Recent comments on applications from Canterbury-Bankstown Council, NSW

  1. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Ali Khan commented

    My family and I strongly oppose this, we have lived here for over fifteen years and it has slowly become more and more congested already. This project will increase congestion exponentially and more importantly will have an adverse impact on the value of our properties in an economy where we simply cannot afford it.

    Please reconsider for the actual residents of the community you represent rather than for whoever put this forth to make a buck.

  2. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Janina Manalese commented

    To whom it may concern,

    My family and I strongly oppose this development application due to the impact it will have in the area and surrounding streets.

    The number of units and residents it will house will result in congesting the surrounding streets with vehicles due to the low number of parking spaces being provided. Please consider how overpopulated the streets will become and where will these cars park specially on days of garbage collection when the footpaths will be filled with the red and yellow/green bins. The garbage trucks needs the roads in front of footpaths to be clear of cars in order to empty the rubbish bins.

    The removal of 25 trees is a great loss to the environment as well as the local wildlife that have already been affected by the m5 widening. Property owners with trees on their lots are required to meet strict conditions with tree removals so to remove 25 for this development should be prohibited.

    I am also concerned of the noise and overcrowding in the area. There have been a lot of duplexes being built over the past few years and a development of this size will contribute to overcrowding specially in such a small street.

    With the location being right across from a school the size of the development is unreasonable and impractical.
    Also, developing a low-income, affordable housing will decrease the value of properties in the area.

  3. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    CAROL GROOM commented

    My family and I oppose the development at Mackenzie Street. The area cannot accommodate overcrowding with more vehicles, not enough parking, not enough infrastructure. The surrounding streets have no parking now let alone vehicles for 106 more residents. Cutting down of 25 trees, when the Council does not let us trim trees...one has to question this! Money talks so they say.....it is very suspicious.
    This area just cannot accommodate a development of this size and Council should re-evaluate the impact this will cause both environmentally, socially and the local community. Council should decline this application.

  4. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Wing Kwong Yu commented

    My family and I oppose the development at Mackenzie Street. There are already too many duplexes in Revesby and Padstow and this has congested the streets when it comes to street parking.

  5. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Ngoc Nguyen commented

    My family and I strongly oppose to this development.
    We have been leaving on this street since 2003 and have always known to be very quiet residential street .Since the development of duplexes grew in time has made the street very busy and congested already because of the off-street parking. With another 106 families propose for this dwelling will create more congested and will create unsafe area to live in.

  6. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    P.Baarendse commented

    To the Planners,

    My family and I oppose this development which will cause traffic jams and adverse environmental impact. 106 residents requiring some sort of parking requirements doesn't equate to 12 car spaces. Realistically 106/4 for average tenancy per unit equates to 26.5 spaces minimum. This doesn't include visitors parking.
    My family has enough trouble getting out of the driveway let alone having the overflow of motor cars parking in front of my house making exiting my property a safety concern.
    Too much development of duplexes has made this suburb overcrowded.
    Please take into consideration THAT the developer is not GOING to live here with the mess his created but council will get an ongoing complaints on all topics.

  7. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Daniel Domenici commented

    My family and I are opposed to this development application. The area is already far too congested for development of this nature. Twelve car spots allocated for up to a hundred and six residents is clearly not suitable. A DA was rejected by Sutherland shire council for a boarding house for up to forty residents across from a child care center. The council stated the application 'did not evaluate social impact' and would 'erode the existing character of the zone through cumulative social effects'. This application is far larger, in a smaller area, across from a school. The social impacts on the area will be tremendous and are completely unreasonable. It is the councils responsibility to consider the needs of the local community and act with integrity. This development will result in far too many negative outcomes. In addition to the logistical issues, there is the environmental issue of cutting down 25 trees. Regular citizens are required to jump through council hoops to cut down or even simply prune trees. For an DA to be approved to cut down 25 trees clearly brings into question the councils integrity regarding environmental matters.

  8. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Joe Martin commented

    My family and I oppose this development which will cause traffic jams and adverse environmental impact.

  9. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Stewart Burke commented

    My Family and I total oppose this.
    The congestion in this area is already bad enough and a school in close proximity is just dangerous.

  10. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Pat Kuluris commented

    This neighbourhood is already congested with all the duplexes. In addition the increase of duplexes and decreased the number of street parking spots due to the multiple driveways and the increasing challenge of adding "no stopping" signs in the narrow streets. Many people have chosen this location due to it being so residential and we are overpopulated with an infrastructure that cannot support it. The quite residential streets that many of us have invested in are now becoming busier than some of the main roads surrounding us as more and more people are cutting through our narrow streets to avoid the already congested traffic. Some of us are already dealing with the increased noise from widening the M5, how much more do we want to decrease the value of our properties. I urge the council to reject this application and keep the area as a residential one and avoid removing the greenery that helps the environment.

  11. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Khaled Chmali commented

    My family and I strongly opposed DA-589/2017. It is a 'cash-cow' development that will severely impact on neighbouring residents.

    1) Street parking is already limited, in Mackenzie Street and surrounding streets.

    2) There will be additional overcrowding and increased pressure on existing resources and facilities.

    3) I currently have a tree overhanging above my property from the neighbour's yard, it looks like the leaning tower of Pisa, is always thudding large branches on our garage, cars and roof and fear that it will give way and fall one day. I applied to Council to have the tree cut down, with owner's consent, but Council refused. But in this instance, the Council seems all to happy to 'do away' with 25 OTHER trees for the proposed development. The environment is ever so scared, until...money starts to talk!

    4) Common sense suggests that if you want to propose a development you should provide residents with sufficient parking spaces. But seriously? 34 spaces for personal transport and if people don't own a motorcycle or bicycle that essentially means 12 car spaces. Worse still, what about those households who own more than 1 vehicle? Oh, the chaos this will create!

    In short, very strong opposition to this DA application.

  12. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Leanne masetto commented

    This da will put the immediate area under stress. Bare minimum parking is being provided and already the street has parking only along one side leaving no option but to impact surrounding streets to park. I object to 25 of the 27 trees being removed. What happens to our native birds who have only just returned since M5 widening. The size of this development will stand out in a R2 low density. Don't ruin our area any more with such da.

  13. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Leonie Robinson commented

    I strongly oppose this development. This area is already overcrowded with duplexes and parking is scarce already in Padstow and Revesby shopping areas. It is already difficult to even drive down the street where I live because of cars parked.

    I therefore ask that the Canterbury Bankstown Council reject DA-589/2017.

  14. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Leigh Killorn commented

    To whom it may concern
    This proposal will severely impact on the surrounding residents.
    Currently there are 19 single units on the property and the existing tenants regularly take up all of the parking available on this small street.
    To potentially nearly triple the amount of cars requiring off street parking is not only unrealistic but it lacks simple common sense.
    The proposed building could also house nearly 5 times the amount of residents which currently live at the property, this alone would have a severe impact on the residents who currently live in this small quiet cul de sac.
    Thank you

  15. In Revesby Heights NSW on “Proposed change of use of...” at 1 Donovan Street Revesby Heights NSW 2212 Australia:

    M & I commented

    I love the quiet family oriented Revesby Heights that exists now. We want a place to raise our kids, that is safe to travel around and without high traffic congestion.

    I oppose the DA application for a number of reasons
    1. With the number of duplex houses being built it's already higher density living
    2. The build would bring in people from out of area which would further congest the streets
    3. It wouldn't be safe for kids to ride bikes or scooter the streets due to congestion
    4. The concept of a community centre should benefit the residents who live there - this proposal doesn't do this

    Please do not allow this DA to be approved and ruin a beautiful neighbourhood

  16. In Punchbowl NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 96 Columbine Avenue Punchbowl NSW 2196:

    S & M Fernandez commented

    Pratten lane is already congested with multiple vehicles that need access in and out of their properties at all times of the day and night. Council garbage pick up also doesn't happen on a regular basis due to this very reason and because the Lane way is already too tight. The residents have previously opposed this project due to the current congestion problem and the inconvenience this will cause to the residents. Having the builders construct from pratten lane will only worsen the problem, cause more complaints and litter the lane way with more junk.
    This is one of the concessions that was provided on granting the application that pratten lane is not blocked during the construction phase.
    This new amendment appears to reverse what we all agreed on.

  17. In Condell Park NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 56 William Street Condell Park NSW 2200:

    Gary Jorgensen commented

    This regards the Property at 56 William street Condell Park.

    We have seen the plans lodged on your application site as we are related to a neighbour of a property next to the property, the construction of the new dwellings does not correspond with the plans, it appears to us the double storey unit at the back is being constructed on the actual common property as per the plans, therefore does comply with the original plans lodged and approved, and noted your application site, please advise the property is currently under construction, when will their be a inspection by a the planning department from the council. Also please advise if there is any plans lodged but not noted on the a[[plication site, thank you for help in this situation as they are under immense stress as they are actually going through a terminating illness which only adds the their stress, this can be verified with documents,, thanks again...

  18. In Bankstown NSW on “Change of use from...” at 12 Eldridge Road Bankstown NSW 2200:

    Ross Wilson commented

    No to this as how many Health rooms are they having also where are they going to park as there os no parkong now.
    And when the building next door gets finished it will be a lot worse.

  19. In Padstow NSW on “Change of Use of an...” at 15 Enterprise Avenue Padstow NSW 2211 Australia:

    Donna Watson commented

    The Land & Environment court said it was not to be used as a place of worship. Why has this changed?
    As a local resident for the past 40 years I have embraced the multiculturalism in our area as a positive thing. The objections to this Mosque in Enterprise Ave are purely against the position of such a development, (traffic, accessibility for traffic flow, parking, interference to business owners, noise, disruption to school area, disruption for residence & safety) these points have been addressed by the Chamber of Commerce for many years with council regarding changes & developments all over the Padstow Area. It seems that our new Council -"Canterbury Bankstown" for which we have not yet voted for due to forced amalgamation, does not represent the rate payers nor consult nor listen to any concerns. Putting a development of this magnitude, which will attract enormous numbers of people & vehicles, into a dead end street with one entrance/exit is beyond belief. Watson Road has enough traffic issues without adding 5000 more...........
    Can I also mention that this "place of worship"appears to be up and running as my husband drove home from work 20.6.2017 at 8.30pm and entered Watson Road from Davies Road. Reaching the roundabout at Watson Road and Enterprise he was met with a stream of cars and pedestrians Why don't we take away all the sensitive issues & look at this from a common sense perspective & make the right decisions for the area...it is not a suitable site for something of this size which is a 7 days a week establishment.

  20. In Padstow NSW on “Change of Use of an...” at 15 Enterprise Avenue Padstow NSW 2211 Australia:

    Richard Blight commented

    There are strict limits on Places of Public Worship in residential areas - limiting floor space to 400 sq. m. and requiring significant car parking based on size (1 space per 8 sq. m), in order to limit impacts on neighbours. These limits seem to be ignored for developments within industrial areas even when the site is very close to residential areas. In this case the site is within 500m of a residential area and is in a cul-de-sac which opens onto a residential street. The scale of this development is excessive in this area and I therefore oppose the proposed it unless it is revised to be within the requirements for PPW's in residential areas.

  21. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 14 Ferndale Road Revesby NSW 2212:

    Marianna commented

    Fernandale St and Clive St are already congested with traffic due to drop offs at De La Salle college. Living in Clive St we deal with this problem everyday, our street is narrow as it is and this will just double the amount of traffic and will cause accidents due view obstructions when driving in and out of these 2 streets. I personally think there is no need for another child care centre in our area. There are 2 centres located on River Rd alone, which are included in the list of the 20 child care centres in Revesby and surrounding areas. We don't need anymore noise and congestion in our street.

  22. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 14 Ferndale Road Revesby NSW 2212:

    Volker commented

    I highly disagree with another childcare facility opening up especially when there are plenty in the area. Ferndale road is very congested and does not need another contributor. It is bad enough with parents parking on the street and the side streets bottle necking the flow of traffic. On numerous occasions I have witnessed parents parking across residential driveways including my own and have had to advise them to move on. Student drivers have increased thus also contributing to the parking congestion.
    On a few occasions I have encountered students running across Ferndale road into oncoming traffic, what traffic management is in play?
    It is a traffic nightmare. Parents picking up and dropping off their kids, parked buses and inconsiderate people who park right on the corner of the side streets making it difficult to merge onto Ferndale road.
    This is a safety hazard and Ferndale road is used like one of the main arteries of revesby.

  23. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 14 Ferndale Road Revesby NSW 2212:

    Suzi commented

    A Childcare in the same street as a high school within few meters will congest the street specially for those who drop their children at the same time. We have to consider traffic and safety of children walking in this street. There is only a footpath on one side of the street being the highschool, and not for the side of intended childcare. The traffic entering and exiting this facility will not only strain the traffic but cause a dangerous situation for those using the footpath and as well as drivers on the road.

  24. In Picnic Point NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 23 Kennedy Street Picnic Point NSW 2213 Australia:

    Suzie commented

    This is much needed. It is in a perfect location, street has curbside parking, a footpath and is down the road from a school zone.
    Please support this proposal for an extension of an already fantastic centre,
    I understand residents are concerned about the increased traffic on Kennedy Street. There will not be another 29 families coming to this childcare centre, but mainly existing families having their children at centres across the street from each other. It is such a convenience rather than traveling to various centres with different opening times and closing times, which for some families is a difficulty and task in itself. There are parents for whom it is a necessity for their children to be in care whilst the parent works. This is a solution to be at the one location effectively.

  25. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 14 Ferndale Road Revesby NSW 2212:

    Sue commented

    There are currently lots of childcare centres within close proximity to this proposed site (there are centres on Kennedy St, Richard St, River Rd, Ramsay Rd) that all have some type of availability such as the service found at centre on River Rd, this currently has availability. This new proposed site on ferndale is going to be a traffic nightmare with many parents conducting dropoffs for De La Salle college, plus bus stops on this already congested road Ferndale Rd, which is very narrow with the inclusion of street parking. During pickups and drop offs there is alot of double parking and even parking infront of residents driveways which clearly should not happen!! if the centre were to go ahead, traffic will be at a standstill at those locations especially on the turn off River rd into Ferndale, intersections of Clive St and Ferndale and Kinross Place and Ferndale. Traffic and impact of the centre needs to be considered. There are no major street crossings or zebra crossings on this road, as well as no footpath of where the centre is to be located. It is appalling that local residents were not informed of such a proposal. Surely more than just the direct neighbours should be notified. Turning out of side streets into ferndale is already a task where the driver has limited visibility when turning onto ferndale due to already parked vehicles on sides of roads, and is a main issue that results the driver having to creep out into path of oncoming traffic to ascertain if its safe to turn. This added change will definitely impact local residents and be cause of concern. This centre should not go ahead when there are a vast number of centres in Revesby . https://www.careforkids.com.au/child-care/revesby/2212 shows 17 out of 20 centres in the local area have availabilities. With various centres offering long and short day care. Therefore there should not be a need to establish a new one with so many centres that can accept new children.

  26. In Revesby Heights NSW on “Change of use to academic...” at 148 Centaur Street Revesby Heights NSW 2212:

    Grace, Revesby Heights commented

    Whilst I welcome the addition of a tutoring centre to Revesby Heights, parking is non-existant in this area. If the council approves this, they must dispatch rangers and enforce breaking of parking codes as often cars are left for the whole weekend in one hour parking zones. There are multiple businesses here that require the parking in a very small area as well as a new apartment block on top of the small block of shops which already has residents parking on the street. The local bus (at times) cannot travel up the required streets due to cars parking on the "no parking" side of the street and there have been many disputes with neighbours in this region with clients of the shops parking on, over, or completely blocking driveways. The council MUST do more if this cafe is approved.

  27. In Revesby Heights NSW on “Fitout of Cafe (First Use)...” at 19 / 134 Centaur Street Revesby Heights NSW 2212:

    Grace, Revesby Heights commented

    Whilst I welcome the addition of a cafe to Revesby Heights, parking is non-existant in this area for a cafe. If the council approves this, they must dispatch rangers and enforce breaking of parking codes as often cars are left for the whole weekend in one hour parking zones. There are multiple businesses here that require the parking in a very small area as well as a new apartment block on top of the proposed cafe which already has residents parking on the street. The local bus (at times) cannot travel up the required streets due to cars parking on the "no parking" side of the street and there have been many disputes with neighbours in this region with clients of the shops parking on, over, or completely blocking driveways. The council MUST do more if this cafe is approved.

  28. In Padstow NSW on “Change of Use of an...” at 15 Enterprise Avenue Padstow NSW 2211 Australia:

    Greg Exton commented

    Due to the increase in tragic this is a inappropriate development for the area the infrastructure(roads) can not cope now with all the extra traffic that comes down Watson road and feeds out onto Fairford road/Davies road which is the main roads for the traffic to Menai and going to Bankstown
    The factories in Enterprise ave employee local people
    The school Padstow North Primary backs onto the development this will severely affect the children at the school

  29. In Padstow NSW on “Change of Use of an...” at 15 Enterprise Avenue Padstow NSW 2211 Australia:

    Jim Sillato commented

    I would like to lodge my disapproval of this application on many grounds, firstly it was only supposed to accommodate around 150 people and wasn't supposed to be used as a place of worship, but they have bought up a joining properties know full well they were going to expand and keep going until they get what they want.
    5000 worshippers is unacceptable for this area or almost any suburban area, traffic congestion, unacceptable noise, parking problems, to name but a few.
    Everywhere their is a mosque their is social upheaval and issues with local residents who only wish to live in peace, with the upheaval brought about by that many people descending on the local area.
    this will severely change the demographics and the fabric of the whole area.
    This development should be opposed and left as just a meeting hall as was originally approved

  30. In Padstow NSW on “Change of Use of an...” at 15 Enterprise Avenue Padstow NSW 2211 Australia:

    Vickie Cachia commented

    Can someone please explain how a change to this development is even being considered, when the Land & Environment court said it was not to be used as a place of worship !!!!!!!!!!!
    As a business owner in Padstow for 20 years, I have embraced the multiculturalism in our area as a positive thing. The objections to this Mosque in Enterprise Ave are purely against the position of such a development, (traffic, accessibility for traffic flow, parking, interference to other business owners, noise, disruption to school area, disruption for residence & safety) these points have been addressed by the Chamber of Commerce for many years with council regarding changes & developments all over the Padstow Area. It seems that our Council does not represent the rate payers nor consult nor listen to any concerns. Putting a development of this magnitude, which will attract enormous numbers of people & vehicles, into a dead end street with one entrance/exit is PURE LUNACY............Watson Road has enough traffic issues without adding 5000 more...........Why don't we take away all the sensitive issues & look at this from a common sense perspective & make the right decisions for the area...it is not a suitable site for something of this size which is a 7 days a week establishment.

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