Recent comments

  1. In Burleigh Heads QLD on “Operational Works Tree...” at 4 Second Avenue, Burleigh Heads QLD 4220:

    Debra Smith commented

    Noosa council has a rule that no building is to be higher than the tallest tree. Their beaches will NEVER be shaded by afternoon sun. Shame we can’t do the same with at least one of our beach suburbs. The whole GC will eventually look like Manhattan 😡

  2. In Tingalpa QLD on “Carry Out Operational Work...” at 274 Fleming Rd Tingalpa QLD 4173:

    Michelle Claydon commented

    One more housing development in Hemmant is just what We don’t need. We are being told that the drainage in each development is being taken care of. However, There are many of us that live in low lying areas that now will get more water during the heavy downpours and then if we have a King tide on top of that, we will be stuck in our home. Due to excessive water due to these Storm drains that aren’t doing their job.

  3. In Burleigh Heads QLD on “Operational Works Tree...” at 4 Second Avenue, Burleigh Heads QLD 4220:

    Mary commented

    I have also noticed that not only has this amazing tree been removed but directly opposite in the park area another Norfolk Pine has been removed as well. You can’t tell me there was anything wrong with it when it’s in the direct sight line of the ocean and the previously mentioned Pine. 😡😡

  4. In Old Noarlunga SA on “Outdoor firing range and...” at 1559 Piggott Range Road, Old Noarlunga SA 5168:

    James Strivens commented

    Super excited that this is on the cards. Hopefully we’ll have an Olympic Champion come from it....

  5. In Noosaville QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 39 The Peninsula Noosaville QLD 4566:

    Grenville Snowdon commented

    This will be just another nail in the coffin of the Noosa lifestyle we have all worked so hard for. You cannot chastise people for celebrating on their holidays but the consequences of continual parties in rental properties is catastrophic for family life.
    The Noosa Council must make a stand to preserve the lifestyle that we cherish.
    Noosa offers a substantial amount of holiday apartments and resorts which should be suffice in keeping the local economy buoyant. I am sure that the members of the council would object to a short term holiday rental in their street.

  6. In Umina Beach NSW on “DUPLICATE Dual Occupancy &...” at 22 Gwendolen Avenue, Umina Beach NSW 2257:

    Mellie commented

    Please can the developer work around the mature native tree on rear of this property?
    The peninsula is already the hottest suburb on the coast due to the lack of trees and continued cutting of mature trees.
    This canopy of this mature tree provides valuable cooling, habitat, and pollution reduction for the area.
    Council please can you adopt a tree plan to ensure valuable trees like this can remain and more are planted across the barren peninsula. Is there any reason why the peninsula cannot become a leafy suburb like those found in North Sydney - where people can venture out to shops in the heat of summer under the protection of the trees

  7. In Woy Woy NSW on “STAGED Multi-dwelling...” at 8 Farnell Road, Woy Woy NSW 2256:

    Jo commented

    This development is out of proportion for the area. This is an inner city Sydney scale development. Please be realistic and be sensible and refuse this. Yes you can keep plonking crap developments anywhere you like, but the residents are fed up. The peninsula is overheated as is, roads locked up, not enough trees etc etc.

  8. In Cowra NSW on “Construction of public...” at 236 Glenlogan Road Cowra 2794 NSW:

    David Clark commented

    I am in favour of this. It is a good drive to the next one.

  9. In Kingscliff NSW on “Amendment to Development...” at 19 Sutherland Street, Kingscliff NSW 2487:

    Gaida Macs commented

    As a direct neighbour of this property - I note that the process so far has taken almost 18months to arrive at this stage ... and they have only done some pile driving, diverting of a significant water course and some foundation work and a concrete pad for one third of the whole project: the drawn- out process by which the three separate parts are going to be carried out in stages concerns us deeply.
    The noise and interference that the present work has subjected us to sounds like it may take many more months, possibly years?! When can we be allowed to return to the quiet enjoyment of our own home.

    If they are building three different projects at least they should have the courtesy to carry them all out at the same time so as to firstly, conclude the disruption as soon as possible, and secondly, to take advantage of bulk purchase/contractor time and value not to mention economies of scale. Very sad that this was not considered earlier.

  10. In Winston Hills NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 4 Lois Street, Winston Hills NSW 2153:

    Tassy J commented

    The characteristic of this beautiful neighbourhood is being killed by all these unwanted dual occupancies. The old charming character of the neighbourhood will be permanently lost. There are already 2 duplexes on that street that has ruined the character of this street. All other houses are a single storey in the neighbourhood and this ground plus one duplex will affect privacy and sunlight of neighbours. The noise and traffic will also add up due to the increase in the number of these dwellings. The next street Naomi Street South also has dual occupancies proposed at 74 Naomi street south. The entire neighbourhood will become a massive construction site and will ruin the peaceful living of the old neighbours that are living there for the past 40-50 yrs. This only benefits the money-minded owner developers who will sell each duplex for more than 2 times the price purchased. Our property is landlocked between this 4 Lois street house and the other house on 74 Naomi Street South and we will be burdened by the construction pollution, lack of privacy, deprivation of sunlight and parking issues. We will permanently lose our property charm and value.

  11. In Woy Woy NSW on “STAGED Multi-dwelling...” at 8 Farnell Road, Woy Woy NSW 2256:

    Karen commented

    This development is inappropriate for the location. It is easy to see how bad the congestion is on Blackwall Rd. Just come down at school time or in the morning or evening peaks and you can sit in your car for ages. We don't need more dense housing here now. Please consider the existing local people when assessing this development. Thank you.

  12. In Merricks North VIC on “The demolition of a...” at 218 Bittern-Dromana Road Merricks North VIC 3926:

    John Patrick commented

    This is an amazingly good proposal, well considered, entirely attractive, beautifully scaled and well detailed in high quality materials. There should be more development like this especially with galvanised roofs.

  13. In Woodville North SA on “Two storey detached...” at 22 Fletcher Street Woodville North SA 5012:

    Thomas O’Connor commented

    My wife and I own the property next door, unit 2,20 Fletcher Street.We have a solar system on our roof. When considering approval for a multi storey residence that our concerns are not ignored.Solar systems require sunlight to operate and if this approved development hinders the effectiveness of our system then we have a problem.

  14. In Wombarra NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 603 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Wombarra NSW 2515:

    Roslyn Taylor commented

    1. As a resident nearby I object to this development for the following reasons.

    2. The corner which has the turn off to Denmark street from there is very dangerous and vehicles travel over the speed limit around there unable to see cars coming out of 601 and 603. As the development is for 5 car capacity there will be at least 7 cars exiting onto Lawrence Hargrave Drive. Also construction vehicles will have to close one lane and sometimes both quite often to access this property causing traffic delays and frustration to residents. As well pedestrian access to cross the road and use the footpath will be very challenging and dangerous it is difficult enough at present. As a resident on the opposite side it is difficult enough to exit my driveway and have to turn left for safety and turn at Denmark street to go south.

    2. The development is over the allowed height for this area and will not be aesthetically appealing to blend in with existing dwellings.

    3. I understand the dwelling will be used for commercial purposes which creates more traffic to exit to the main road. Why have the plans not been available on line?
    As a resident you over 45 years I am disappointed to see the loss of the coastal village feel with oversized constructions spoiling the seascape views.

    I strongly object to this development.
    object to this development.

  15. In Reynella SA on “Removal of a regulated gum...” at 16 Ross Court, Reynella SA 5161:

    Dr Iris Iwanicki commented

    re: removal of significant and regulated tree in the council area:
    57a Judith Crescent Morphett Vale
    and also regulated tree

    If the tree is not a danger and development can fit on the block providing a tree root circumference, then I strongly urge the assessment to have regard to climate change predictions and consider retaining the tree. The climatic and environmental benefits should be considered and remedial work undertaken to remove any branches in question that may be in need of trimming and maintenance of this natural asset to the property in question.

    Yours sincerely

    Dr Iris Iwanicki, PhD, Life Fellow RPIA
    Telephone 0438535058

  16. In Noosaville QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 39 The Peninsula Noosaville QLD 4566:

    M Haddon commented

    I do not support short term holiday rentals in the residential estate of Noosa Waters it should remain as a residential estate, no short term holiday rentals as the issues created from this are very disruptive to the current resident's, i.e noise, car parking issues, incorrect use of watercraft in canals, and general lack of respect for the environment and area, as a result from short term holiday rentals.

  17. In Banksia NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 15 Wolli Creek Road, Banksia NSW 2216:

    A. Anonymous commented

    I object to DA 2021/69, an application to build a two story, 8 double room boarding house at 15 Wolli Creek Rd because it irresponsibly exploits the housing crisis while exacerbating local parking and amenity issues.
    The plans show 4 parking bays on site. This is not enough for a development catering for 16 adults. It is already a challenge to find a parking spot in the area, especially when there are soccer games or training at Gardiner Park.
    Under the Bayside Local Strategic Planning Statement Kogarah and Rockdale are areas identified as areas where existing infrastructure and resources are already in place to support tenants who would require extra social support that is not found in Banksia. The nearest hospital is in Kogarah, the nearest supermarket is in Rockdale, the nearest police station is in Kogarah and social services are also located in Rockdale and Kogarah.
    Noise and traffic:
    I am concerned that this development would increase traffic and street noise. With Gardiner Park being developed traffic is already at disturbing levels, and this would make it worse.
    Exploitation of people on lower incomes:
    Over the last few decades economic inequality has sharply risen, housing prices have increased and as a result many people are experiencing a crisis in housing affordability. To alleviate this crisis, the state government needs to fund social and affordable housing, and Bayside Council should work with community housing providers and the state government to facilitate this. Both an increase in social housing for people on low incomes and affordable housing for key workers is needed. Established Community Housing Providers have the resources and experience to manage tenants in both these categories.
    Instead, the government has created planning laws that allow boarding houses to be built with self-contained rooms that are much smaller than the minimum size of an apartment. DA 2021/69 is for a two-story, 8 double room boarding house. If each room is rented for $250 per week, the landlord would make $2000/week. However, if the development was for two conventional flats, rented at $500 per week each, then the income is $1000/week. This hypothetical example shows that landlords can earn roughly twice as much by building boarding houses rather than conventional units. Developers should not be allowed to profiteer from people experiencing financial hardship.
    I therefore object to DA 2021/69 and call on council not to allow any boarding house developments in the Bayside Council area unless the development is under the management and care of an experienced and not-for-profit community housing provider or Housing NSW. To address the housing affordability crisis, Bayside Council must include targets for social and affordable housing, and concrete mechanisms for achieving them. This should include provision of greater diversity in not-for-profit housing to meet the accessibility needs of changing demographics and disadvantaged groups.

  18. In Woodville North SA on “Two storey detached...” at 22 Fletcher Street Woodville North SA 5012:

    Thomas O’Connor commented

    My wife and I own Unit 2,20 Fletcher St. We have a solar system on our roof. Will this development interfere with the efficiency of my solar system? When considering approval for this development our concerns are respected and protected by the City of Charles Sturt.

  19. In Noosaville QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 11 Saltwater Ave Noosaville QLD 4566:

    Jeremy Honeyman commented

    We entirely concur with all the objections expressed to date

  20. In Burleigh Heads QLD on “Operational Works Tree...” at 4 Second Avenue, Burleigh Heads QLD 4220:

    Tony Drysdale commented

    It's absolutely disgusting what this terribly incompetent GCCC is doing in the favour of developers. Who are they to say that these trees are "considered to be common landscape/garden species and provide limited environmental and amenity
    values". It's appalling that the council approved this monster development so that the developers can now remove all assessable vegetation within the site. You should be ashamed!! The more oversized ugly highrises that are approved, more trees are cut down. More character lost. All that will be left is big bulky buildings squashing people in tiny sardine can apartments. No one will want to live here once the novelty has worn off and we, the long term residents, will be left to live in concrete ghetto land. Wake up Council!!

  21. In West Lakes Shore SA on “Land Division – 252/D031/21...” at 7 Narooma Place West Lakes Shore SA 5020:

    Rosmarie Jones commented

    A shame this lovely little cul de sac is going to loose its personality with yet another two storey dwellings. This is not what the original West lakes area was all about

  22. In Noosaville QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 39 The Peninsula Noosaville QLD 4566:

    Deebs commented

    Noosa is a holiday area and always has been, don't move to the area then winge about it!

    Bring on the holiday rentals Noosa waters is the perfect area for it. 90% of the people in the area aren't born and bred locals so they shouldn't have a say. Move back to where you came from if you don't like what Noosa is. Don't move here and try to change it.

  23. In Carlingford NSW on “Demolition, tree removal...” at 32 Honiton Avenue, Carlingford NSW 2118:

    Kim Payne commented

    I would like to object to this development for a child care to be built on 32 Honiton Ave East. This is very dangerous spot to place a preschool . The corner of Honiton Ave East and Coleman Ave is very busy with cars in the am and pm using this way to access Pennant Hills rd by the lights . There is little parking in the street.I have lived in the area since 1984 .Cars and buses come up from Marshall rd onto to Honiton Ave and up Coleman Ave at speed. . I see many people that don’t stop at stop sign at the end of Coleman Ave .All these traffic issues make that corner very UNSAFE ato build a preschool. There is also a number of preschools close by .We have enough issues with parking in all streets surrounding this property and I feel even though there will be some parking provided on site there will be times that won’t be enough for staff and parents to pick up children safely. I object to this development also on the issues that during building process this corner spot will cause chaos to the residents of Surrounding areas that use these roads .

  24. In Redfern NSW on “Use public footway for...” at 7 Cope Street Redfern NSW 2016:

    Drew Andrea commented

    Love this!! More more please. Its exactly what this area needs to revitalise it.

  25. In Noosaville QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 39 The Peninsula Noosaville QLD 4566:

    L Lewis commented

    We retired to Noosa Waters 20 years ago for a peacefull retirement. But since the house next door has been converted to a Air B&B,we are living a nightmare.Every weekend there are Boozey parties,loud noise,dogs,screaming kids in the pool till all hours.We feel the Council should not permit this to happen in a residential area.

  26. In North Bondi NSW on “Prune one (1) Eucalypt...” at 1 Shaw Street North Bondi NSW 2026:

    Jack lowenstein commented

    I cant see any document supporting this application. In general removal of native trees should be rejected. Our dwindling tree cover is responsible for losses of native animals and birds.

  27. In Botany NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1581 Botany Road, Botany NSW 2019:

    Chris Rowney commented

    I'm against it, more traffic, more noise and more rubbish, a win win for everyone would be to build a macca's and a service station on Foreshore Road near to the boat ramp

  28. In Clayton VIC on “Construction of two (2)...” at 42 Morton Street Clayton VIC 3168:

    Joanna Lee commented

    How can I obtain a copy of the proposed plan?

  29. In Burraneer NSW on “We have a medium to large...” at 8 Dunkeld Close Burraneer NSW 2230:

    Kathy Dale commented

    I understand the safety issue with large trees near houses. Is it possible to plant a smaller tree in its place to keep something for the native bird life?

  30. In Old Noarlunga SA on “Outdoor firing range and...” at 1559 Piggott Range Road, Old Noarlunga SA 5168:

    Derek Bawden commented

    Top of a hill does not seem like the smartest place for a firing range. Too close to residential housing, there's a reason ranges are located in old quarries. Something like a gel blaster field would be better suited with no noise and no danger but still providing a fun place for kids and families to play a sport

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