Recent comments on applications from Canterbury-Bankstown Council, NSW

  1. In Georges Hall NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 40 Lincoln Road Georges Hall NSW 2198:

    Nell Kamensky commented

    This property has over 100 year old native eucalyptus trees on it which are specifically endemic to the area. Along with trees on neighbouring properties, numbers 38 and 42, these trees form a habitat for native flora and fauna, including endangered species and protected flying foxes. These huge trees have a root span exceeding 10 meters in diameter. Developer has requested selective tree removal which will damage root systems of nearby trees thus killing them slowly over years and causing them to collapse on nearby buildings, including the proposed development. It is not possible to remove a tree which is less than 2 meters from another without damaging the latter's root system.

    While development is an unfortunate necessity in a city with ever increasing population, it is very important to consider environmental implications, especially where endemic flora and fauna are involved as it will help to preserve native fauna who lives in these small pockets of trees. We need to consider future generations and ask ourselves, do we really want our children and grandchildren to be brought up in a treeless concrete jungle or do we want them to wake up in mornings under shady native trees to the sounds of birdsong.

  2. In Bankstown NSW on “Demolition & construction...” at 83 North Terrace Bankstown NSW 2200 Australia:

    Zain Alrubai commented

    I think the new upgrade would be great for the suburb of Bankstown. It will bring life back into Bankstown as a CBD for everyone to enjoy. We need Bankstown to compete with suburbs such as Burwood and Parammatta.

  3. In Revesby Heights NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 7 Edinburgh Drive Revesby Heights NSW 2212:

    robert byrne commented

    this will again add more access difficulties to revesby heights.this street is used by the local bus service and they already have difficulties negotiating this street at the best of times but when vehicles are parked illegally on the "no parking" side of the street it is impossible for them to negotiate.it is the same problem in sandakan road,particularly on the weekends and after business hours as the residents know that they will not be fined because there are no council rangers interested during these periods.

  4. In Picnic Point NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 12 Parkview Avenue Picnic Point NSW 2213:

    Kirstie commented

    Parkview Ave is a narrow street with limited parking, particularly "bin nights" is becoming an issue. A construction of yet another dual occupancy in this street will further limit parking options

  5. In Padstow NSW on “Partial demolition of...” at 8 Faraday Road Padstow NSW 2211:

    Tina commented

    SO Australia Post will be closed or moved? Also, is this going to be housing commissions?

  6. In Padstow NSW on “Demolition of an existing...” at 16 Trevone Street Padstow NSW 2211:

    Harry Galanos commented

    I do not approve of this development as it break many of the planning rules, the block has a narrow frontage and the cul-de-sac is already congested in terms of parking.

    Furthermore, there are power lines ans easements along the rear boundary of the property which other land/property owners were advised could not be built on.

  7. In Potts Hill NSW on “Erection of a 2 storey...” at 66 Jones Avenue Potts Hill NSW 2143:

    Allen commented

    What is a CC1 ?

  8. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of all existing...” at 3 Neptune Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    robert byrne commented

    this will further reduce access to the Revesby heights area and street parking to an already overdeveloped street. it would be another poor decision to approve this development.

  9. In Milperra NSW on “Amended plans” at 507 Henry Lawson Drive Milperra NSW 2214:

    Jackie Coleman commented

    Not a lot of detail supplied with the change - "amended plans".
    Can they post more information to their neighbours. Thanks

  10. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing site...” at 66 Victoria Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    Barbara commented

    When will Bankstown council realise that our infrastructure can not deal with the extra building of duplexes or any muilty storey extra buildings

  11. In Revesby Heights NSW on “Demolition of Existing...” at 82 Morotai Road Revesby Heights NSW 2212:

    K Banks commented

    Oppose due to the area not able to sustain an increase in traffic- specifically on Morotai.

  12. In Padstow NSW on “Proposed use of existing...” at 22 Howard Road Padstow NSW 2211:

    Jo commented

    I myself further support what Chloe has said, Padstow is in need of a local creative centre where young people, individuals and families can access and feel proud about where they live. Why not capitalise on it's space and create a thriving place where community groups such as parenting groups, after school groups, young people, cultural groups and the elderly can come to connect with each other and explore their creative interests. Being the Padstow Star cinema building in the 1950s why not pay homage to this and create a local hub thriving with culture in an era which is certainly due to boom in the next few years. The suggestion of having something similar to Hazelhurst Gallery in Gymea is a fantastic one. Why should places such as The Shire or Inner West (as much as I love those two areas for their natural beauty and thriving music, art, cafe and nightlife respectively) have all the good stuff and South West Syd be jammed between the two barely anything? Look at how well 'POD by Peter' has gone since opening up their cafe and bringing something new and exciting to the area. Let's do something fresh and exciting, not recreate the wheel with yet another fitness centre in an area which is clearly ready to open it's arm to something different.

  13. In Padstow NSW on “Proposed use of existing...” at 22 Howard Road Padstow NSW 2211:

    Chloe commented

    I echo the sentiments of the other comments. We already have quite a number of Gyms. I think there is a need for a creative hub/centre in Padstow. A space for youth and the community to enjoy the creative arts (art gallery/theatre/cafe/music events). It would be great if we could turn the space into something similar to Hazelhurst Art Gallery.
    It would also be keeping with the history of the building itself.

  14. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 5 Hydrae Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    K Banks commented

    I oppose this development.
    This street cannot cope with anymore traffic!

  15. In Picnic Point NSW on “Construct new two storey...” at 14 Sylvan Grove Picnic Point NSW 2213:

    Graham Thorne commented

    This is a bush fire prone area. Please ensure that building code AS3959 is met. It need to have access to both sides of dwelling. This one of the narrower blocks in Sylvan Grove I have a concern that a dual occupancy would be a over sized building for this block.

  16. In Greenacre NSW on “Temporary outdoor food...” at 239 Roberts Road Greenacre NSW 2190:

    Mohamad Bilal commented

    To Canterbury Bankstown Council,
    I am the owner occupant of 208 Roberts Road Greenacre and I am writing to advise my view of the proposed development application to allow food trucks on 239 Roberts Road Greenacre. I wish to advise that I object to this proposal for the following reasons:
    1. We are within a 100-200 meter radius of the proposed location of the food trucks and will no doubt suffer the noise of large crowds and noise from the food trucks leaving and arriving. This is in addition to the noise of the traffic and trucks that pass by our property every hour of every day. My family and I are struggling with the noise of traffic which has increased significantly since I purchased the property in the early 1990s.
    2. Roberts Road is a dangerous and busy road and the footpath is too narrow to safely allow for the increased amount of pedestrians. Although the access gate will be on Moondoo Street, pedestrians will access the gate on foot via Roberts Road.

    Thank you for taking my comments into consideration.

  17. In Revesby NSW on “Use of level 1 of existing...” at 32 Marco Avenue Revesby NSW 2212:

    robert byrne commented

    it would be a good idea to explain what use the tutoring rooms would be used for what type of tutoring.tutoring covers a wide range of rather indescript subjects.when the explicit use of the premises is not explained fully,it would appear that either the applicant or the council are attempting to hide something.

  18. In on “Subdivision of land into...” at 56 Prescott Parade Milperra NSW 2214:

    Mark Horsnell commented

    I am totally against this development.

    This will have a major impact on all residents within the district. There is simply not enough infrastructure for this development. We already have traffic problems on Henry Lawson Drive from Milperra Road to the M5.
    What about the extra traffic in the local streets, including past the primary school? What impact will this have on our already slow water pressure and congested telephone/broadband connections? There are also flood issues around the Riverlands Golf Course.
    This development would add at least two more cars per dwelling and we are talking around 241 dwellings. This would be an absolute gridlock and an environmental disaster. Not to mention the trees, animal life and birdlife which currently exist there. The community of Milperra is horrified as to what could happen to our safe and quiet suburb! We are totally against this development!
    Look at the other side of Milperra with the university development and the traffic issues there.
    Way to many houses and right at my back fence

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

    Sandra commented

    I strongly oppose this development due to lack of foresight on the impact on surrounding streets in our community. Who in their right mind would build a complex for 106 residents and only provide 12 parking spaces. Just because residents may be low income earners doesn't mean they don't own a car. This complex is in close proximity to the high school so this alone will cause parking issues.
    It stands to reason that extra cars will park in the south side of Mackenzie St as well as surrounding streets and will add to the already choked Louie St. Try driving down these narrow streets when people are home from work.
    Already in our streets there are multiple duplexes being built which has had a huge impact on parking in our narrow streets. There are a number of families in my area that own at least 3-4 cars.
    Please reject this planning application .

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

    Jim Kokla commented

    To the planning authority,
    I strongly oppose this development for the following reasons
    As residents we will need to deal with the increase of traffic, pollution and noise on a daily basis. This will mean that our children will not be able to ride their bikes or play outside. This also poses a risk to our elderly and school children who walk locally each day. To believe that the number of parking spots is sufficient is a joke. How many people commute by motorcycle or bicycle as their main means of transportation and what if there is more than one vehicle? Congestion! Property value decreases with low-income, affordable housing and boarding houses unfortunately, this is a fact. I understand that affordable housing is a need but these rooms should be built in areas that can accommodate it without impacting its community and it does impact ours.
    We purchase our homes we have a 30 year mortgage and to have a developer decide he wants to put 53 boarding rooms on a block that does not meet requirements with the site frontage is wrong. Neighbours want to build a duplex have been informed by council that they are unable to proceed as they are just short of the minimum frontage requirement. Please be fair. After living in the inner west for many years we were attracted to the area because of it's wildlife and trees and remove 25 will be a loss to our environment.

    I ask that council please reject the application

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

    Trevor Davies commented

    I am against the approval of DA589/2017 at Mackenzie Street

    I have lived in the Padstow area for 42 years and have concerns over the increased congestion within the area caused by new developments such as the one proposed at Mackenzie St.

    New duplex approvals for the area provide parking for one vehicle per family - how many families have one vehicle these days? Any additional vehicles are parked on the street making two way traffic flow in the area a thing of the past.

    Try getting a park in Padstow and Revesby shopping centres in peak times.

    In the past our neighbours could not get council approval to have trees (considered to be dangerous because of age) removed from their property. One of those trees eventually came down during a storm and landed on their roof. Of course all repair costs were borne by the neighbour. Where is the consistency in council policy when 25 trees are approved to be removed to make way for a Boarding House?

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

    samer makkouk commented

    The proposed development at 12 Mackenzie st Revesby DA 589/2017 for a boarding house. I oppose this development.

    It will severely impact the residents in the street I am located very close to this development only some houses away and have 3 kids under 2 years of age it is already a busy street so with the addition of at least another 80 cars on average there will be an increase of traffic to and from this development, not only during the development process but post development with over 100 new resident, this will also impose on the safety of the school kids that walk to and from school on a daily basis with the increase in traffic will most certainly increase the risk of an accident in a 40 zoned area. Turvey street and streets surrounding are not suitable for such developments. A factor that also plays a big part in opposing this development I can probably speak for a lot of home owners is the fact we work hard to pay our mortgage off and have pride in where we live then for some development to take place without the communities consent and de-value the aussie dream of owning a home and being able to use that equity as your retirement. History in the market has shown a decrease in house prices in areas of low-income, affordable housing and boarding houses.

    It is a way to manipulate the system where the land isn't sufficient in size to occupy all the opposed properties in a normal DA so the developer has gone down the path of boarding homes and affordable living scheme its really a win win for the developer as he gets more properties on his site, higher profits and government incentives and doesn't need to live anywhere next to this development. I think its a absolute joke, the system should be designed in a way where it cant get manipulated by government funded schemes.

    to sum up I strongly oppose this development for the reasons mentioned above as well as other factors please put a stop to this very unhealthy housing growth in Sydney metropolitan areas.

    thanks

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

    Melissa Pereira commented

    To the planning authority,

    I strongly oppose this development. For the following reasons:

    To try and nearly triple the number of boarding rooms and only offer an additional 3 extra car spots is absurd. The area will cause chaos with parking and the additional traffic. To suggest that there will also be bicycle and motorcycle areas to assist is even more absurd Will all applicants be screened on how they commute ? I think not.

    We purchased our home in 2011 - what attracted us to the area was the number of trees and birds .To remove 25 trees is a loss to our environment, wildlife and our community.

    When we built our home we had to make a number of changes in order to comply to privacy regulations, I hope council will reject the application so the residents in Wolaroi Crescent can maintain theirs.

    Thank you

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

    Andrew k commented

    The proposed development at 12 Mackenzie st Revesby DA 589/2017 for a boarding house. I oppose this development . The reasons are listed below ;

    * This development does not even qualify for a Boarding House In the Canterbury / Bankstown guidelines . The Minimum Frontage required is 20 Meters . This development is only 18.29 meters and would send a dangerous precedent to all applications lodged with this council if the minimum requirements are ignored or not met .

    * The Scope and scale of this development is out of character for this area.

    * This development proposes an access path through Wolaroi Crescent is currently a quiet cul-de-sac street . These residents bought in this street because it is a quiet and peaceful street . The addition of hundreds of people daily using this quiet cul-de -sac as a thoroughfare would infringe on these residents' privacy, creating noise and parking issues. .
    * This development would affect the residents resale value of their homes in close proximity to this development ,

    * The Revesby area is renowned for its trees and bird life . This development wants to cut down 25 established trees which are mostly Australian native trees and which have become home to many wildlife . These Trees are vital to this area as it also creates a buffer zone from the M5 motorway .

    * Residents privacy in Wolaroi Crescent would be severely impacted as this development proposes to build two story row houses only a few meters from their rear boundary line.
    What about the line of sight buffer zones for these residents and their right to privacy .

    * This development would cause traffic, parking chaos and noise problems with an extra 106 residents on a daily basis. There is also a high school across the road with cars entering and exiting the street and would be quite hazardous for students using that walkway/path.

    This clearly is not in the best interests for residents in the suburb or the community.

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

    violet commented

    My family and I strongly oppose this, we have lived in Revesby area 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.

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

    Daniel Laus commented

    My family and I strongly oppose this and request council to reject DA-589/2017.
    To put such a complex in such a cramped surrounding is just asking for problems not to mention the environmental impact by removing 25 native trees.
    Please let common sense prevail and scrap this plan!

  27. 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.

  28. 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.

  29. 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.

  30. 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.

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