Report comment

In Keiraville NSW on “Residential - multi...” at 14 Cosgrove Avenue, Keiraville NSW 2500:

Amanda Cooper commented

I wish to lodge comment on the development proposal for 14 Cosgrove Avenue Keiraville.

With regard to Council's resolution in 2014 that the ten (10) vision statements for Keiraville and Gwynneville be endorsed, I feel that vision statements 4.1 (Keiraville and Gwynneville are villages), 4.3 (building styles reflect village character) and 4.8 (valuing the university while retaining our character, are not supported by the proposed devlopment.

Specifically;
1. 4.1- villages. I am concerned about the density of dwellings in this proposal. 47 individual dwellings located within 5 buildings, with an accompanying 109 car parking spaces, accessed by a single driveway is a high density proposal. I note that these dwellings are not within the immediate vicinity of the village shops, where housing development is higher than in other parts of the village. The density of existing dwellings in Cosgrove Avenue, and in surrounding streets, Is significantly lower than this proposal. Existing street widths are designed for the current density and traffic needs.

2. 4.3 - building style reflects village character. 47 dwellings contained within 5 buildings, in my opinion, is not reflective of the village character, nor of the character of dwellings on this street and surrounding streets.

3. 4.8 - value university but retain character. This proposed development appears to be attempting to take advantage of the university's student and staff population’s hunger for accommodation and to maximise a financial return on it, at the expense of the character of the existing Keiraville village, and without sympathy for the same. Given the nature of capitalism, I am concerned that allowing this precedant will then result in further degradation of the character of our village in our to satisfy this existing hunger, and compensate for the University’s failure to supply appropriate and affordable accommodation, infrastructure and transport across the region for their students.

I also note that the removal of over 250 mature trees is not in keeping with the spirit of vision statement 4.9 (protect green spaces), which I find concerning given the rapid rate of climate change and global warming. In fact, given the events of the current fire season, and the fact only blind luck prevented the Illawarra escarpment from becoming another catastrophic fire ground, and the likelihood of the same luck not holding in future fire seasons, I am frankly astonished a development of this density, on the edge of this tract of bushland, is considered by anyone to be a wise proposition.

Practical considerations such as waste disposal, storm water mitigation, traffic congestion, visitor parking, noise and light pollution are all obvious issues and I would hope don’t need to be laboured upon.

It is also worth noting that this piece of land has never been considered appropriate for more than a single dwelling previously. Additionally, the gradient of the access has prevented even that single dwelling being built to date. I remember earthmoving equipment being unable to ascend the slope previously, and becoming stuck. This piece of land is wholly inappropriate for the proposed development in my opinion.

sent to the planning authority

This form is for reporting comments that should be removed. Reasons can include that the comment is spam, abusive, unlawful or harassing — in other words, where people are going out of their way to cause harm. Please explain clearly why you think the comment should be removed.

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