Recent comments

  1. In Glenelg North SA on “Demolition of existing...” at 2 Canning Street Glenelg North SA 5045:

    Paul Williams commented

    i just hope that the Council is taking into acc the extra parking and traffic flow to the area

  2. In Melbourne VIC on “Erection and display of a...” at 142-146 Elizabeth Street Melbourne 3000:

    Jenny Eltham commented

    As this is such a primary location, it would be hoped that it is mandatory for the hoarding to be kept graffiti and Bill free, not used for advertising and contributes to the area’s amenity, by being a thoughtful art work.

  3. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Sivakumar Kathiresan commented

    Please stop this project to ensure safety for the children and the neighbourhood.

  4. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Dhaval Joshi commented

    As a near by residence, I strongly oppose to this project. It will affect community, traffic and particularly children in this area as it has 2 school and 2 child care within walking distance. This area already has enough traffic please don't make more by adding 30 units.

  5. In South Yarra VIC on “Condition 1 - Plans...” at 11-13 Wilson Street, South Yarra VIC 3141:

    Susi Inglis commented

    This areas is so overdeveloped. Along with these massive high-rise comes cars - you cannot stop them. How does an area that was once meant to be a suburb of Melbourne not a suburb of high-rise developments - becoming a satellite greedy city of development. Please Stonnington stop and look at the long term development in this area. Susi Inglis

  6. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Dhaval Patel commented

    I live nearby this property and I strongly oppose this boarding house because I don’t want this beautiful area to become a commercial.

  7. In Burraneer NSW on “The nominated trees are...” at 70 Burraneer Bay Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    Colin Bisset commented

    The loss of yet more large trees on this stretch of road is sad, indeed. The reasons given are not strong given that all gum trees drop branches - pruning can mitigate the danger to others. Replacement with proper trees, not small shrubby trees, must be enforced.

  8. In East Launceston TAS on “Residential - Demolish...” at 14-16 St Georges Square East Launceston TAS 7250:

    Paul Osborne commented

    This development application, and in particular the proposal to demolish a very substantial amount of 150 yr old brick wall, is in my opinion, page 1- step 1 from the profit-above-all developer handbook. Buy a property with recognised heritage/character value that is obviously in need of maintenance or repair and then apply to knock it down. Alternatively, sit back and wait till it falls over then build what you want anyway.
    If the council allows this sort of development scenario to proceed, then it will be open slather for unscrupulous developers. The built heritage that brings tourists to Launceston and the resultant long term economic benefits to the entire community, will be gone forever.
    In addition, I find it hard to believe that any architect of note wouldn’t want to incorporate a wall with that amount of character into a new design. Admittedly the wall needs repair, but it is a straightforward process, carried out on vastly more substantial structures worldwide on a daily basis. I believe the photos and data contained in the DA, illustrating how much the wall is out of plumb, are cynical in the extreme.
    Again, the council needs to draw a line in the sand or this type of development will flourish, to the detriment of all but the few who seek to profit from it in the short term.

  9. In Hindmarsh SA on “Removal of a significant...” at 2 Manton Street Hindmarsh SA 5007:

    phillip commented

    is this necessary, we have already removed a number of trees from this strip and it has made it unattractive. if the tree is significant, doesn't that make it exempt from removal unless it presnts a danger?

  10. In Carlingford NSW on “Development Application -...” at 1 - 7 Thallon Street Carlingford NSW 2118:

    Juli commented

    Hi Parramatta council,

    Is this not the block where trees were removed illegally? I wonder why this development group are being approved to build at all. Surely this group can’t be trusted. What’s their policy on cladding? Beware.


  11. In Boronia VIC on “The construction of four...” at 64 Boronia Road, Boronia VIC 3155:

    donna commented

    Nope, nope and nope, another multi dwelling that will clog up the road and look like a shanti !

  12. In Mount Hutton NSW on “Telecommunication Facility” at Lake Macquarie Square 46 Wilsons Road Mount Hutton NSW 2290:

    Margaret Paget commented

    I am very concerned about the location of the mobile phone tower at Lake Macquarie Square.
    There are 1000,s of people going to the centre each week plus a childcare centre in the grounds.
    My grandchild lives four block from the centre and I'm very concerned about the radiation.
    Surely there is an area close by in the crown land or the quarry up the road that would be more suitable.

  13. In Mount Hutton NSW on “Telecommunication Facility” at Lake Macquarie Square 46 Wilsons Road Mount Hutton NSW 2290:

    Andrew Youd commented

    Hi, we live close to the shopping centre. We have a young child and planning to grow our family. Whilst we understand the area needs better reception, we are very concerned about potential health risks to our family, the many people who work in the centre, live around it, and, in particular, the childcare centre behind little Ceasars. I recognise that there is no evidence of adverse health effects from mobile towers, but there is also no evidence to say that it certainly doesn't cause any harm. We don't want to take the risk. It should be placed in a location less populated but which will still service the area? Regards

  14. In Richmond VIC on “Extension to existing...” at 178 Bridge Rd Richmond VIC 3121:

    Dominic Green commented

    The reduction in carparking will inevitably lead to parking in adjacent streets, reducing the ame ity of the area. There is already a lack of working due to the increase in service and fitness businesses along Bridge Rd. If the development cannot factor in the required parking then reduce the number of residences.

    At what point does Yarra council reflect on past planning decisions and their effect on the stretch of Bridge Rd from Church Street to Punt Rd and consider that they may have got it wrong? It's a ghost-like wind tunnel, made so by the overshadowing apartment blocks on the North of the road. Please advise.

  15. In Naremburn NSW on “Remove 2 x Chinese Celtis” at 246A Willoughby Road Naremburn NSW 2065.:

    Peter S commented

    Amanda Smith, if you have nothing specific to add about the specific application then stay out of it. Of course there is a reason for the trees to be removed. It’s obviously not as simple as you think it is!

  16. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Jigar commented

    As a member of integrated, peaceful community of Girraween and regular contributor of the Cumberland council I oppose the plan for building the boarding houses at 96 Oramzi road,Girraween.

    The boarding houses proposed for Oramzi Road are close to the primary school, posing a “severe risk to school children arising out of potential occupants and traffic” and the aspect of trust will be seriously questioned if the boarding house development proceeds. The peace and wellbeing of the neighbours will be significantly affected by the proposed building.

  17. In Mooroolbark VIC on “Buildings and works to...” at 42 Winyard Drive, Mooroolbark VIC 3138:

    Concerned of Mooroolbark commented

    Enough units in this street it is getting hard to drive through with cars parked on both sides of the rd. It is becoming so very dangerous

  18. In Sydney NSW on “Use of two spaces adjacent...” at 2 Murray Street Sydney NSW 2000:

    Mark Hansen commented

    Yes please. Sculpture is a far better use of central city space than a parking lot, especially in the extremely pedestrianized, well-served by public-transport Darling Harbor precinct.

  19. In Stafford Heights QLD on “Filling and/or Excavation” at 818 Rode Rd Stafford Heights QLD 4053:

    Clive O'Sullivan commented

    Please inform the community this is not the start of the Blue Care aged care facility that will endanger wild life, kill trees and generally be an eyesore

  20. In Bondi NSW on “Prune two (2) Large Trees...” at 71 Anglesea Street Bondi NSW 2026:

    kathleen tangney commented


  21. In Glenelg North SA on “Land division - Torrens...” at 10 Warren Avenue, Glenelg North SA 5045:

    Amanda Durbridge commented

    we approve a sub division but we do not want a double storey next door. Please advise me if an application for double storey is applied for. Thanks Amanda neighbour.

  22. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Janakiram Sampalli commented

    As a member of this tightly knit, peaceful community of Girraween, I oppose this project's approval considering the peace and safety of children with 2 primary schools and 2 child care centres within meters of the proposed building.

    Also, the traffic will be affected significantly resulting in congestion and threat to children walking to and from the schools.

    Keeping these in view, please DO NOT approve this project.

    Kind Regards,

  23. In Warwick Farm NSW on “Stage 1 Early work -...” at 200 Governor Macquarie Drive Warwick Farm NSW 2170:

    Alison Horscroft commented

    What is this concrete slab for?

  24. In Preston VIC on “Construction of a medium...” at 50 Regent Street Preston VIC 3072:

    Suzanne commented

    Totally agree with previous comment. Parking already becoming a problem due to opposite development, to the point where turning in and out of the street has become dangerous. This is a tiny but busy street. Please reconsider.

  25. In Port Adelaide SA on “Single storey detached...” at 3 Holmes St Port Adelaide SA 5015:

    Jenny Ramos commented

    What a shame this lovely blue stone house is going to be knocked down and replaced with a generic new dwelling. It must be at least 100 years old. So sad the Port is losing it's working class history. Shed 26 knocked down and now the old dwellings are following.

  26. In Tweed Heads South NSW on “Integrated Development -...” at 136 - 150 Dry Dock Road Tweed Heads South NSW 2486:

    Kevin Leane commented

    What is the proposed development.

  27. In Naremburn NSW on “Remove 2 x Chinese Celtis” at 246A Willoughby Road Naremburn NSW 2065.:

    Amanda Smith commented

    Why do these trees need to be removed ? The landscape of our suburb is being demolished tree by tree ! Trees = life . It’s that simple.

  28. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Nag Gowda commented

    Please do not approve this proposal, all of the residents do not want this boarding house in the area.

  29. In Mount Eliza VIC on “Buildings and works to...” at 235 Canadian Bay Road Mount Eliza VIC 3930:

    Kerry Rainer commented

    As far as I can ascertain, this application seeks to amend the original granted permit application of "aged care facility" to a non specified " any other development, one or more new buildings" If given approval, this application could result in anything ( fast food outlet, blocks of units etc ) being constructed. Therefore I strongly object to application P16/1538.02 as the potential new use and development of the site is an unknown entity as are the ramifications and impacts to myself and the local community.

  30. In Girraween NSW on “Demolition of Exisiting...” at 96 Oramzi Road, Girraween NSW 2145:

    Venu Boreddy commented

    Please stop this project so that our community will be safe and our children will be safe.

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