I also agree with the Marrickville Heritage Society that a 5 storey building will be out of place in that section. It will cause further over crowding of an already crowded area. There are also quite a number of retail vacancies already in the area and the new ones are always vastly overpriced and so not really providing small business owners a chance to succeed. Ultimately the developer would rather leave them empty and cause a blight on the street (as what has happened only a little way up the street on the corner of Byrnes street where most of the badly thought out retail space has remained empty for over 3 years.)
The Heritage of the area is slowly being eaten away and Marrickville will become bland and awful.
I think that this development poses a great risk to the heritage nature of adjoining sites, contributing detrimentally to the streets cape, and adding significant issues of overlooking and privacy concern.
The result of the approval of this dwelling shall be the irreversible continuation of gentrification of our beautiful neighborhood, and the surrounding streets cape losing its characteristic aesthetic qualities.
Neil Morris. You are amazing in your battle. I must admit I have given up considering what is happening in Struan Ave. I do not understand why they are doing this overdevelopment in our areas and after lots of protests feel no one really cares about our lifestyle. No one considers our submission. I am amazed at the fact they say if they will consider it if we stay polite etc.... I am not a person who normally swears but OH I would love to.
Neil Morris. You are amazing in your battle. I must admit I have given up considering what is happening in Struan Ave. I do not understand why they are doing this overdevelopment in our areas and after lots of protests feel no one really cares about our lifestyle. No one considers our submission. I am amazed at the fact they say if they will consider it if we stay polite etc.... I am not a person who normally swears but OH I would love to.
Great for Council rate revenue, but this development. like others, will bring with it additional vehicular traffic and street parking that is at/over it maximum now. What proposals are there to ease this additional extension to the traffic.
I will agree with Mr Scott MacArthur below. While not opposing at all the development of more units in central Marrickville, we need to be careful with our choices. The particular lot of old houses are best to be restored and used as food and coffee places (as some are already) that enhance and add to the character of Marrickville. Too many grey, generic buildings are already built with no reference or respect to Marrickville’s unique individual character of its people and surroundings. Instead of taking down unattractive, run down buildings and replacing them with unique, colourful and friendly designed units, we opt to create more generic boxes of grey and demolish charming, historical dwellings. This makes very little sense for Illawarra Road and will end up looking like Canterbury road instead
I am totally against this development.
It looks like Milperra has been ear marked for over development on every green patch it hold as precious with no regard to the impact it has on residents.
Apart from the devastation to natural habitat it is just incomprehensible that you would approve any development that would put our native wildlife further at risk.
The major to residents within the district is the obvious - there is simply not enough infrastructure for this development. We have major speed & traffic issues along Henry Lawson Drive from Milperra Road to the M5. I have given up long ago the idea I could turn right from my street onto HLD during peak hour. Extra traffic already dog leg through our local streets which sees an increase amount of vehicles at speed past the day care centres, preschools & the primary school.
We have already slow water pressure, limited public transport, extremely poor and congested phone/internet connections and don't forget the flood issues around the Riverlands Golf Course.
This development with the added 2 cars per dwelling would create gridlock and be an environmental disaster. The community of Milperra is stunned that this proposal is even being considered for our safe and quiet suburb! I am totally against this development!
We are all totally against the development of Riverlands Golf Course.
I’m with you Steve Barton. The garbage bins and litter on the streets, footpaths and gutters is disgusting. Council should be ashamed! Virtually no enforcement of the rules and not enough street cleaners. It’s very nice building little flower patches next to the footpaths but they quickly lose their charm when littered with garbage. Wake up city council and do something about it.
Drainage is of real concern in Britton rd and the entire Seville basin .
The existing main drain to the northern boundary of Britton rd (running east) is already non compliant with Vba regulation as it’s undersized at 150mm for the ARI for Seville with 1 in 100 year flooding
It’s also without sufficient grade (holding water therefore mud therefore breaching across ground ) for the m2 of roofs , hard surfaces and ground water it already has to cope with .
Soil tests show impermeable clay therefore low to near zero percolation once saturated .
The table drain to the south of Britton rd already breaches in numerous places only to flow down the road like a river then branch off down adjacent driveways due to Drummond rd run off .
Once 9 Britton rd was developed the next flood was intensified at our end of the street with less rain than the previous flooding episode ,
Britton rd not only has to cope with the entire Drummond rd estate stormwater racing down hill , but also the creek starts backing up towards us
There’s already much concern amongst neighbours I’ve spoken to !
Extra concentrated load on existing infrastructure will not only flood our garages again but could result in flooding of our houses , 1 house in the street already floods and several houses only just escaped flooding last rainstorms .
With global warming , other states/countries have already experienced more intense ARI with weather patterns .
The only way I could see this proposed development not impact on neighbouring properties is for the northern drain to be Vba compliant being correctly sized with sufficient grade/fall with engineering .
We live in the block next door at 125 MacPherson Street and the tables would not only take up too much of the footpath, but the noise from the outdoor diners and wait-staff would be unbearable. Definitely against the proposal.
23 dwellings on a 5,502 m² block! Where is the parking going to be accommodated? where is the extra green parks or amenities that so many people living on this one block will enjoy? It seems the usual story of these extra density living piggy backing off the green areas/parks which were there prior, without any extra being provided. It seems that the Knox Council will allow any number of dwellings on a block that initially had one home, but don't ask the developers to add anything to the surroundings. Most of these developments use nearly the whole block to maximize the number of dwellings, so little green space/ garden is left.
This road is already heavily over developed, to the point that you can not safely enter it from Morphett Road due to the amount of cars parked on the street.
I was almost ran into last week because of this issue, being unable to enter the road having to giveway to an oncoming vehicle trying to exit, and having someone run up the back of me.
Will council or state government pay for my medical bills, replacement vehicle and lost income if unable to work? If No, then same answer should be given to this development.
All levels of Governments need to stop putting the community at risk and stop this level of poorly designed urban infill.
For all those against this level of development, please read and sign the petition below.
http://chng.it/4xHd8JWHcY
It is a shame to see the only large tree on Gwendolen Ave come down but can the owners plant a shade tree* (or two) to replace it?
The Peninsula and Umina in particular are now rated as one of the hottest suburbs (coastal sand plain) on the Central Coast therefore any additional trees planted on private land will add value when sold plus cost savings with electricity for air-conditioning on these hot days, not to mention flowers for bees & places for birds and wildlife.
* a shade tree doesn't have to be a big rangy gum or exotic but how about a broad-leaf tuckeroo, flowering gum, yellow bloodwood, native frangapani, brush box, ivory curl tree, blueberry ash or callistemon (bottlebrush)? All these trees tolerate the sand and don't get gigantic.
When the pool is complete, can the owners plant a shade tree* (or two) and a few at the front?
The Peninsula and Umina in particular are now rated as one of the hottest suburbs (coastal sand plain) on the Central Coast therefore any additional trees planted on private land will add value when sold plus cost savings with electricity for air-conditioning on these hot days.
* a shade tree doesn't have to be a big rangy gum but how about a broad-leaf tuckeroo, flowering gum, yellow bloodwood, native frangapani, brush box, ivory curl tree, blueberry ash or callistemon (bottlebrush)? All these trees tolerate the sand and don't get gigantic.
Can the owners work around the trees at the rear or plant a shade tree* (or two) to complement the shrubs at the front?
The Peninsula and Umina in particular are now rated as one of the hottest suburbs (coastal sand plain) on the Central Coast therefore any additional trees planted on private land will add value when sold plus cost savings with electricity for air-conditioning on these hot days.
* a shade tree doesn't have to be a big rangy gum but how about a broad-leaf tuckeroo, flowering gum, yellow bloodwood, native frangapani, brush box, ivory curl tree, blueberry ash or callistemon (bottlebrush)? All these trees tolerate the sand and don't get gigantic.
When the renovations are complete, can the owners plant a shade tree* (or two) to complement the shrubs at the front?
The Peninsula and Ettalong in particular are now rated as one of the hottest suburbs (coastal sand plain) on the Central Coast therefore any additional trees planted on private land will add value when sold plus cost savings with electricity for air-conditioning on these hot days.
* a shade tree doesn't have to be a big rangy gum but how about a broad-leaf tuckeroo, flowering gum, yellow bloodwood, native frangapani, brush box, ivory curl tree, blueberry ash or callistemon (bottlebrush)? All these trees tolerate the sand and don't get gigantic.
While it is good to see structures being renewed and adapted, all too often, the site is clear-felled, as is the case here, and low level plantings appear at the end - with no shade trees, again!
Can Council follow-up on this project to have the developers comply with CCC's commitment to Greening Places and Urban Canopy targets?
The Marrickville Heritage Society does not support this application.
315-321 Illawarra Road comprises two pairs of Federation era single storey semi-deatched houses that are currently used as a small shop, a residence and a doctor's surgery. They retain many of their original character features, with decorative terracotta ridge tiles, slate roofs and gable barge boards intact, but sadly the tuck-pointed brickwork has been painted and rendered over. The doctor's surgery has been used as medical rooms continuously from 1917, initially as Dr Francis Murphy's dental surgery, then as a doctor's surgeries, right up to the present day.
It is proposed to demolish the existing houses and replace them with a five storey mixed use building, with a medical centre and shops under 38 serviced apartments, and underground carparking. The Society is concerned that the proposal is over-scaled and out of character for this narrow section of Illawarra Road, where the existing building stock is simple late Victorian and Edwardian retail shopfronts, no more than three-storeys tall. The new building will also loom over the single storey Federation and Inter-war era dwellings in Central Avenue. The Society also notes that the cladding of the highly prominant facade and end walls of the taller residential tower is monolithic dark grey metal sheeting. This is the same colour cladding that has been used in other new developments along Illawarra and Marrickville Roads, to the great detriment of the varied and eclectic streetscape character of the precinct. The Society notes that there are many vacant retail tenancies in new 'shop top' developments in Marrickville, and is concerned that heritage and character buildings in our commercial precints are being sacrificed on the basis of a flawed business model.
Scott MacArthur,
President, Marrickville Heritage Society
Can the owners and contractors work around or prune the significant trees on the rear boundary for shade?
All too often with villa builds, the blocks are clear-felled with not even a blade of grass left and nothing much is planted when all is finished. This in turn contributes further to our hotter Peninsula with hard reflective surfaces with little to no shade.
I would not like any more outdoor seating areas in this part of Macpherson St. Already it is very overcrowded causing either walking out on the road or having to ask people if you can pass. So I am not in favour of a new footpath dining permit for Nick Bardetta for 9 tables and 18 chairs or anyone else
If this new development brings additional vehicular traffic into the area, what is the Council proposing to prevent further congestion. The roads are full now
Great, this area needs revitalization and more small business like restaurants,bars and shopping to breathe life into its dark garbage bin graffitied riddled streets.
This would not work. It gets extremely congested along that strip. Often we’ve had to walk out into the road near 3 Blue Ducks because people spread out with prams and dogs plus people milling around the outdoor seating area. Huxton’s is ok because the corner affords more space and The Char seating is very small and up against the wall.
I am assuming that significant trees are protected on private property (as there would be no reason to apply to council for removal if this was not the case). Therefore what is the basis for considering removal? If approval to remove tree is granted, what Protection is actually afforded to the tree by being termed significant in practical terms?
I hope council can come up with some sort of street parking restriction for this property as it is near a tight bend in the street .also the local bus service uses the street and the drivers already have difficulty negotiating the street due to boats ,caravans and trucks parking on the road.
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.
In Marrickville NSW on “To demolish existing...” at 315-317 Illawarra Road Marrickville NSW 2204:
In Parramatta NSW on “Development Application -...” at 73 High Street Parramatta NSW 2150:
In Oaklands Park SA on “To construct three single...” at 13 Shearing St, Oaklands Park 5046 SA:
In Oaklands Park SA on “To construct three single...” at 13 Shearing St, Oaklands Park 5046 SA:
In Carlingford NSW on “Development Application -...” at 32 Georgian Avenue Carlingford NSW 2118:
In Marrickville NSW on “To demolish existing...” at 315-317 Illawarra Road Marrickville NSW 2204:
In Bronte NSW on “New footpath dining permit...” at 127 MacPherson Street Bronte NSW 2024:
In Milperra NSW on “Subdivision of proposed Lot...” at 56 Prescott Parade, Milperra NSW 2214:
In Upper Swan WA on “Solid boundary fence” at 21 Station Street Upper Swan WA 6069:
In Wantirna VIC on “Variation of Licence” at Templeton Reserve, 51 Templeton Street, Wantirna 3152, VIC:
In Surry Hills NSW on “Change of use of suite 1,...” at 16-22 Cooper Street Surry Hills NSW 2010:
In Seville VIC on “Two lot subdivision” at 5 Britton Road, Seville VIC 3139:
In Bronte NSW on “New footpath dining permit...” at 127 MacPherson Street Bronte NSW 2024:
In Ferntree Gully VIC on “Development of the land for...” at 9 Commercial Road, Ferntree Gully VIC 3156:
In Oaklands Park SA on “To construct three single...” at 13 Shearing St, Oaklands Park 5046 SA:
In Umina Beach NSW on “Removal of 1 x Liquidamber...” at 76 Gwendolen Avenue, Umina Beach NSW 2257:
In Umina Beach NSW on “Concrete Swimming Pool” at 42 Osborne Avenue, Umina Beach NSW 2257:
In Umina Beach NSW on “Single Storey Dwelling” at 50 Australia Avenue, Umina Beach NSW 2257:
In Ettalong Beach NSW on “Modification- Increase...” at 26 Picnic Parade, Ettalong Beach NSW 2257:
In Ettalong Beach NSW on “Section 4.55 Amendment -...” at 352 Ocean View Road, Ettalong Beach NSW 2257:
In Marrickville NSW on “To demolish existing...” at 315-317 Illawarra Road Marrickville NSW 2204:
In Umina Beach NSW on “Multi Dwelling Housing...” at 125 Bourke Road, Umina Beach NSW 2257:
In Bronte NSW on “New footpath dining permit...” at 127 MacPherson Street Bronte NSW 2024:
In North Rocks NSW on “Complying Development...” at 11 Yale Close North Rocks NSW 2151:
In West Pennant Hills NSW on “Demolition of an Existing...” at 111 Eaton Road, West Pennant Hills NSW 2125:
In Surry Hills NSW on “Change of use of suite 1,...” at 16-22 Cooper Street Surry Hills NSW 2010:
In Bronte NSW on “New footpath dining permit...” at 127 MacPherson Street Bronte NSW 2024:
In Glenelg East SA on “Removal of significant SA...” at 122 Brighton Road Glenelg East SA 5045:
In Revesby Heights NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 8 Sandakan Road, Revesby Heights NSW 2212:
In Brunswick VIC on “Buildings and works to...” at 162 Hope Street, Brunswick VIC 3056: