Recent comments on applications from Maitland City Council, NSW

  1. In Gillieston Heights NSW on “Commercial premises,...” at 353 Cessnock Road Gillieston Heights NSW 2321:

    Bill Lockett commented

    We live in Redwood Drive and would like to see a plan of the layout of the retail area, wondering which end will be the IGA, Child Care centre etc. and what other tenants are planned for this development.

  2. In Raworth NSW on “Shed and Awning” at 268 Morpeth Road Raworth NSW 2321:

    Gregory Ninness commented

    How will the storm water from the shed be controlled

  3. In Raworth NSW on “Dwelling house” at 53 Raworth Avenue Raworth NSW 2321:

    Megan Moores commented

    Hi just wondering can i please have more information is it single or double story.

  4. In on “Shed” at 3 Tallowwood Way Thornton NSW 2322:

    Leeanne commented

    I object to this approval, they have layed the form work for the concrete and it is extremely close to my boundary fence, far closer than the 900 required. I can not believe in a suburban area people are permitted to build these industrial size sheds in their backyards, they are an eyesore and restrict light into people's homes. It will block any afternoon sun we now receive. I understand the need for development approvals, families grow and their needs change, but it appears Maitland Council has lost the care factor. Alot of the residents in Maitland feel like it more about penny pinching and less about considered planning. We have made numerous attempts to contact the development officer we have left a number of messages but he refuses to return out calls.

  5. In East Maitland NSW on “Multi dwelling housing” at 6 Wilton Drive East Maitland NSW 2323:

    John may commented

    I refer to DA 2019/128 for 12 seniors living units at 6 wilton drive east maitland.

    Ps I have made no political donations to this Council.

    The Assessment Planner should request amended plans to save the developer time as this DA will be refused by the Community here !

    1) Driveway wrong location

    The driveway is positioned so that it is headed straight for those two magnificent large gum trees. There is no reason why this road and unit configuration cant be changed to allow the road servicing the units to be moved 30m down hill.

    2) Tree protection

    This Council doesn't have strong protection of significant trees like other Councils have in their LEP. last week the Maitland Mercury reported a large 200 year old Fig tree was cut down on the weekend while council were closed and council advised the objecting resident that no consent is needed. How pathetic ! I found this totally unbelievable ! Soon Maitland will have no iconic significant trees left as each developer values them as a building site only. The main gateways to Maitland lack scenic quality as they become denuded of trees and built upon. My vision in 50 years is this eastern gateway will look like a generic subdivision 1 The 20 fold increase in traffic thanks to the Hunter Expressway will make it a main gateway and MCC has no plan for this ? we should value the environment more ! We need landmark trees not a few replanted liquid ambers on the verge !

    Other Councils would make the developer build a roundabout around the tree and make it a feature. (Great lakes Council near Mcdonalds approved a sub and protected a fig) Yes I do realise the trees are not on the property and the developer is either ignorant of where his development may extend out, so I am just making sure he and all the residents in Rathluba are aware of what Council happen. The developer may want the road to extend over the trees and build more units, so I am suggesting this is not appropriate from a town planning point of view in protecting scenic amenity ! This is a consideration under the EP&A Act 1979 when assessing a DA. The developer has alternative ways of designing this development and that must be considered.

    It appears two other trees have disappeared prob when everyone went to work. Do we want a natural environment in Maitland or a generic subdivision that looks like another suburb in Sydney ?

    Please show some tenacity and strength when refusing this DA. I am happy to have Seniors Housing there just not the way they have designed it.

    Eagles are nesting in that tree and a year ago we had 30 eagles flying around this suburb then the DA for that stupid low cost manufactured estate next to the Tip came in and they all but disappeared.

    3) Design

    The other issue I have noticed based on the plans provided is the plain design with very little architectural merit. What a mundane design unit 5 and 6 are facing Wilton Drive ! It also looks like a government building ! They are providing absolutely no landscaping to the main road of Wilton Drive and I wlll be interested to see if Council actually has a landscape plan for this development ?

    4) Private Open Space

    The POS for a dwelling in the front setback to Wilton drive shouldn't be allowed given how noisy that road gets. The only way they can make that private is by having a 1.8m high fence on the main street frontage. I thought the fencing guidelines required smaller fences facing the main street ? This will be out of character with other dwelling frontage treatments and streetscape will in effect create an abrupt hard solid fence buffer with no softening of landscaping visible. Go to Blacktown or Doonside and see the tunnel effect of high fences !

    the developer needs to make the elderly part of the community instead of fencing them in as they will be unable to talk to neighbours over a 1.8m high fence, and are unlikely to walk 200 m around the road to have a chat !. The more I think of this development the more I think how poorly it was planned and how generic it is. They need a proper town planner showing them how to design and make the place liveable for all people involved !

    If GHT Holding P/L and Land Development Consultants think this is a great planning then they seriously ask themselves would they like this development if they lived here ? So go get a planner that can design in accordance with the environment as it really doesn't cost much to fix this problem !

    5) Councillors need to call this up and have a good look at it !

    Once again the Rathluba Community have to waste time telling a developer and planning consultants how to be mindful when developing !

  6. In Farley NSW on “Crematorium and Cemetery -...” at 48 Old North Road Farley NSW 2320:

    Grant Banner commented

    There are a number of residences on Winders Lane, over the tracks but immediately behind Old North Road and potentially also impacted by this Application if approved. Already we have to endure increased particulate load from the third track, coal trains parking near us deep into the night and delivering diesel particulate into the atmosphere. The third track approved at the last second by the Kristina Keneally Labor Government in NSW, the very day she prorogued parliament for the election she lost. Particulate load as checked at 10ppm passes muster down the Valley, but check it down to 2 ppm as recommended and wow, guess what you would find. We all almost to each resident, experience NOW, nasal issues. The cancer load is also anecdotally higher than usual in our area. Guess why? What will a crematorium add to the atmosphere? Further particulate. This is not to mention the mercury seepage load into our bores at some residences, from a cemetery impacting acquifers. We are long-term here, with our 5000 new homes and residences, staring at a class action likely against the operators of the crematorium and against the Council for approving (if they do). The road from Kurri, coming off the Hunter Expressway is a death trap, imagine some distraught aged people, used to expressway conditions, not using GPS & driving that goat-track to try to find what used to just be Pondi Park, a quiet, private residence. Deaths are on-the-cards. Any stack for the crematorium will impact the skyline, be visible from Pindari House, a successful and currently operating B & B in our 'Lane' and would be an eyesore.

  7. In Farley NSW on “Crematorium and Cemetery -...” at 48 Old North Road Farley NSW 2320:

    Jan Collingwood commented

    Re Crematorium and Cemetery at 48 Old North Road this is unthinkable on such an historic road surely they could have purchased land on the highway away from other properties there is so much development going on in the area with a rumored 5000 new residents the roads cannot hope to handle any extra traffic. Then we have the emissions from the crematorium, no matter what safeguards are put into place there will always be particles escaping and there is overwhelming evidence about poisonous gases escaping from such facilities. The residents successfully petitioned many years ago re a planned subdivision and I think this is even more outrageous that a local company could now come in and plan for a commercial development on our road. I may be only voice so far but as this has been done at a time when most people are on holidays and unaware I am certain more will follow.

  8. In Raworth NSW on “Dual occupancy (detached),...” at 58 Laurie Drive Raworth NSW 2321:

    megan moores commented

    I think the council really needs to think about all these subdivision of land and duplexes being approved and horribly built. The council needs to go back to the original design standards of what was allowed to be built in Raworth. Consideration to the community and neighbors of these constructions needs to take priority, not only of the $$$. If you want small blocks and live on top of each other go to another suburb why ruin the gem we have and the beautiful country side we have. Keep it clean, feel the fresh air. No more building needs to take place. We have no more spaces in the schools to cater for the influx of families. The council/ government needs build schools. Priority

  9. In Raworth NSW on “Dual Occupancy / Duplex and...” at 47 Raworth Avenue Raworth 2321 NSW:

    Megan and Daniel Moores commented

    The dwellings being built on Raworth ave Raworth appear to be out of character to other dwelling within the street. Most of the current dwellings are of larger block size of approx 1500m2 or above.We have recently bought here a month ago for the life style and feel saddened that the council is allowing subdivision of approx 700m2 block sizes and double story duplex sites to be built on this wonderful space. I also have concerns regarding parking on this narrow cul-de-sac and believe it will have effects on the environment and the keeping of the character within this community destroying the life style that as residents we have bought in and paid for. There is plenty of other development sites that can cater for double story duplexes. Please keep what the residents have fought for over the last few years.

  10. In Raworth NSW on “Dual Occupancy / Duplex and...” at 47 Raworth Avenue Raworth 2321 NSW:

    Megan and Daniel Moores commented

    Hi I Megan and Daniel Moores are the new owners of 48 Raworth, Raworth. I have just come across this submission from the council and would like to know actually where this subdivision is to take place and is it still going ahead. We were told that the residents have fought hard to maintain the blocks to be of decent size and we have life style blocks of 1500m2. The blocks were not to be bought and sold for duplexes to be built. If this is the case I am extremely concerned about my view being completely diminished, most probable by a two story dwelling, not a single story?. Can I please be contacted asap on 0407493974 or 0404261357

  11. In Maitland NSW on “Shop” at Ken Tubman Drive Maitland 2320 NSW:

    Carole Cox commented

    What number on ken tubman drive

  12. In Maitland NSW on “Change of Use” at 511 High Street Maitland 2320 NSW:

    Carole Cox commented

    What is it that the owner wants to do to this building

  13. In East Maitland NSW on “SEPP Seniors Housing” at 6 Wilton Drive East Maitland 2323 NSW:

    john may commented

    this is a gateway to East Maitland and any removal of trees will make Maitland look more barren than what it already is. Maitlands founding fathers cleared the land for their agriculture and mining pursuits and nothing has changed. even the roundabout requests that i have made in Wilton drive for some simple landscape improvement have fallen on deaf ears. apparently dead weedy grass is ok ?

    The Councillors here dont respond to emails except at election time with they remark - what email ? Councils Motto is "we can do it ! " that was ten years ago. what can you do Council hmmm put a manufactured home estate and a nursing home up against a tip ? how pleasant ...... Wait for the methane to come up and the wind to blow !

    It takes ten minutes to get out of Wilton drive some mornings ? wheres the traffic study ? I havent seen anyone monitoring the traffic count ? have they done this ? or on what basis have they done it ?

    The land isnt flat and not good for seniors housing ! check Senior Living SEPP ! they will fall over and roll down the hill, break hips etc

    wheres the landscape plan ? how have they treated the buffer to mt vincent road ?

  14. In Morpeth NSW on “Subdivision - New Road” at 123 Princess Street, Morpeth, NSW 2321:

    Bev Bradfield commented

    I feel that this development will change the course of Morpeth forever.
    At the moment it is a quite, small, rural town, attracting many visitors to its precinct for a unique shopping and old world charm experience.

    By adding more development to its surrounds, I feel it would spoil its very fabric.

    Please don't allow this continued disruption to such a wonderful town that I feel this council of ours respects and treasures, but to allow for future memories to continue by investing in its future.

  15. In Louth Park NSW on “Fence / retaining wall” at 470 Louth Park Road, Louth Park, NSW 2320:

    Patricia Maher commented

    Non complaint fencing should be observed by everyone. If council are inclined to approve this DA it will open the doors to others to suit themselves without prior approval. The rural residential zoning will be compromised should this DA be approved.

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