PlanningAlerts

2 Comments

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

1. This development will increase traffic and introduce a new type of traffic to this road.

   INCREASED TRAFFIC
   a) Geilston Bay Road is already suffering because of traffic resulting from dense development of former agricultural land.
   b) The construction of the road - originally gravel - was never intended to support as many vehicles as it presently does.
   c) Despite increased pedestrian use – i.e. increased population, school children accessing public transport on East Derwent Highway, younger children using skateboard, bike track, and sporting facilities generally, walking groups and clubs - there are no footpaths.
   d) There are already difficulties with access to East Derwent Highway caused by increased development, increased heavy vehicle traffic from xxxx bridge and by parental traffic from Lindisfarne North Primary School. The introduction of holiday vehicles to this area is clearly inappropriate and potentially dangerous.
   NEW TYPE OF TRAFFIC
   a) Any development of holiday cabins will attract not only increased traffic, but potentially also caravans and lifestyle/holiday trailers. Common sense would indicate that holiday makers often plan to use a caravan/ motor home in conjunction with cabin accommodation at various points in their journey. This road will not support such vehicles in terms of either width or road construction.
   b) Tarmac width varies from 4.8 to 6.1 metres - guttering on only one side – no footpaths. Current Australian guidelines recommend traffic lane widths of 3.5m as standard. This report finds that lanes below 3.5 metres can operate successfully provided that attention is paid to the local circumstances.
   c) At present if a car is parked on the roadside, the narrow character of the road means that some vehicles already have difficulty proceeding. The road becomes a single carriageway and a very narrow one at that.

   I believe it is vital that the Council take account of the current extensive use of this park and foreshore; remembering that current users, including those who live in the area, are as worthy of consideration as developers or potential tourists.

2. Any idea what the name of the company proposing this is?

   Ive read the council minutes where the proposal was rejected, doesnt seem to have a name though... :(

Have your say on this application

You're too late! The period for officially commenting on this application finished almost 7 years ago. If you chose to comment now, your comment will still be displayed here and be sent to the planning authority but it will not be officially considered by the planning authority.

Your comment and details will be sent to Clarence City Council. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment