Recent comments on applications from Wollongong City Council, NSW

  1. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    ROSA KHOURY commented

    I do not live in thirroul but you need to consider what residents have to say and are dealing with. Not every plan is ideal for an area. Consider the stress and impact you are putting on residents. I live in bulli and have seen over the last 10 years a nice residential area go from quiet to very busy.
    Listen to the people in the area.
    Stop, listen and look and see what is best for thirroul.

  2. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Georgia Willis commented

    I object to this change in the DA. We fought this before to have the developers amend their plans only for it to be approved despite people's arguments.

    I object especially to the first floor balconies which will impact the privacy and increase the overlooking for neighbours on the east side. Their amenity is greatly reduced already and this is really a bridge too far to ask for balconies on their side.

    I object to a glass balustrade at the front of the building. The developer has said "The use of the glass balustrade works well with adding a sense of elegance and helps modernize the traditional feel of the development without losing the character and feel of Thirroul." This is utter GARBAGE. It does NOT add a sense of elegance nor does it add to the character and feel of Thirroul. This should DEFINITELY not be allowed to be changed.

    I object to changing the entrance of the front apartment to be at the front.

  3. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Jeremy Park commented

    These changes are substantial. Locals fought this controversial development for many months and had to go multiple processes and redesigns along the way. New major changes to the DA at this stage of building I feel are opportunistic and profit driven. These are not for a wider benefit to the community and local residents.

    - I object to the addition of balconies which for multi unit dwellings add up to quite a large privacy issue for neighbours. Addition of balconies is a huge change.
    - I object to the larger windows which also impact privacy and overlooking which was much debated in the original plans. The BASIX on this property is already low and a review of the effects of more glass should be considered here also.
    - I object to changing the entry to one of the unit to now face directly to the street. This will add more impact to the street and lessen the need for garage parking, instead encouraging street parking which was another very controversial issue.
    - I object to the glass balustrade which will be seen from the street. Glass is not traditional for the area. It's hilarious and wrong that developer is saying "The use of the glass balustrade works well with adding a sense of elegance and helps modernize the traditional feel of the development without losing the character and feel of Thirroul." There is nothing traditional about this development. It's a profit driven cheap finish from front to back. They are using PVC to build the lower floor which is NOT in character with the area. White PVC walls if seen from the street would be in breech of the DA that was passed that stated they were using sympathetic cladding. Council, please enforce the character statement for the area.

    There was a very high number of objections to this development, as editorialised in the Illawarra mercury. The original DA was knocked back by the independent planning panel, so if they want to make major changes to the DA at this late stage then they should put a halt to all building works until it is fully and fairly resolved. Otherwise it can only be seen as opportunistic, profit driven and another reason why people are upset with councils approach to overdevelopment in the area.

  4. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Tim commented

    Please stop over-development. There is no need to turn every single block into multiple dwellings, the pressure on our local systems and infrastructure will become too high. I'm not against the renovation and rebuild of old houses, but it appears property developers are just out to cash in quickly by turning whatever single dwelling they can get their hands on into multiple dwellings.

  5. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Simone Molloy commented

    Please do not approve any further multiple dwellings on anymore blocks in George Street.
    As a resident of this great street for 12 years we have seen the traffic congestion with extra cars becoming extremely dangerous for pedestrians & local kids to walk to & from school with no footpath, the extra cars parked in the kerb is making driving down this street dangerous with cars being sideswiped and the noise of the additional cars is Ridiculous! Please do not ruin this street any further! Keep Thirroul Village as is - No More Over Developing!

  6. In Corrimal NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 303 Princes Highway, Corrimal NSW 2518:

    Matt commented

    There is a severe shortage of affordable housing in the area. We need more of this.

  7. In Corrimal NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 303 Princes Highway, Corrimal NSW 2518:

    Rodney commented

    This will be great as the northern suburbs could do with more affordable housing.

  8. In Figtree NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 Figtree Crescent, Figtree NSW 2525:

    Tibor Csapo commented

    Dear Planning Support Team,

    Members of my family, friends and I have resided in Figtree Crescent and nearby for over 50 years.

    As a child I submitted petitions regarding the state of Figtree Crescent, in particular the road surface, which was potholed, gravelly and ignored. Many years later the road was finally resurfaced, quickly and without care for the manhole covers and valve covers, leaving large obstacles for motor vehicles.

    Recently Figtree Crescent is all but impassable due to traffic parking on both sides (rarely using driveways), including on the bends. On bin night it is significantly worse.

    Council has approved a large (13 residence) development at 12 Figtree Crescent, Figtree, which will significantly increase traffic in the area. The proposed development at 28-30 Figtree Crescent (adding 4 new homes) will further increase the traffic load. The plan shows one visitor space and space for bins, but I expect many more cars will park on the road and travel to and from the premises.

    I am also concerned about the precedent set for other developments of a similar nature. The blocks are large (but steep) and the approval at 12 Figtree Crescent has obviously led to planning for these developments. Further similar developments will continue to increase the load on this narrow, crowded and poorly maintained road surface.

    The construction is also expected to created difficulties for the street during the period of construction.

    I also acknowledge the interference to the enjoyment of the properties of neighbours, with such large developments being constructed high up and overlooking the other yards, in particular the number of windows on the neighbour-facing sides.

    Thank you for your consideration.

  9. In Corrimal NSW on “Mixed Use Residential -...” at 22 Robert Street, Corrimal NSW 2518:

    Glenn savill commented

    I live at 21 Robert street my name is Glenn Savill and i can not find the plans or development lodgement for this development. I have not been fully informed on the development and i believe there is a major flaw with it concerning access by firetrucks due to the lack of car parking when the origenal development of 20 and 21 Robert street and only 1 way into the area . This property was a school with 3 access points . One on Robert street one via Rothery road and one via Wilga Street .The Rothery Road access is not being allowed by council even though it was the access for the public school for over 50 years not allowing acces for fire trucks or people will at some point cause a problem if there is a fire at the new complex due to the Wilga access not being wide enough to allow fire trucks and the Robert street access also not being wide enough when the resident have there cars parked . I believe this will cause someone at some point to be killed due to the fact that the residents will be disabled and old and frail and will not be as mobile as people without disability's .Allow access via Rothery Road or this development should not happen due to the real fire risk

  10. In Woonona NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 481-485 Princes Highway, Woonona NSW 2517:

    Peter Green commented

    Woonona ~ Bulli School of Arts Inc. Est 1862
    479 Princes Hwy, WOONONA, NSW.


    The directors of the Woonona ~ Bulli School of Arts Inc (established 1862) have a number of concerns we would like considered as we have concerns the proposed development might signal the end of the Woonona ~ Bulli School of Arts Inc (SoA) which has operated from its current location since 1862. The proposed residential development runs the entire length of our southern boundary.

    We believe any development should take serious consideration as to its effect on the SoA as of the original 811 Schools of Arts and Mechanics Institutes; only 75 private and 30 on Crown Land remain. 29 are in name only with no buildings or land (AMASA meeting with NSW Govt 2018 at Sydney Schools of Arts and Mechanics Institute, Pitt St Sydney, Govt White Paper, Crown Lands Act).

    The Schools of Arts and Mechanics Institutes are a part of Australia’s heritage which should be protected and not put under unnecessary threat or duress likely to lead to their end.

    The SoA is listed on the NSW Environment and Heritage register: “is of significance for the local area for historical and aesthetic reasons, for social significance that it has for the local community and as representative of Interwar period buildings in the area. This c. 1935 building makes an important contribution to the streetscape and the area and presents a local landmark”.


    The items of concern we are raising about the development as follows:

    1. Traffic congestion, traffic management and the Woonona Public School

    Traffic congestion on Gray street is a real concern. The school drop off- pick up is already a nightmare for residents living on Gray Street and surrounding streets. The addition of 12 Townhouses to the corner of Gray Street will create further traffic congestion and frustration among residents.

    There are also concerns about danger surrounding the construction of the townhouses. With regards to the development of an Aged care facility on Hospital Road Bulli, on May 1st 2018, an assault on an aged pensioner over a parking spot by a tradesperson working on the construction of the Bulli aged care facility was just part of the on-going problems suffered by local residents on an almost daily basis by the road being taken up by trades and construction vehicles. The same type of construction traffic can be expected on Princes Hwy, Grey Street and Gordon Streets with parents and children attending Woonona Public School. Parents drop their children off to attend this school in all of the above-mentioned streets. Having trades and construction vehicles causing the same levels of frustration plus the additional risk to school children cannot be left to “she will be the right mate”. Proper time management of parking based on the school and NOT on traditional building work hours needs to be implemented and enforced by the police before a child is killed or injured.

    What provisions have both the developers and WCC put or are putting in place to avoid the conflict situations that occurred on an almost daily bases with the construction project on Hospital Rd Bulli where residents were in constant arguments with builders, particularly the finishing trades who were there for over a year taking up ALL the available on-street parking. What measures will be in place to protect the quality of life the current residents enjoy? Additionally, what compensation will businesses be paid by the developers while this disruption is occurring?

    Longer term danger to children at school drop off and pick-up time. People have expressed to us either personally or through social media their fears for children’s safety with new 12 units in that location.



    2. Effect on established commercial businesses directly affected by this proposed development

    Have the developers made provision in their development so close to an existing commercial operation such as at minimum: double glazing, sound insulation in the walls facing the SoA. Screening using vegetation and distance from the existing commercial operation. No development should be approved that is not providing at least these very basic measures if not more to ensure that the residents are comfortable in their new homes and the SoA is not impacted by complaints from these residents if such measures are not undertaken by the developers.

    If a development is approved without consideration to the existing commercial operation then WCC & developers should take all responsibility for complaints and not pass any of this on to the existing commercial operation now or at any time in the future. Our records will contain a permanent record of events and outcomes. Or is it seen as only the problem of the commercial enterprise and it is the entity that pays the price by ceasing to exist?

    The School of Arts Inc has not been approached or consulted by the developers of the DA in relation to any matters. We conclude then that the School of Arts Inc is considered expendable in their plans for this site.

    How will WCC handle complaints by residents of the new housing complex against the Woonona ~ Bulli School of Arts Inc?



    3. Loss of the Woonona ~ Bulli School of Arts Inc

    An institution that has operated at this location since 1862 operation directly adjacent to the proposed development. Schools of Arts were introduced to Australia from Scotland in 1827 by Dr James Ross.

    At some stage the area of Woonona where the SoA is located obviously allowed and indeed would have encouraged commercial development while under the Bulli Local Council, now under WCC the area has been rezoned residential which puts the SoA in a position where after over 150 years of continued operation it is at the mercy of any of the new residents to complain about the SoA and its operations to have it closed down or it’s operations restricted to a point where it becomes unviable to continue operation. All the people who run their social businesses and community operations have lost yet another “affordable” place of operation.

    If there is no protection and the SoA closes, not a single member of WCC should utter one word of complaint or objection at that time because the time to protect historical assets is now not when the inevitable happens as a result of your current decisions.

    Once a historical institution such as the SoA is gone it is never coming back, the history, culture and service to the community is gone forever as the resources would not be available to recreate such a historical facility again.

    In Australia very few of the original 811+ schools of arts and mechanics institutes remain. Of those that do remain 75 are privately owned and managed, the other 30 exist on Crown Lands and receive government funding and assistance. The private schools of arts and mechanics institutes are usually totally self-funded and like any other historical institution become lost to the community if they cannot pay their way in today’s very expensive world.

    The annual running and maintenance of an institution like the Woonona ~ Bulli Schools of Arts Inc is expensive and any restriction in parking near the facility drives away customers. With COVID-19 the School of Arts Inc was closed to business, we did not qualify for any government financial assistance and had to absorb all the associated costs and loss of income. A reduction in customers for the demolition and construction time of the proposed development if provisions are not put in place will likely result in the demise of the Woonona Bulli School of Arts.


    4. Continued loss and change to the Streetscape of Woonona.

    A number of residents lament the loss of the old church located across the road at 488-490 Princes Highway, which was demolished to make way for home units which appears to be part of a continued loss of historical streetscape in the pursuit of development seemingly at any cost to history.

    Many towns like Woonona lose their individual character as the history and streetscape are washed away by development. A town's character and personality are characterized by a sense of community, familiarity of surroundings and being comfortable with memories. All of these are compromised by the loss / changing streetscape.

    We consider the streetscape of Woonona should be preserved and the facade of the proposed development should be preserved and factored into the design. This has been done with developments all over the world where developments do not wipe out history, replacing it with new buildings that are not at all preserving the character or personality of a town.

    5. Loss of social amenities.

    Any Google search on mental health issues quickly indicates the importance of social outlets such as the SoA provide along with the social and educational support in supporting mental health and wellbeing. Several groups operate from the SoA in providing music, dance, yoga, medication, lectures and mental health support services along with social hub activities such as children’s parties, amateur theatre, musical rehearsal and concerts.

    As venues like the SoA are forced out of existence and given the links between lack of social venues and increased vandalism from bored youth what safeguards has WCC proposed to protect venues like the SoA that provide employment and activities to the community or are they just sacrificed


    6. Residents quality of life and commercial businesses during and after construction.

    Consideration must be given to the quality of life enjoyed by existing residents and the parents and children attending the school for drop off and pick up of their children without having to run the gauntlet of builder’s trucks and additional parked vehicles from then on. Situations should not be allowed to develop that results in conflict or reduced quality of life for people already living in the area. Another 12 units in such a location is probably too many units, the plans should be scaled back to maintain the quality of life resends currently enjoyed. The council should examine the impact this density of development will have on the current community.

    What guarantees are to be put in place before this DA is approved to deal with the following:

    Compensation for any and all loss of business experienced by local businesses due to lack of on-street parking that all aspects of this development will deliver.

    We hope the Developers and WCC consider these comments and act with a lot of consideration to the residents of Woonona, its history and heritage along with the unique qualities of Woonona.


    Peter Green
    PP.Eng., B.A., M.Sc., MAPS
    Public Officer. Woonona ~ Bulli School of Arts Inc

  11. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Joanne commented

    So the developers knew when to put in their submission during a pandemic and when everyone was pretty much in lockdown. This issue requires more than 19 days to respond! There should be community consultation and a clear plan how the rd and traffic flow is going to be fixed. A refurbishment would suffice not a ridiculous over development. Shame on the ‘locals’ who are developing this!!!

  12. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    S. Ritson commented

    Regarding the Redevelopment proposal of Thirroul Village (DA - 2020/363) and the installation of 82 new 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments, this is concerning on many levels.
    As previously noted, it does not appear to be consistent with the limits for buildings in the area. In addition, the traffic conditions that this volume of apartments and its new residents will bring would be extreme for the area. Already there is considerable traffic due to the single lane each direction through Thirroul without any other options. I am quite concerned that the essential services and infrastructure are already unable to cope with the current volumes and would be overwhelmed with the addition of further numbers.
    The current situation with the closure of LHD at Bald Hill and more traffic from north Illawarra forced to travel through Thirroul, provides the perfect example of the challenges to traffic flow through the area. I am concerned about emergency services also being able to get through the area when they may be required during these busy times.
    For the record, allowing just 19 days for community consultation for such a massive development with its significant impacts on the local community is quite insulting!

  13. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    mat mccosker commented

    I agree with the majority of the comments here.

    Road, school, & health infrastructure cannot support such a high-density development.

    Additionally, plans to add 50 townhouses with the Anglicare development, flagged for the former Cookson Plibrico site at Bulli, would compound this difficulty.

    Urban planning that made better use of existing housing would better serve the community, such as repairs to social housing in Bellambi.

    Kind thanks
    M

  14. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Mara P commented

    The refurbishment of Thirroul plaza would be a welcome development, however the addition of 82 apartments would place a huge strain on local services, schools and the already heavy traffic and clogged roads in Thirroul. Please reconsider the overdevelopment of this site - 82 apartments is far too many.

  15. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Mara P commented

    The refurbishment of Thirroul plaza would be a welcome development, however the addition of 82 apartments would place a huge strain on local services, schools and the already heavy traffic and clogged roads in Thirroul. Please reconsider the overdevelopment of this site - 82 apartments is far too many.

  16. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Antonia Farrugia commented

    82 units - absolutely not. We do not want Thirroul to become another North Wollongong. Even if traffic wasn’t a problem and even if there were plenty of services (which there are clearly not) overcrowding this area will absolutely destroy it. One large unit complex will open the door to others. We must stop this in its tracks.

  17. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Carmen Poulton commented

    With regard to the proposal of DA - 2020/363 to be granted in Thirroul I find this to be highly irresponsible. Whilst Thirroul Plaza needs refurbishing, it certainly doesn’t need the extra proposed development of 82 residential apartments. The existing roads in Thirroul are already heavily congested. I and many residents living in Thirroul and surrounds, constantly experience the gridlock trying to get in and out of the area safely. Putting extra traffic lights on Lawrence Hargrave Drive does not solve this problem as it only leads to further frustration of drivers trying to get to their destinations. Lawrence Hargrave Drive was constructed in the 1870s with no obvious foresight for future development in the area therefore causing the major problems of today. WCC has allowed the residential areas to now become overpopulated within this region. The Illawarra escarpment has already experienced devastating bushfires in years past. The 1968 fires should be a lesson learnt, as the area then was not as populated and the thought of fires occurring now, with Wollongong Council allowing constant further development in the area, is totally irresponsible. We have had further fires in the Royal National Park in the 1990’s and 2000’s spreading quickly down the escarpment which have also been threatening. How can anyone escape quickly and safely if this catastrophe were to occur again? WCC need to consider all the repercussions of not being able to escape. How can emergency transport be effective in gridlock areas? As there is only one (1) main road accessing the Thirroul area it should be obvious this is always going to cause havoc. With over 11,000 residents living in Thirroul, Austinmer, Coledale, Wombarra, Clifton and Scarborough area alone all vying to escape safely and quickly, it stands to reason that the approval of more residential development will cause MORE complications to the major problems that already exit. Noise and environmental pollution Is another concern for this area.

  18. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Ian Dewey commented

    Yippee!!!!!!!!! More over development.

    I do hope that it is well designed as all residents of the area will spend a huge amount of our time looking at it, while we are grid locked. Also a good job we are fixing LH drive as all those north of thirroul will need to drive to bulli via Helensburgh.
    I enjoy live music, bye bye Beaches, and anitas as the NEW residents will have you guys closed down due to noise complaints, and you were there first. No more eating outside of the wonderful restaurants on the other side of the road, too noisy.......
    WCC has done a grand job of looking after the current traffic issues over our SINGLE lane bridge, what could go wrong with this development, golly I can’t think of anything!!!!
    Can’t wait for all the building and construction movements, this will get us ready for the extra traffic I guess.....

    Top idea, stop this disaster.

  19. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Carmen Poulton commented

    With regard to the proposal of DA - 2020/363 to be granted in Thirroul I find this to be highly irresponsible. Whilst Thirroul Plaza needs refurbishing, it certainly doesn’t need the extra proposed development of 82 residential apartments. The existing roads in Thirroul are already heavily congested. I and many residents living in Thirroul and surrounds, constantly experience the gridlock trying to get in and out of the area safely. Putting extra traffic lights on Lawrence Hargrave Drive does not solve this problem as it only leads to further frustration of drivers trying to get to their destinations. Lawrence Hargrave Drive was constructed in the 1870s with no obvious foresight for future development in the area therefore causing the major problems of today. WCC has allowed the residential areas to now become overpopulated within this region. The Illawarra escarpment has already experienced devastating bushfires in years past. The 1968 fires should be a lesson learnt, as the area then was not as populated and the thought of fires occurring now, with Wollongong Council allowing constant further development in the area, is totally irresponsible. We have had further fires in the Royal National Park in the 1990’s and 2000’s spreading quickly down the escarpment which have also been threatening. How can anyone escape quickly and safely if this catastrophe were to occur again? WCC need to consider all the repercussions of not being able to escape. How can emergency transport be effective in gridlock areas? As there is only one (1) main road accessing the Thirroul area it should be obvious this is always going to cause havoc. With over 11,000 residents living in Thirroul, Austinmer, Coledale, Wombarra, Clifton and Scarborough area alone all vying to escape safely and quickly, it stands to reason that the approval of more residential development will cause MORE complications to the major problems that already exit. Noise and environmental pollution Is another concern for this area.

  20. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Alex Hitchins commented

    The shops definitely need a renovation but 82 residential units is crazy! Firstly, Thirroul and surrounding suburbs can’t handle the extra traffic/cars and secondly, the town would lose it’s small town feel.
    There would be safety concerns regarding evacuations and increased congestion from the additional cars.
    Local live music would need to be protected from noise restrictions also.

  21. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Neil Wiblin commented

    I am vehemently against this proposal.
    During peak times Monday to Friday, traffic along LHD from Austinmer to south of Thirroul is at best, heavy. On the weekend traffic is at a standstill, sometimes from the other side of Kennedy's Hill in Austinmer to Bulli. This used to occur mainly during summer, however now stretches year round. No amount of traffic control will manage the current issues already in and around Thirroul, let alone with these proposed extra traffic movements. There is only one road with two lanes in and out of Thirroul as well as suburbs north all the way to Helensburgh.
    How can the Council entertain such a huge increase in daily traffic movements?
    The NSW SES and Council are the experts in flood plans - this application should be with them for consultation prior to public release - particularly as the updated study has not been released as yet.
    Car movements are always underestimated, with no thought given to events, both social but more importantly environmental. There is only one way in and out of Thirroul -
    We were very lucky this fire season that the escarpment didn't ignite, unlike the South Coast and many other regions in NSW. How will these extra traffic movements impact egress for the public and access for Emergency Services?
    The Bureau of Meteorology forecast rainfall to be up to 80% above median this coming year. Once again the question of egress and access rears it head!
    We have all experienced the effects of Climate Change and words like Fires unprecedented in memory, Flood of Record etc comes to mind.
    The risks aren't about the fact people are stuck in heavy traffic for extended periods, the risk is to peoples lives trying to evacuate the area! This is a real risk!

    NO - the addition of 82 Units is a money making exercise without due consideration to the lives and safety of residents and responding emergency services.

  22. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Jenni commented

    While it is very clear that the Plaza , which has been deliberately run down, needs a total renovation, the sheer size and scale of the proposed development is not acceptable in a town this size. The last of the village nature of Thirroul would be lost forever, and there would be no return. The one road in and out of Thirroul surely could not support the increased anticipated traffic and an already horrendous traffic problem would only be exacerbated, and there would be frequent gridlock. Not to mention the potential threat in an any emergency (including Fires or floods) of emergency vehicles not being able to get through, or potentially there being no way out for residents if the one road was cut. Please consider the nature of this beautiful village, that we are lucky to call home, and how it will be forever , irretrievably be changed.

  23. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Linda Kara commented

    We have been waiting for an upgrade to the neglected Thirroul Plaza for some time, so it was with great disappointment to see that little consideration had been given to the the issues that encompass the Northern Suburbs.
    To see the residential component they want to squeeze into this tight section of Thirroul is alarming and shows no duty of care to the residents of this area.

    It is glaringly obvious from the many submissions concerning this development that while an upgrade of the plaza is needed, the majority of residents are opposed to the negative impact the scale of this development is going to make on our day to day movements and well being.
    The community are sending out a resoundingly loud NO to this proposal for many valid reasons.

    To lose the view of the escarpment, the sun shining on the main street, public space and on street parking is a travesty. They are what gives Thirroul it’s village vibe - not a huge supermarket that nobody asked for and an extra 300 people and 200 cars.

    The traffic problems have been documented in detail by well informed residents who actually live with the chaos daily, as opposed to someone standing on a corner for a couple of odd hours in September.
    The King St traffic lights do nothing to alleviate issues on LHD. In fact they add issues, particularly for Redman Ave.
    The loss of on-street parking would be a major blow to the viability of our independent family run stores and amenities.

    Under the 2009 Wollongong Development Control Plan for Thirroul Village Centre Chapter D12, this development is a big fail.
    Prove to us that the DCP’s are worth more than the paper they are written on because at the moment, this proposal flies in the face of its core values.
    The Flood study needs to be looked at very very carefully. It is well known there are specific points along LHD and surrounding streets that have previously been adversely affected by the topology of the area and the failure of storm water pipes to cope with even a short deluge.
    This has been addressed in the Flood study (point 5) with the suggestion that if the measures they plan to put in place fail, the shops at ground level could have, I quote -
    ‘a flood barrier system to be activated by the shopkeeper during business hours when required, and can simply be installed at the end of each evening in case flooding occurs during non-business hours’.
    REALLY ??
    It goes on to state - ‘this is something that is not likely to be experienced frequently’.
    Try telling that to the shops across the road like Egg and Dart, Mamma’s Pizza, and Oat & Honey- who had shoes floating around in their back carpark after our last big storm.
    After they excavate to sea level for the two storey carpark it is going to change the water course and no amount of ‘best practise’ or ‘modeling’ is going to hold it back.

    There are also suggestions in the flood study that the residential component have an alarm system to notify them if the measures in place...an On Site Detention pit, fail.

    ‘ A trigger level could be set up inside the OSD tank and when the run-off in the tank reaches a certain level an alarm could sound to all occupants of the development to install the flood barriers and to expect imminent flooding on Lawrence Hargrave Drive’.
    Who is going to alert all the existing residents who live in houses downstream from the development that will cop the brunt of the run off ?
    If anywhere near what is proposed goes through, future generations will never know what it was truly like to live in Thirroul village. It will just be a carbon copy of every other over-developed town. Don’t allow Thirroul to lose its magic.

  24. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Candice Greenwood commented

    As a Thirroul resident and homeowner for a decade, I would like to add my objection to the DA for development of Thirroul Plaza.

    This DA represents a gross overdevelopment for this area, is direct conflict with many objectives outlined in Wollongong Development Control Plan (WDCP 2009) Chapter 12D and without significant amendments will have a detrimental impact on the quality of life and amenity of the existing residents, businesses and amenity of the area.

    With ever increasing permanent residents, coupled with drastic increase in tourist travel the existing roadways are not coping. The single lane Lawrence Hargrave Drive, bottlenecks at the single-lane train bridge between South and North parts and is exacerbated by traffic lights at the entrance to McCauleys Estate at Wrexham Road. The potential risks in respect to emergency services access/egress in the event of bushfire emergency and the closure of Lawrence Hargrave Drive and integrity of the old railway bridge must be addressed before adding a development of this size and scale. Further to this, transport and traffic assessments must be conducted accurate and representative of actual conditions (those included in this DA were conducted at non-peak times and months).

    The size, scale and build of this development is inappropriate for this site and area. 82 residential units is too many for the heart of Thirroul ‘village’. As per the WDCP 2009) Chapter 12D new developments in the Village Centre should retain core retail village components and character of the existing buildings.

    Significant infrastructure issues including traffic volume, public transport, parking and school capacity must be adequately addressed BEFORE a development of this magnitude be approved. There must be adequate community consultation, which has not happened on this occasion.

  25. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Irene commented

    We really need the Plaza updated to something that is in character with the rest of the town, the Coles new country layouts they have set up in the city etc and maybe some other country organic stores to buy from. But not the units above, a small food & wine venue would better suit and have those lovely views to enjoy in business hours of course.

  26. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Alan Cooper commented

    My objections in regards to DA2020/363 on Lawrence Hargrave Drive (Thirroul Shopping Complex).

    I am not opposed to the refurbishment of the Thirroul Shopping Plazza.

    I am however opposed to the building of the proposed 82 apartments, as this type of aggressive over development does not fit in with the calm nature of the beach-side suburb of Thirroul. It simple does not fit in with the local landscape.

    Developments of this nature should not be allowed to happen in this location, at least until Wollongong City Council, the RTA and the NSW Government provide us with proper roads and other basic infrastructure that could accommodate such developments.

    We are already suffering from transport fatigue in the northern suburbs of Wollongong. One only needs to observe the heavy traffic on weekends to understand that we have already reached a point of saturation.

    Something that should not be overlooked is the the fact that such an increase in the local population requires the provision of services like transport, more trains, parks, community spaces and institutions. We just can not accept such level of development when these basic services are not yet provided.

  27. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Janice commented

    This is not a mixed use/residential proposal, this is a DA to completely alter a village.
    There are no boundaries to this proposal, it is a village taker over with no consultation with the residents that live there.
    Traffic is going to be horrendous and the loss of on street parking, character and escarpment views is a crying shame.
    The ramifications of changing the natural water course is going to be a big problem for residents outside of this development.

    A group of developers do not get to decide the future of a town.
    That’s why residents pay rates - to have you, our council, protect our heritage, character and environmental beauty.
    The attributes that are outlined in Wollongong Councils own DCP -Chapter D12, need to be adhered to and protected.
    This DA in its current form should never have come this far. It does not comply with the DCP.

  28. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    June commented

    No thank you! Most comments have outlined the many acute problems with this application. It is not a mixed use development. It has no community or commercial spaces. Just a bigger supermarket, same number of shops and massive residential component. The DCP and planning documents for our village have been compiled by council over many years but seem to have been completely ignored.! Back to the drawing board owners please.

  29. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Emma commented

    Thirroul would benefit from more investment however it is doubtful the road capacity, facilities and infrastructure has been designed to cope with the additional units and traffic this would bring. I would be concerned that in an emergency evacuation, routes which would be already tested with the current population and visitors could cope as they struggle with normal weekend traffic.

  30. In Thirroul NSW on “Commercial - demolition of...” at 282-298 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Simon Blanch commented

    Although the plaza may need refurbishment, the development plans for 82 units would be a grave decision that would spell the end of the "village feel" of the town and destroy the visual aspect of the beautiful escarpment backdrop.

    This development will also threaten the very survival of Anita's Theatre and Beaches Hotel, which inject more than just money into the local economy. To lose these venues would be a severe blow to the popularity of the area and indeed live music itself.

    The limited coastal strip area cannot deal with the traffic congestion demanded of it already. The residential development would severely worsen traffic problems which are already horrendous and out of control.

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