67 Oak Drive Georges Hall NSW 2198

Proposed demolition of existing dwelling and construction of single 2 storey dwelling

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Canterbury-Bankstown Council, reference DA-198/2017)

2 Comments

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

  1. spiro jakas commented

    it appears from the shadow diagram that at 3pm half of my residence will be in shadow and at 4pm all will be in the shadow of the proposed residence including the backyard. This in my opinion will increase the heating costs of my residence and the drying of clothes will become an issue. its appears that this residence will have neither of these problems but it appears it will create them for us. The present home is 2 meter from the fence, single story, the proposed home will be less than a meter from the fence and two stories.
    I am also concerned of the excavation which will take place along the boundary fence which appears to be up to 2 meters deep. Will the subsequent retaining wall stop the flow of the natural ( rain ) water run off and be re direct towards my property. My home of 46 years has never had a problem of water under the house and i suggest that if an efficient drainage is not in place i may have a water problem. who is responsible if this occurs ?
    who is responsible for any damage to the current fence, cracks in the outside and inside walls.

  2. spiro jakas commented

    i have read the statement of environmental several times and i wish to have the following points explained please.
    1.over shadowing having marginal impact on side neighbouring property. . It is now 2.39 on the 9-4-2017 i have full light no shadowing. the shadow diagram as i understand it shows from 2.pm will creep across and by 4.pm cover the whole house and yard. i do not consider this as marginal. the court yard of 69 will receive 50% sunlight for more than 3 hours. Who came to that decision. Its obvious they haven't lived here for 46 years.
    Their private space and i quote"carefully considered to maximise sunlight." go from maximise to marginal impact.
    it is admitted that the design will minimise the overshadowing impact on our living it's 3.pm there is no shadowing at all, hasn't been for 46 years. minimise nothing at this stage.
    The current property single story (67)on the eastern starts 12 meters from the front boundary, 2 meters from the fence (eastern) side. Therefore no shadowing. The new premises is 6 meters from the front boundary and less than 1 meter from the side fence
    Right now i can see the sky and there is plenty of light in the living room and kitchen.
    from the plans, that will go and i will look out to a 9 meter high wall plus the roof height, 6 meters longer, 54square meters of wall plus roof.. That logically will cut down the light considerably. please explain how that can be a marginal impact.
    Marginal " Amount allowed beyond what is necessary " who decided what is necessary
    for my living standards this case?
    it appears that the conclusion was made by someone who does not live here.
    I still have great concerns about the retaining wall and drainage.
    It is now 3.30pm still no shadowing. this development will put an end to that according to the shadow diagram.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Canterbury-Bankstown 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

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is part of the digital library from the local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small 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