<strong>66 Wattle Crescent, GLOSSODIA</strong>

Caravan Parks - demolition of Existing dwelling house and sheds, operation of caravan park

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website over 4 years ago. It was received by them 3 days earlier.

(Source: Hawkesbury City Council, reference DA0591/14)

9 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Peter Asmussen commented

    A Caravan Park in Wattle Crescent Glossodia would be completely inappropriate for more reasons than I could describe here.
    I hope that those deciding on this application have the sense to deny this application at the first opportunity.

    I sense that the local community, currently disillusioned with recent revelations of council decision making processes, will not not stand for this development going ahead.

    Over 500 people in 10 hrs have signed on to an online residents group opposing this application. I would expect to see a lot more opposition to this development, and to any council move to support it. I will involve myself fully in this opposition.

    I am involved in the community in many capacities...Rural Fire Service; Soccer Club; and with Glossodia Public School. I pay my rates and ask for no special considerations.

    I do not want this development to go ahead.

  2. Roslyn Stewart commented

    I feel that to approve this application would be very wrong. Already people in the area are going to have to get ready for the subdivision for Jacarandah Ponds. Caravan Parks usually attrack people of lesser standards of living than home owners and im sure the future buyers of Jacarandah Ponds would not be too impressed with this. Also how many times does it have to be brought to councils attention of the lack of infrastructure and services on this side of the river. There is also not enough things to do for people if they dont have a car. Such as if a caravan park is near the river at least people can fish or swim and even if council says they need to build play equipment etc it would be soon vandalised and rendered useless so please think very carefull councellors before saying yes to this application and maybe think of the residents already here who pay rates and will already will be having to live with 580 new homes. Vote no to this application. I

  3. Graham Whitehead commented

    They are calling it a caravan park but the site plan shows the true nature of the proposal - 150 'long term' cabins and not a single space for a caravan. This is a low cost housing proposal dressed up to look like a harmless tourist park.

    Developments like this invariably attract undesirables which results in increased crime in surrounding areas and a lowering of property values.

    If you live in Glossodia or surrounding areas, you need to let Hawkesbury Council know that you don't want this type of housing in your home town.

  4. We don't that caravan park,it's not a holiday destination. commented

    I must agree with all comments above.

    My young family and I love glossy.

    We should not allow this.

    It is not a holiday destination.

    It is a nice quite place lets keep it that way.
    Please vote no !!!

    Matthew Dominello

  5. Mark Logie commented

    My family and I moved to Glossy nearly 6 years ago, I was attracted by the rural aspect, decided it would be a good place live and bring up my children. Great community, quiet and safe.

    My Wife and I strongly disapprove and disagree with the development of a Caravan Park in Glossodia.

    Items of concern for are;
    * The threat of implementing this type of low cost living - will attract undesirable people into our close community. Increase in crime and safety of our children.

    * The lowering of property values - less attractive to potential buyers and people moving into the area.

    * The contrast from our traditional low density living to high density living - A caravan park in a residential street?

    * Insufficient infrastructure to support this development - increased congestion and traffic along transport routes e.g. Bridges an local roads.

    Please take into account our concerns.

  6. Paul Collier commented

    To Whom It May Concern,

    My Family and I moved to Glossodia approximately 2 years ago and love it. My wife and I have been born and breed in the Hawkesbury and have lived here all our lives. The area is one of semi-rural charm and Glossodia is a big part of that. Whoever in there right mind thinks that we have a need for a caravan park in this exact location obviously thinks nothing of this. There is no reason that I can think that putting a "caravan park", which even in its' own admission has provision for 150 Permanent Cabins which no doubt will become home for many undesirable persons (read: Just out of John Moroney Prison type persons). Glossodia has a low crime rate and a 'safe' feel about it, that I am sure will change should this DA go ahead. The bridge at Windsor and surrounding roads barely cope as it is now and adding the extra traffic due to this development will cause even further problems. Why you would want to put this type of development here is beyond me, there is nothing here but residences, no forms of tourist attractions at all, and I am sure that it will stay that way for a long time. I fear that this development will also have a negative effect on housing prices in not only Glossodia but also nearby suburbs.

    Please take the time to review both the DA and the letters submitted and make the correct decision.

    REJECT THIS DA.

    Paul Collier

  7. Steve Hirst commented

    This is a ridiculous proposal
    Operation and the consequent movement of vehicular traffic to and from a 'caravan park' in Wattle Cres is totally inappropriate.
    I sincerely hope Hawkesbury council is savvy enough to realise the significant ongoing negative impacts approval of this development would create

  8. Elle Carter commented

    Agree with everyone above.

    Glad the council has now asked for more information from the developer. Hopefully the council will not just go along with the new info willy nilly like they did with redbank at nth richmond.

    This is a totally inappropriate site for so many people to live on top of one another.

    People who need a) lower cost housing or b) emergency housing have the right to so much more than this ridiculus development offers.

    I have NOT made any donations to HCC. Although you may as well call my rates a donation as I get buggar all back for them!!!

    Elle Carter

  9. linda davies commented

    This application should be approved as blind freddie can see that will never be able to be used as a touring caravan park as its very difficult to get to and dangerous as restricted access leading to thin winding roads, nightmare, We all know that it will become a cheap housing like the one at Wildberforce with the tenants having now way to travel as we have no public travel near there. and please don't even think that by magic the buses will appear as for ten years we have been trying to get more buses to Richmond to no affect. This is nothing else but a cheap land grab to dump social housing in our village. DON'T YOU THINK WE HAVE DONE OUR BIT , Jacaranda ponds will be a major disturbance of the village. the school already has to help the children from San Migual and now you want to put this shanty town on the edge of town. Enough is Enough No More

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts