Recent comments on applications from City of West Torrens, SA

  1. In Kurralta Park SA on “Combined Land division -...” at 14 Basnett Street, Kurralta Park SA 5037:

    YiZhong Zhuang commented

    Please ensure that these are not going to be baking hot in summer and freezing in winter, necessitating use of airconditioning. Make sure there is adequate shading and natural light.

  2. In Plympton SA on “Combined Land division -...” at 26 Wheaton Road, Plympton SA 5038:

    YiZhong Zhuang commented

    Ensure the dwellings are properly insulated with shade trees, double glazing, efficient appliances, and natural light.

  3. In Camden Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Morphett Road, Camden Park SA 5038:

    Ian commented

    As we border on the fenceline to this property. My concerned is, if the fenceline is to be removed & is only a temp see through fence (chain fence) the following will happen whilst building.
    1. We will be open to the elements of the weather.
    2. Be exposed to all traffic on the around about heading south, east & west.
    3. Further more would render our rear yard & driveway insecure & with no privacy what so ever.
    We spend a fair amount of time in the yard, this would affect our every day living & health.
    If the development can take this on board we would be grateful, as we have gone through this development problem around our premises in the past.

  4. In Plympton SA on “Land division - Torrens...” at 43 Wheaton Road, Plympton SA 5038:

    Penny Raven commented

    As owner is aware after our land was surveyed at their request and we paid for, the rear boundary fence is incorrectly placed. This fenceline will need to be corrected by them at their cost as we have corrected half the boundary at our cost already.

  5. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 120 Marion Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Jackie Fulham commented

    Please ensure that there is adequate parking on site. Residential streets are already getting congested by staff who work at businesses located on Sir Donald Bradman Drive and Marion Road due to insufficient on-site parking.

  6. In Plympton SA on “S10 - Demolition of...” at 1B Glenburnie Terrace, Plympton SA 5038:

    Julienne Lenain commented

    Totally agree with the above comments. For good physical and mental health, and a sense of well being, people need enough space to be able to relax among green surroundings, not buildings crammed on top of/next to each other.
    We have an excellent opportunity to make Adelaide a desirable, liveable city. The new Planning and Design Code needs to be completely rethought in the light of Covid-19!

  7. In Plympton SA on “S10 - Demolition of...” at 1B Glenburnie Terrace, Plympton SA 5038:

    Cathy H commented

    Imagine social distancing in a situation like this. 32 families packed in....We need to rethink NOW the new buildings that are going up in Adelaide. And especially along the Anzac Hwy and adjacent roads....Look at the places around the world where there are people packed in on top of each other...eg...Italy, Spain, New York. Will more and more high rises make it more difficult to keep the population healthy.

  8. In Thebarton SA on “Removal of significant tree...” at 5 Filsell Street, Thebarton SA 5031:

    Vanessa Goodhand commented

    Please accept that this tree is important for the neighbourhood in so many ways. Do not let development effect it’s ability to continue to thrive. Too many trees have a shortened life span. And new replacement trees rarely survive past a few years.

  9. In North Plympton SA on “Construction of a two...” at 8 Packard Street, North Plympton SA 5037:

    Sarah C commented

    This is too many dwellings to replace one decent house. It will be ugly and provide no benefits to the area, but many negatives in the look of the street, parking issues, lack of privacy for neighbours, and too high a population density. There will be no garden space for the residents. They will have to hover next to the road with their children in the evening to allow them to play outside for an hour, like all the Indians who live in cream brick apartments. This is bad for our standard of living.

  10. In Plympton SA on “S10 - Demolition of...” at 1B Glenburnie Terrace, Plympton SA 5038:

    Sarah C commented

    This is horrible and should not be allowed. It is far too high, far too many people, and far to small to support so many people. It does not fit with the area. The only reason to build this is greed. It provides nothing but negatives to the area.

  11. In Mile End SA on “Construction of a 5-storey...” at 6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Sarah C commented

    This would be terrible. It would not fit with the area and would have a negative effect on the area while providing no positives.

  12. In Torrensville SA on “Demolition of one...” at 176 Henley Beach Road, Torrensville SA 5031:

    Sarah C commented

    These should not be demolished. They are nice buildings, and are obviously able to be useful as they are. They will not be replaced by anything nice, and their removal with damage the character of the area. The only reason to demolish them is greed. Further, it will damage the businesses currently occupying them. Henley beach road will loose its distinctive charm if more of these buildings are allowed to be replaced by characterless modern precast boxes.

  13. In Thebarton SA on “Removal of significant tree...” at 5 Filsell Street, Thebarton SA 5031:

    Sarah C commented

    Please preserve this tree. Significant trees make a huge, positive, difference to the area and should be preserved.

  14. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Sarah C commented

    I object to the proposed demolition.

    This is a beautiful building which will not be replaced with anything even close to as good. What is the point of having planning and development restrictions if such a building can be demolished? I support development restrictions if they preserve good things built at a time of better taste from the merciless grips of profit hungry developers. If the planning rules can allow this to be demolished one wonders why ordinary people have to go through the rigmarole of getting their minor alterations approved.

  15. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Sarah C commented

    I object to the proposed multi story development.

    Such a development does not fit with the surrounding character of the area. The development will negatively impact the existing area in every way, purely to make profit for a developer who does not have to live in it, and provides no benefits. A four story development in a neighbourhood of single story homes is clearly not going to fit in. It is questionable how they can fit 22 dwellings in to this area. Certainly they cannot do so and provide any semblance of what used to be the ordinary Australian lifestyle.

  16. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Bob Hoover commented

    I am supportive of the application. The proposal is for a 4 story development which is in keeping with the urban corridor zone 35 rules. The development is close to public transport and local shops and appears to be a suitable location for a project of this density. The new accommodation will provide additional customers to the local district businesses and will assist to make the suburb a more interesting place to live.

  17. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Raffaela Del Vecchio commented

    I object to the proposed multi-storey development. This development would change the character of surrounding area as well as impacting on the environment of neighbouring houses. The height of the development and number of dwellings within it really is out of character for a residential corner site. The design is not congruent with the character of the area and what we will have is high density population on a very small space with negative impact on the area.

  18. In Thebarton SA on “Removal of significant tree...” at 5 Filsell Street, Thebarton SA 5031:

    Brad Taylor commented

    Significant trees so close to the city should be preserved at all costs. We are becoming a concrete jungle so this removal should not be allowed!

  19. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Judith Dwyer commented

    I object to the proposed multi storey development for the following reasons:
    - This building is not suitable for Norma St, a largely single-storey residential neighbourhood. The High St development rules apply to Henley Beach Rd appropriately, and I understand that this is what was included in the draft development plan, but this extension of that style of development is out of character
    - I gather from reading the application that the balconies are smaller than required and some rooms are also too small. This kind of scrimping against already minimalist allowances should not be permitted.
    - there is no merit in this proposal, it will detract from, not add to, the amenity of the area
    - it is too high and not in keeping with the style of the surrounding houses which are largely of historic character
    - the development will increase the urban heat load of the area, rather than contribute to ameliorating it
    - surrounding houses will be overshadowed and lose sunlight and privacy.

  20. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    S White commented

    I object to the proposed development for the following reasons:
    - I accept that within the proximity to the CBD there must be urban infill and multi story development along the corridor. This proposed development is not ON the corridor, it is on a residential corner. With some of the issues addressed, this may be an appropriate development if it was on Henley beach road, but not for the residential streets behind it.
    - the essence of the original development plan which was released for public comment was for there to be multi story development along the immediate corridor. This goes against what the community understood was being proposed.
    - the design of the proposed development does not take into account the character homes in the neighbourhood.
    - the development does not take into account the urban heat map, and it will contribute negatively to this.
    - parking is already an issue in the area and this will add to the problems.
    -There will be overshadowing issues for neighbours.

  21. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Nicki Dantalis commented

    I object to the proposed multi storey development for the following reasons:
    - the community was never consulted nor supported the changes to the zone that now allows multi storeys on Norma St. The draft development plan that was circulated for public comnent had only proposed multi storey for Henley Beach Rd.
    - there is no policy argument for this type of development in residential streets - what is the benefit to the community? There is none
    - these reforms for urban consolidation had been intended for the arterial roads only and should not be considered for residential streets
    - multi storey is not appropriate for this residential street where there is only single (and a small number of double) storey properties nearby
    -the building is out of step with surrounding houses. The housing stock is predominately of historic character and this development would be an eyesore on the landscape.
    - the development would increase the urban heat footprint, and increase the temperature of the suburb. Something that must be avoided. Instead planning should ensure impacts of urban heat are reduced.
    -There would be privacy impacts on surrounding houses with windows and balconies overlooking neighbours properties.
    -Morning sun would be blocked out for immediate neighbours.
    -The concept plan is ugly - no consideration has been given to aesthetics or design principles sympathetic to the area.
    - There are no positive aspects to this proposal. It would be a disaster.

  22. In Mile End SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 4/6 Ebor Avenue, Mile End SA 5031:

    Margaret Allen commented

    The proposed building is very much out of keeping with the neighbourhood. It will tower over and overshadow the adjacent and nearby dwellings. While it is a good idea to have some higher density in suburban areas, this proposal is poorly conceived and will be a blot upon the neighbourhood like the Tribeca building nearby. It will contribute to the degradation of the West Torrens environment.

  23. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    felicity downer commented

    People who wants to preserve this house should put money up to contribute to the up keeping of the house. It takes alot of money to keep it in good condition just like an old car. There is salt dam, re wiring, plumbing, roofing, flooring, painting, heating cooling, chimney safety upkeep.
    Council should buy the property if they want to preserve it otherwise let the owners decide what they want to do with it.
    Lots of complainers that voice their preservation speech but ask them to show the money ....crickets.

  24. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Selena webster commented

    This property is beautiful and could have been sold to someone who would have retained it as is. It is disgraceful the amount of historic premises lost in South Australia. What history are we leaving for our children. I used to live in this suburb and it is rapidly losing its character.

  25. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Lyndal Beer commented

    This home is a well maintained prime example of Adelaide heritage and should not be demolished to be replaced by a collection of medium density townhouses made from inferior materials and construction methods in order to make money.
    The many examples of the townhouses replacing such fine dwellings are already showing signs of requiring ongoing maintenance, that they do not receive, within 3 years of construction.
    By all means, construct single storey dwellings on the land at the front and rear of the property in a sympathetic style.
    I personally am very distressed by the rapid loss of Adelaide’s heritage that we are experiencing. The only people that want this are money hungry developers.

  26. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Janelle Brown commented

    What is the exact reason for demolition of this beautiful heritage house which is a great example of architecture for Uni students, but also an example of our history and the craftmanship that went into a building. Apart from greed, what is the reason to knock this down and build two or more "dog boxes" termed as houses with one carspace and no backyard? What happened to the family home where you could have a bbq or get together? Please do not let us lose the family home.

  27. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Julie Olsen commented

    Please, Please don’t let this gorgeous old home be knocked down. I moved from characterless western Sydney back to Adelaide because of all the heritage properties we have here. I love living in one and so enjoy seeing them here all around me in SA. Repurpose, Reuse and give them new lives again. Dont send this beauty to landfill and put up more ugly boxes 🙏🏻

  28. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Lauren Buchanan commented

    The City of West Torrens did not save Moorfield House, a manor which still contained stables and an orchard in a fairly ordinary low-to-middle class neighbourhood. The outrage was registered too late. Henley Beach however is now an affluent suburb with gorgeous character buildings like this adding to the value of the area. You don’t move to Henley Beach to live in a squat box, you move there to be close to the beach and to enjoy the character of homes like this and marvel at the streets containing buildings of grandeur, history, character, and vision. To see this destroyed is to witness yet another piece of Adelaide’s history being destroyed. We’re losing the essential character of Adelaide and replacing it with cheap, nasty, energy inefficient and aesthetically displeasing housing that won’t stand the test of time, let alone climate change. Why would tourists come to our city when they can see the same urban sprawl crap in the outer suburbs of Melbourne and Sydney? Houses like this are as much a part of our cultural heritage as the Thebarton Theatre and the Queen of Angels Church, which the West Torrens Council has loudly proclaimed it will try to protect. Talk the talk, walk the walk. If preserving cultural heritage means anything to this council, this house should be afforded protection.

  29. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Debbie Williams commented

    It is staggering to think that such a significant home could be lost !! It has been cared for since 1901, and kept in immaculate condition ! It is sad to think that developers are deciding how people should live..no garden space, a;; the same..box after concrete box around our subs and city. it will have a negative effect on how a community live among each other. No more back fence chats...limited outdoor space..and garden space.
    I would like to see a Town Planning Survey actually asking people 'HOW' they would like to live. Every one needs the opportunity to buy a home, but the choices are not only very often out of reach for the 'average' person...they are changing the lifestyle choices available ! A 'Cramming' of concrete....not acceptable !

  30. In Brooklyn Park SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 407 Henley Beach Road, Brooklyn Park SA 5032:

    Julie Ince commented

    This is surely a significant building that should be preserved for future generations to enjoy. This being over 100 years old and it still looks wonderful, please don’t demolish it to put some ordinary buildings in its place. That would be a shame. This building at 407 Henley Beach Road Brooklyn Park should be preserved.

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