290 Mowbray Road, Artarmon NSW 2064.

DA for alts/adds to existing dwelling, change of use for long day care facility, provision of through-site drop off and car parking area comprising 21 car spaces

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 1 day earlier.

(Source: Willoughby City Council, reference DA-2014/567)

5 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Susan Clayhills commented

    DA-2014/567 re 290 Mowbray Road, Artarmon

    21/12/2014

    To Whom It May Concern

    An energetic campaign of opposition by a significant number of locals residents was lodged about this property about this time last year in regard to the proposed development of a long day care centre in this suburban street.

    Our opposition was regarding several areas of concern which in fact council totally agreed with and which resulted in the rejection of that DA proposal.

    Issues

    Lack of parking in dead end street ie. access to property is on Stafford Road
    Danger of parking on busy Mowbray Road to drop off children
    Impact on neighbouring streets particularly Muttama Road, Tindale Road and Stafford Road
    Access for emergency vehicles
    Increased volume of traffic along Stafford and Tindale Roads - at peak drop off / collection times - investigated in survey
    OHS and other safety issues with young children at drop off and pickup times
    Noise to neighbouring properties
    Lack of space on property to construct designated driveway for vehicles

    Also how is it possible to have car spaces for 21 cars on this property that would be safe to children when staff do shift work and so arrive and leave at varying times ??

    Thank you for your consideration

    Susan Clayhills

  2. Liam Hudson commented

    To Whom It May Concern

    Tindale Road and Stafford Road already have excessive traffic levels from drivers using that route as a shortcut to bypass Mowbray Road (they transit between Artarmon station and the Mowbray Rd/Sydney St intersection). The traffic volume has become excessive in recent years. These are residential roads, not arterial, and are unsuited to high traffic volume due to their being narrow increasing risks of collision. Stafford Road also has visibility issues due to it's many hills/crests. Putting a massive day care center at the end of the street will significantly increase the traffic/risks to residents and their children (and make no mistake, 85 places is ridiculously large for a residential center. Most are 25-50).

    85 places means a lot of cars in peak hours. I think the council should put the safety of residents and their children first and before the commercial interest of the person wanting to put a business in a street unsuited to the traffic it will generate. Then there's the parking issue. Where are the parents of the 85 children going to park exactly? I'd assume many will park their cars on Tindale Rd and catch the train to work. The 10 customer spaces in the DA is clearly inadequate.

    Given there's already a Hubba Bubba daycare center on Stafford Rd (at the intersection of Sydney St) surely an alternative street is more reasonable rather than expecting residents having to contend with the traffic/parking issues caused by having two large centers on their street. I'm not against residential day care facilities. I myself have a child in day care. But it's simply not safe to put any more traffic on Tindale Road and Stafford Road and the safety of children in the neighbourhood should outweigh other factors.

  3. Steve Mansfield commented

    There seems to be no regard for other road users in the submission, particularly cyclists who use the cycle paths in the area.

    The developers predict an extra 200 vehicles a day in this area, which is substantial, including staff, delivery and waste vehicles, and likely disadvantageous to the very children the centre is supposed to be caring for.

    You should reject the proposal.

  4. Gordon Newell commented

    I've been using the quiet back streets of Artarmon for many years to commute to town for work from Pymble as a cyclist. I have chosen Tindale and the cycle path through Artarmon as it offers some respite from the traffic in other areas. while Tindale is relatively quiet, over the years I have seen a trend for rat running where drivers take no care in other users, be it other drivers, pedestrians (including school children) or cyclists. Many travel at speed and flaunt stop and give way signs.

    The streets while wide enough for two way traffic are not when cars park either side, as is the case at the top of Tindale near Mowbray Road and also towards Artarmon station. This applies to all the local roads in the area. While the traffic is not excessive, the peak times are from around 6:30am - 9am and then in the afternoon. I cannot comment for the peak times but around 5:45pm - 6pm when I pass through, there is generally speeding traffic.

    With the inclusion of a child care centre utilising these quiet streets that Council blocked off many years ago to try and curtail the rat runs, now runs a mockery of Council and how they view the residence.

    The development should be rejected for the following reasons:
    * Narrow streets with inability to allow two way traffic due to parking either side of road
    * Narrow streets not having capacity for increased usage and continual increase in cyclist movements
    * Conflict with peak cyclists usage at the same time as peak usage of the day care centre
    * Development not consistent with residential area
    * Poor street lighting which may not meet code requirements for the high usage of vehicles and pedestrians if day care centre is approved

    Gordon Newell

  5. Chris Perry commented

    I do not think the application should be approved.

    The residential back streets near the proposed development are already difficult to negotiate, with little room for existing parked cars and passing traffic.

    I cycle commute along Tindale each way during the morning and afternoon traffic peaks at times that coincide with the proposed increase in usage.

    Travelling the existing cycle route would become far more hazardous if another 85 or 100 traffic movements were added to the area during a sample 1.5 hour period. With a car going in and coming out, that would be an additional car every 30 seconds.

    Consider the existing situation where it is normally necessary for cars travelling the route to have to stop and wait behind parked cars for passing traffic. Add another car every 30 seconds and you'll possibly have grid lock. Not good for me as a cyclist and not good for the local residents who would like to maintain peace and quiet and a viable way of accessing their own properties.

    What happens if there is a tree down, or some other blockage compounding the grid lock? No one will be able to get in or out.

  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