points 1-6 and the closing remarks.
   1. Built Form against Local Streetscape
   Whilst we are not against re-development; the proposal for 18 storeys is excessively tall and dense for this quiet part of Macquarie Park. The images shown on the architectural plans, urban design report and other documents within the submission all are written to mislead with the intent of using language and imagery that downplay the proposed built form and height of the proposed development; whilst inaccurately exaggerate the density of the existing residential and even commercial buildings in both the immediate vicinity and broader neighbouring areas.
   In Section 3.2 Local Context of The Crime Risk Report, by City Plan February, 2021 the report describes “The corridor comprises a mix of technology focused commercial development and high density RFBs. Four high rise RFBs are located directly to the west of the site on the adjacent side of Lane Cove Road.”
   It is important to clarify that this area of Macquarie Park (bounded by Lane Cove Road, Khartoum Road and the east of the M2 Motorway) is a quiet pocket of streetscape which has a clear delineation from the high-density development forming part of the broader strategy of the Macquarie Park Corridor. See Figures 1 to 3 of street images illustrating the local setting which appear to have been conveniently omitted from the submission. Further to this, 307 Lane Cove Road whilst on the periphery of the Macquarie Park Corridor, is not actually within the extent of the Macquarie Park Corridor boundary as depicted in Ryde Council’s Plans. Rightly so, as the quaint residential buildings outside the periphery has a clear delineation of natural streetscape when compared to the high density development enabled within the Corridor.
   It is evident by walkthrough of the neighbouring areas that the built form of the neighbouring commercial buildings along Lane Cove Road (to the south-west of 307 Lane Cove Road) are no higher than 6-7 storeys. In addition, the opposite facing residential complex buildings of 1-15 Fontenoy Road comprises of no higher than 8 storeys. When traversing down Fontenoy Road, it is blatantly clear that the streetscape predominantly comprises of units of 1-4 storeys and townhouses/villas with only 1-2 storeys.
   Figures 4 and 5 illustrate the immediate adjacent commercial buildings which are of max 4-5 storeys.
   We urge that the determination panel look rationalize the shown perspective images so as not to be misled by its scale representation. We note that the perspectives which demonstrate the built form of the 18-storey development are typically standalone and no side-by-side (and to scale) comparisons or perspectives have been depicted contextualizing the height of this building in comparison to the local topography, parks or residential buildings are shown to potentially downplay the height of the proposed development. We strongly ask this to be scrutinized as 18 storeys is at least 3-6 multiples higher than the buildings in the immediate vicinity.

   
   Figure 1: Fontenoy Road Looking West
   
   Figure 2: Khartoum Road Looking North
   
   Figure 3: Tuckwell Place Looking East

   
   Figure 4: 299 Lane Cove Road (next commercial building from 307 Lane Cove Road (max 3-4 storeys)
   
   Figure 5: 5 Talavera Road – Canon Building (next commercial building over from 299 Lane Cove Road (max 4 storeys)

   2. Lane Cove National Park
   We urge that as part of the future Determination that the National Parks Authority, which we understand as being responsible for development adjacent to Lane Cove National Park, is required to provide a formal statement on the subject proposal.
   We have concerns for the local environment, flora and fauna e.g. kookaburras, owls, bandicoots, cockatoos which call the National Park their home and also the light pollution caused by the inevitable lengthened duration of office lights, etc.

   3. Traffic/Parking Impacts
   The proposed scale of the building accommodating 1750 workers at full occupancy will likely worsen the congestion on Fontenoy Road and impact the local residents using this road to access their homes and the local shops. An increase of 314 and 262 vehicle trips per hour in the morning and evening peaks respectively will also detriment the bus services (259, 292) which service the local residents of Fontenoy Road, Khartoum, Tuckwell and Rogal Place. The traffic queues on Fontenoy Road before Lane Cove Road in the morning and night are already excessive. 605 parking spaces will encourage personal vehicle use to the proposed development which will generate additional traffic, not helping the situation. There will inevitably be a substantial portion of office workers/visitors who do not wish to pay for on-site parking naturally leading to overflow of these visitors parking within the residential streets of Tuckwell Place/Fontenoy Road.
   4. Increased Maintenance and Loss of Availability of Parks for Local Residents
   The development will introduce a high number of visitors (full occupancy of 1750 workers) which will inevitably increase the frequency of maintenance and litter count of the two public parks (Fontenoy and Tuckwell Park). We also expect that the overflow of visitors will subsequently use Fontenoy Road, Tuckwell Place, Tuckwell Park parking area for their visit, further adversely affecting and reducing the availability of amenity for local residents.
   5. Notice Period and Residents Notified
   We note that for a proposed development of this scale; 18 storey high density office building; that the notification area to local residents to be expanded. It is worrying that there was a short timeframe allocated between when the submission was made available to public for comment on 14th of April 2021 and closing date for comment, 7th of May 2021 to enable residents to respond. This is far too short a window, evidently leading to those that are affected to be unaware of a proposed development right across the road and is unacceptable for this scale of major development.
   6. Opening Hours
   Opening Hours until 12am generates long durations of light pollution. Office lights also stay on throughout the night.

   Closing Remarks
   - We object to the proposed development as it stands. Though we are open to re-development, the proposal for 18 storeys next to a National Park and quiet pocket of Macquarie Park is blatantly excessive and totally unacceptable. The development will inevitably reduce access to amenities, increase traffic congestion on Fontenoy Road, introduce light pollution to residents and flora/fauna, generate parking overflow, and certainly not fit in with the context of this part of Macquarie Park. We request that the proposal is rejected and resubmitted with building height controls with context of Fontenoy Road as a whole and the immediate neighbouring commercial buildings on Lane Cove Road which are only maximum 4 storeys.
   - We request for the notice period for comments to be re-opened with a longer window (28 days) and expanded to residents of Fontenoy Road and Tuckwell Place as a minimum
   - We request that the National Park Authority make formal comment or statement regarding the proposed development with respect to their guidelines on development adjacent to National Park

7. I wish to echo the objections so well put by many others in the local area. I am a nearby resident of 21 years.

   I find the scale of the project to be completely excessive, particularly as it borders the Lane Cove National Park and is particularly out of place in this location. It's height should be limited to less than the nearby buildings to a maximum of 4 levels.

   As mentioned by others Fontenoy Road is used as a "rat run" and it does take 20 to thirty minutes to access our residences as it is in peak periods.

   With the significant increase of hundreds of vehicles that would be entering Lane Cove Road the light phases will have flow on effects to the whole area, multiplying the gridlock.

   This project does appear to be a money grab for the developer, and reminds me of the fight that was required to reduce heights of buildings alongside the M2 which was proposed by a large developer.

8. Dear public officers and audience,

   1. There was a follow-up public meeting on 15 December 2022, which I could not attend due to work pressures.

   It lists development proposal as an 18-storey building.

   In my original assessment, I showed discrepancies about height of the new high-rise building.

   In some documents it is 17-storeys, in some documents 17-storeys, and in some documents it is 18-storeys.

   17-storeys on page 32 of "307-lane-cove-road-hertiage-impact-statement.pdf”.

   Development proposal (page 4 of “307-lane-cove-road-energy-efficiency-report.pdf”:
   18-storey commercial building with height about 80 metres above the ground level.

   Pre-DA meeting with NSW Rural Fire Services on 7th of March 2019, the building was 16
   storeys.

   More details in my report in May 2021:

   https://www.nswstratasleuth.info/Development-LDA2021-0095-Dusan-Baljevic-submission-to-City-of-Ryde-Council-5May2021.pdf

   2. It appears that almost none of 218 owners in large strata complex across this proposed development (1-15 Fontenoy Road) were aware of this meeting. I spoke to many owners and nobody had knowledge of this meeting.

   3. Judging by the lack of any information, strata manager and nine committee members appear to have taken no actions on behalf of owners corporation, which means quite a few citizens had no representation.

   Last year, when I asked strata manager to take action on behalf of owners corporation on 19 April 2021, he deleted it without responding month later on 11 May 2021. The subject of the email was:

   URGENT INQUIRY SP52948 response to City of Ryde Development Proposal LDA2021/0095 due by 7May2021

   4. Since last year, we observe significant increase in traffic on Lane Cove Road and Fontenoy Road, and surrounding streets.

   5. Since last year, new developments in near-by streets are bringing even more conference centres, restaurants, and even a brewery (Macquarie Square plans for microbrewery in 2021, as per photo taken last year).

   There is much more to take into account for the development and I hope decisions will not be rushed, for the sake of public.

   Over-development in North Ryde/Macquarie Park is already taking its tolls.

9. I was invited to attend Land and Environment Court Section 34 Conciliation Conference regarding development proposal at Eden Gardens (18-storey building and 4-storey car park) in the Land and Environment Court on 22 March 2023.

   I provided a response with my wish to attend that conference and also updated my concerns:

   https://www.nswstratasleuth.info/LDA2021-0095-Dusan-Baljevic-submission-17FebMay2023.pdf

   Through six notice boards in the large strata complex across this development, I tried to engage committee members and strata managers on 17 February 2023. So far, as of 27 February 2023, no responses were received.

   Over the next week or so, I will try to take photos from units in Block B, C, and D (pending owners' and tenants' approvals to allow me to do so), who will mostly suffer from this new high-rise (loss of privacy, loss of value of property, loss of beautiful views towards Lane Cove National Park, North Sydney, and City, significant increase in noise levels, and so on).

10. Official invitation to attend the court on 22 March 2023 was confirmed.

    In the meantime, I managed to take some photos from strata plan SP52948, opposite Eden Gardens and found more reasons for concerns. In fact, I have 55 concerns:

    https://www.nswstratasleuth.info/LDA2021-0095-Dusan-Baljevic-submission-19Mar2023.pdf

    I also found submission from a well-organised 416 Group which represents 750 households in Killara and Lindfield west of Lady Game Drive.

    https://www.416group.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Presentation-to-Sydney-North-Planning-Panel-on-Eden-Gardens-office-tower-proposal-16.12.22.pdf

    By pure accident, on 19 March 2023, I met an Aboriginal representative at Eden Gardens at around 11:40 hours. She confirmed that her community had not been consulted on this development and she was going to attend Land and Environment Court Section 34 Conciliation Conference regarding development proposal at Eden Gardens (18-storey building and 4-storey car park) in the Land and Environment Court on 22nd of March 2023.

    According to Property Update website in 2019:

    https://propertyupdate.com.au/how-much-does-a-view-add-to-the-value-of-your-property/

    • Unobstructed view from ground level increase property value by 3% to 5%
    • Rooftop partially unobstructed view increase property value by 6% to 8%
    • Unobstructed view from medium elevation increase property value by 9% to 12%
    • Unobstructed view from high elevation increase property value by 15% to 20%

    Another point of interest. Number of times I visited Eden Gardens in 2021, 2022, and 2023 I never saw any development proposal prominently displayed. Indeed, whenever I spoke to visitors they were genuinely shocked by this proposal.

11. Appeal against the Sydney North Planning Panel's actual refusal by determination on 19 December 2022 of Development Application for alterations and additions to the existing garden centre and function centre and the construction of an office building and restaurant has been listed for a five (5) day Hearing in the Land and Environment Court
    on 21 August 2023 to 25 August 2023.

    I am one of the invited parties to give evidence to the Court at the on-site component of the Hearing.

    Whilst I support progress when it is reasonable, I see very little benefit of this development.

    Eden Gardens is surrounded by Lane Cove National Park on three sides and Lane Cove Road to the west. The M2 is further away to the south. The only development nearby is on the western side of Lane Cove Road where the buildings are 6 to 8 stories and further south in Macquarie Park.

    There seems to be an oversight in the zoning because there is actually no zoning for the site. The applicant has taken advantage of this and decided to have a go at getting approval for building a commercial tower significantly higher than any other building nearby.

    It appears that main reason for the high-rise development proposal is the commercial failure in gardening business.

    High-rise development at Eden Gardens must not be used as avenue for compensating commercial failures for gardening business. Public should not, and must not be held to ransom so that current owners of Eden Gardens achieve own successes

    Here is my final version of the submission:

    https://www.nswstratasleuth.info/LDA2021-0095-Dusan-Baljevic-submission-17Jul2023.pdf

12. City of Ryde Solicitor advised that, at the initiative of the proponent, the appeal has been postponed to the week beginning 26 February 2024. This is to enable them to submit further which in turn gives rise to opportunity for objectors to resubmit.

    Over-development in the area continues (information from public sources): By February 2024, the Meriton towers under construction at 100 Talavera Road near the Macquarie Centre will be further advanced. The one already built is 27 storeys (88m), the ones coming are 39 storeys (129m), 46 storeys (152m) and 59 storeys (193m).

    Apart from many other concerns that we have already raised against this development, we found another one, which will be present to the court.

    A good precedent case, covering so-called "Implied Right to a Healthy Environment".

    Landmark recognition of human rights and environmental impacts as grounds for a recommendation against the grant of a mining lease:

    Waratah Coal Pty Ltd v Youth Verdict Ltd & Ors (No 6) [2022] QLC 21 (25 November 2022) involved the Land Court of Queensland making recommendations to the [Queensland] Minister for Resources (Minister) and the Chief Executive of the Department of Environment and Science (Chief Executive) on Waratah Coal Pty Ltd's (Waratah) applications for a mining lease and environmental authority to mine thermal coal in the Galilee Basin.

    In regards to this legal case, we will talk about:

    Rights of First Nations people
    Right to protect children
    Right to property
    Right to privacy and home
    Right to enjoy human rights without discrimination

    Overall, the balance weighs against approving the application, taking into account the factors for each of the rights considered.

    The fact that the development site does not impose height limits should not be accepted as valid defense. Laws change frequently, so regulation to prevent high-rise buildings close to national parks is just a matter of time. For the moment, we should accept it as an "implied rule".

    The Tasmanian law restricting protests in Brown (2017), for example, did not come close to single-handedly destroy the Constitution. Nevertheless, the Court was sensitive to how such actions might incrementally or partially affect our rights and privileges. This was enough for it to be deemed in breach of the Implied Freedom of Political Communication.

13. On 11 September 2023, we received a letter (sent on 6 September 2023 by Australia Post) about additional 45 documents that the development proposal submitted.

    Due to extremely tight deadline, we provided a response on 16 September 2023.

    1. We note that the number of changes, including sudden pedestrian bridge was submitted to the court, in spite of it not being part of the original documents, whilst mostly ignoring the original concerns that we raised multiple times.

    The pedestrian bridge is a major new element, the application should be withdrawn and resubmitted as it otherwise is an abuse of legal process.

    2. Based on deep investigations of hidden metadata in the 45 documents we conclude that most of them were prepared on, or around, 5 June 2023. Drastic evidence is even more compelling: Applicant’s document “Tab 4 - Architectural drawings and prepared by
    DKO Architecture.pdf” was prepared on Friday, 26 May 2023 at 14:25 hours. We raise this question:

    Why did Mills Oakley wait till mid-August 2023 to delay the proceedings in Land and Environment Court?

    3. It is questionable if all owners and tenants in large strata plan SP52948 (218 properties) at 1-15 Fontenoy Road, directly facing the proposed development, received this updated information.

    4. 45 files new have total size of staggering 958.3 MB (27 files larger than 1 MB in size individually, and 18 files smaller than 1 MB in size individually). An average person will have difficulties to digest this amount of data.

    5. In Applicant’s document “Tab 12 - Arboricultural development impact assessment report.pdf”, on page 2 and 3, they provide Revision D of this report to specifically address the contentions raised by City of Ryde within the Statement of Facts and Contentions dated 21 December 2022. The number of errors and omissions in their original report is stunning and disappointing. Some of the contentions that the Applicant had to correct from the original proposal:

    a) Proposed level of impact to Tree 162 construction methods were (Eucalyptus racemosa) and Trees 183 and 184 (Angophora costata) is unacceptable.

    b) No assessment of the level of impact ti trees located within LCNP which are situated along the northern boundary of the subject site.

    c) The arborist report incorrectly identifies tree species, provides insufficient justification for impacts and has not been designed in response to the site’s constraints.

    d) Tree 158 noted as dead and wrong species.

    e) Misrepresentation of the level of impact to several trees across the site.

    f) Several instances of species misidentification.

    g) The Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) of Trees 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 115, 116, 120, 121, 125, 126, 130, 131, 135, 136, 149, 150, 151, 152, 177, 180, 181, 182, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 199, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, and 212, are encroached by the proposed construction and required earthworks by a total or major encroachment as defined by AS4970-2009 Protection of Trees on Development Sites. These trees will not be viable to be retained and will be required to be removed due to the proposed development. In addition, The Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) of Trees 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 and 81 are viable to be retained however these trees encroached by proposed revised landscape elements as defined by Realm Studios DA Package dated 19 May 2023 and are proposed for removal as part of the proposed landscape design.

    We categorically state that the number of errors and omissions in their original report is stunning and disappointing. Furthermore, we question the quality and veracity of submissions not only for arboricultural development, but other submissions as well.

    More details at:

    https://www.nswstratasleuth.info/LDA2021-0095-Dusan-Baljevic-submission-16Sep2023.pdf

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to City of Ryde. 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