Recent comments

  1. In Chatswood NSW on “Request to remove clump of...” at 8-14 Ellis Street Chatswood NSW 2067.:

    Logical Assessment commented

    Generalised comments are not helpful - if you have to interfere in someone's life - that you have never met - at least specifically address the application.

  2. In Artarmon NSW on “Application to remove one...” at 300 Mowbray Road Artarmon NSW 2064.:

    Logical Assessment commented

    OMG - the three of you appear to have too much time on your hands - let us know your address so we can inspect your place and interfere with your lifestyle

  3. In Speers Point NSW on “Community Facility (Multi...” at Speers Point Park 23 Park Road Speers Point NSW 2284:

    E. Williams commented

    I also object to the design and location of this structure. It is insensitive to the users of the park and to the open nature of the park. It needs to be must less intrusive and not block views.

  4. In Macquarie Park NSW on “Approval is sought for a...” at 122 Herring Rd Macquarie Park NSW 2113:

    Megan K commented

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    Please consider our request and do not proceed with the proposed development.

    Maquarie Park is a great location for young families, not a place reputable for students' party central. Please come to the area on Wednesday nights after drunk noisy crowds return from the Ranch hotel, leaving our parks behind Morling College completely trashed and vandalised. This is a huge disruption to young families with children wanting a clean playgrounds and putting kids to sleep.
    If more student accomodation is going to be built and Morling College is encouraging such behaviour, then please prevent this proposed development.

  5. In Speers Point NSW on “Community Facility (Multi...” at Speers Point Park 23 Park Road Speers Point NSW 2284:

    Susan Gleeson commented

    When this multi-purpose arts venue was first mentioned, I had been hopeful it would be a fantastic asset to the Lake Macquarie/Newcastle residents and the wider community. So I have just now looked at the plans and artist impression of the style of building and the proposed site.

    This proposal is drab and disappointing. I think the Council is way off mark with this proposal. As for who this venue could benefit, I ask how could a small one room space be called "multi-purpose arts" facility. It has just 2 toilets and a small kitchen. Basically it is just a very costly room for hire. There are plenty of rooms for hire already existing - Teralba Community Hall for one, the Performing Arts Centre at Warners Bay and numerous other halls.

    As for the location, why plant it on the boulevard, thereby blocking longer views of the lake from the enclosed picnic area, and the view is of a brick/concrete bunker, not to mention the length (and long view) of the boulevard being compromised by what looks a little like a fancy toilet block.

    Could the building be located elsewhere within Speers Point Park? I have seen a suggestion that it be on the western side of Speers Point Park (close to the western carpark). I think this would be a good use of the land, and with a more sympathetic use of materials, it could capitalise on a terrific view and be a venue that brings joy.

    I think this building and its location is a very short sighted vision. Why waste the opportunity to have a better design that at least looks like it could be exciting and bring joy to its users and the people who visit the park.

  6. In Leura NSW on “Nineteen residential units...” at 8 Great Western Highway Leura NSW 2780:

    Darryl Nelson commented

    Dannielle Parisi comments would reflect most residents feelings about the character of the Leura village and surrounding area.

  7. In Punchbowl NSW on “Additional use of premises...” at 77 Wattle Street, Punchbowl NSW 2196:

    Arthur commented

    Perfect cafe better than fruit shop on that corner fruit shop was a mess

  8. In Balnarring Beach VIC on “Vegetation removal” at Miscellaneous Planning Applications Mornington VIC 3931:

    Jane Pincott commented

    I would like to object to the removal of this beautiful old coastal manna gum. I understand that this tree has become an issue for buses entering Balnarrring Beach but ask that you please consider other options for management of this. This tree provides important habitat for our rapidly dwindling koala population. The beauty of this old tree also adds to the character of our town and is enjoyed by residents as they enter. The small number of buses, low speed limit and minimal traffic in this area surely do not warrant the removal of such a significant tree.

  9. In Parramatta NSW on “Development Application -...” at 23 Harold Street Parramatta NSW 2150:

    Paul Johnson commented

    I fully support this application. Parramatta is Sydney's next CBD. Light rail construction means that many more residents and visitors will be required in order to utilise the benefits.
    Hopefully, more businesses will be attracted to the area, creating more jobs. High rise development along Church Street is to be encouraged. As Parramattas population grows, more and more housing will be required. With easy access to Parramattas CBD , the construction of residential apartments will bring prosperity and commerce to the district.

  10. In Balnarring Beach VIC on “Vegetation removal” at Miscellaneous Planning Applications Mornington VIC 3931:

    Mark Payton commented

    I am objecting to the removal of the Manna Gum which marks the entrance to Balnarring Bch , as a local resident l cherish the beautiful environment that surrounds myself and my family , as l understand the reason for the removal is because the bus has to turn wide slightly to miss it , l would like you to keep in mind that the bus has been coming passed that point for at least 35yrs without incident and the idea that cutting down any tree especially this particular one on the very slim chance that it’s a danger doesn’t stake up ,
    Please leave the tree !

  11. In Macquarie Park NSW on “Approval is sought for a...” at 122 Herring Rd Macquarie Park NSW 2113:

    C. R commented

    Dear City of Ryde Council,
    No one should be living in an unsafe, lack of privacy and overcrowded living environment.
    The new development proposed will be unsafe for the existing owners, and tenants. Cracks and leaks (including underground areas) have already been reported by many residents to building managers etc. Further drilling, excavation will not only create noise, air pollutions but fatally weaken the construction and foundation of the surrounding buildings. Please respect the basic living condition standard of the current people who already made Saunders Close their home!
    We believe the council will not neglect and damage current residents' basic living conditions (for the sake of getting new incomes and rooms for new developers). Please don't endanger existing people's homes for future years to come!

  12. In Bexley North NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 72 Laycock Street, Bexley North NSW 2207:

    John Polous commented

    I wish to lodge an objection to the DA 2019/286 on the following ground:

    • The Bowling club, when it was operational closed most nights by 7.00pm with the exception of Friday nights when it occasional closed at midnight.

    • During operations till 12 mid night many times noise could be heard from a block away especailly events with Dis

    • The premises have not been used as a club for in excess of 2 years and therefore have been abandoned,

    • Under current legislation “Without limiting the generality of subsection (2) (e), a use is to be presumed, unless the contrary is established, to be abandoned if it ceases to be actually so used for a continuous period of 12 months.” The registration lapsed more than two years again, and has not been or been able to be used as a club.

    • Applicant’s report shows this to be the case. the club registration expired in July 2017 – more than two years ago and notwithstanding that this development relies solely on existing use rights for the approval to proceed as a licensed club – no effort was made to ensure that the Bowling club remained registered. The fee in the vicinity of $550.00 was not paid and the registration has been cancelled permanently.

    • The development is excessive and not in keeping with the local street scape

    • The development goes against the conditions made by the Administrator that the lease must meet community expectations. The roof line at its maximum height is in excess of stories which is evident in the locality,

    • Traffic conditions have not been adequately addressed for the proposed number of persons.

    • traffic control and calming devices are not fit for purpose currently, let alone with this development.

    • car parking is difficult currently and development does not have enough parking for site visitors

    • local area is truck free yet if allowed then truck deliveries will be the norm for the local streets

    • The hours of operation are excessive in a residential area and are not appropriate in the locality, and certainly not in keeping with hours kept by previous club. residents bought houses based on 7pm closure not a late night trading hub!

    • Public transport, particularly at night, is insufficient to cater for the proposed number of people that will be leaving the premises after functions making driving to and from the venue the most likely mode of transport. cars leaving will also increase nosie and air pollution

    • The site sits in a gully creating a nature acoustic area making it problematic and difficult to contain noise – particularly given that functions can be held outside until the late hours of the night. This has not been addressed in the report as it does not show the typography of the area.

    • The development is vastly different to the draft proposal lodged by AHEPA at Tender Stage and resolved by council on 20 April 2016 and presented to the community. The development is almost twice the size as was previously presented and is excessive.

    • The SoEE page 23 confirms that the proposed development will be in part, approximately 3 Metre above that of the surrounding area and is not in keeping with the street scape nor appropriate to the area.

    • The function of the proposed development is not appropriate to a low-density residential area but rather more to the area where it is currently located away from low density housing.

    • The existing structure of the previous club was in keeping with the streetscape and was abandoned and left derelict to strengthen the applicant’s case to increase the development. The proposed development is far in excess and not compatible with the surrounding mid-century housing.

    • The development is excessive and not designed to be compatible with existing development in the area.

    • On the basis of items listed above the development should not be approved.

  13. In Macquarie Park NSW on “Approval is sought for a...” at 122 Herring Rd Macquarie Park NSW 2113:

    K. R commented

    Dear City of Ryde council,
    Other than Saunders Close 1, other Saunders Close apartments will also be impacted by the new extensive drilling and excavation into the ground: we already have construction issues (e.g leaking and cracks within buildings and parking spaces) with the current Saunders Close buildings. Knowing this, further drilling and excavation in the immediate areas will aggravate the entire community's building structures :( The damages will be too high for so many existing tenants, property owners etc. Please don't build on such a dense and already developed land :( The consequences and damages will be too substantial and please think in the people who first settled here. If you are in our shoes, would you risk further cracks, leaks and damages in your own homes? :(

  14. In Artarmon NSW on “Application to remove one...” at 300 Mowbray Road Artarmon NSW 2064.:

    Mike Pickles commented

    Leaves falling in a gutter seems to be a very weak reason to fell a tree. Gutters need cleaning regularly otherwise they will block up.

  15. In Macquarie Park NSW on “Approval is sought for a...” at 122 Herring Rd Macquarie Park NSW 2113:

    John Zhang commented

    Disagree with the DA to develop high density buildings as it's overcrowded and will cause traffic congestion. The proposed building is too close to the surrounding building will cause risk.

  16. In Sapphire Beach NSW on “Centre-based childcare...” at 2 Beach Way, Sapphire Beach NSW 2450:

    David commented

    Very disappointing to hear of this application. The layout of the estate centred around boardwalks and paths to the Beachstone Cafe. The loss of the cafe and what it currently offers the local community and visitors would be a real shame. With plenty of Day care centres already available locally I urge the council to reconsider this application and have some consideration for the residents of North Sapphire who were sold the Dream by developers and envisioned weekends and afternoons at The Cafe with family and friends.

  17. In Sapphire Beach NSW on “Centre-based childcare...” at 2 Beach Way, Sapphire Beach NSW 2450:

    Emma Sainsbury commented

    Very disappointing to hear of this application! Beachstone cafe and park would be a major loss to the Sapphire community. Communities need these spaces to build a community and engage with each other. The benefits of these spaces not only impacts on physical activity but also contributes to mental health and other health outcomes for the community. The environments where people choose to live and raise there families has major affects on these outcomes.

  18. In Northcote VIC on “Proposed demolition of...” at 2A Cunningham Street Northcote VIC 3070:

    Lou Baxter commented

    This is a disgrace - native habitat and green space destroyed! The inner suburbs are bearing far too much of the burden of population growth, which should be spread over all of Melbourne (just look at the population densities of the different areas of Melbourne). Developers massive profits should NOT be put ahead of future liveability for residents.

  19. In Clontarf QLD on “Material Change of Use -...” at 12-18 Haysmouth Parade, Clontarf QLD 4019:

    Amy Thomas commented

    Dear Moreton Bay Regional Council,

    As a local Redcliffe resident, this proposal is concerning. This is located in close proximity to an important natural habitat for koalas, kangaroos and other wildlife. Not only is this a great concern for the biodiversity of the area, but it will also place significant pressure on Haysmouth Parade with the 40 dwelling proposal net keeping with natural look of the waterway or local suburban area.

    The height of the structure is inappropriate to the area and is close to a tidal line which may mean significant modification of the shoreline to protect against erosion to the detriment of Hays Inlet.

    Kind regards,

    Amy from Redcliffe

  20. In Sapphire Beach NSW on “Centre-based childcare...” at 2 Beach Way, Sapphire Beach NSW 2450:

    Barbara commented

    Why do we need a childcare centre? There is one nearby at Moonee.
    We purchased our land believing that the cafe and park would always be part of the North Sapphire community. It is very well utilised by locals and visitors. I strongly object to a commercial childcare centre in this space.

  21. In North Rocks NSW on “Building Certificate -...” at 7 Barclay Road North Rocks NSW 2151:

    Brian BORJESON commented

    If work is non complaint, it should be bought up to current standards.

  22. In Fawkner VIC on “Construction of 8 dwellings...” at 21 Hood Crescent, Fawkner VIC 3060:

    Sandra commented

    This can't be happening again!

    This is the second time that this developer has initiated this plan.

    Eight!! Where on such a small block of land will 8 properly constructed houses accommodate families moving into this area!

    Points to consider...Hood Cres - small narrow road. Traffic hazard. Noise pollution. Environmental concerns. Safety for the children playing in the area. Safety for the elderly in the area. Access to driveways. Access for Council garbage collection trucks. Emergency vehicle access....need I go on!

  23. In Artarmon NSW on “Application to remove one...” at 300 Mowbray Road Artarmon NSW 2064.:

    Meredith Anne Foley commented

    Surely this is an unnecessary removal. Perhaps clean the gutters or affix gutter guard? Pruning the tree away from the gutters is another possibility.

  24. In Tyabb VIC on “Development of a...” at 59 Stuart Road Tyabb VIC 3913:

    David Wilson commented

    Everyone, (particularly the elderly and their families considering buying into these ‘resorts’), should google
    Alan Kohler, ‘Complex Contracts and the Lifestyle Village Swindle’. ABC.
    But, I fear the developer and the shire are in covert league: they both stand to make money, after all ! And who cares about the aesthetic and social well-being of a small local community when money can be made ?

  25. In on “Telecommunications Facility” at McDonalds Quarry 106 Reservoir Road Glendale NSW 2285:

    Chris Sterjovski commented

    While 5G may enhance our quality of life the price we pay may be dear. Given the known health risks associated with such a development I and others in the community strongly oppose to it (DA 840/2019) with good reason.

    The tower does not belong in the middle of where people are living in such close proximity as it is not only going to impact people’s health as studies reveal but also be an eyesore. No one wants the tower in the middle of their suburb hence the formal and informal protest to it. There has been a lack of community consultation about this and it seems like not everyone that should be aware of this development is. Stop this from happening so close to where people live and move it to a more reasonable location.

  26. In Bellbird Park QLD on “Other Change -...” at 36-38 Rosemary Street Bellbird Park QLD 4300:

    Rachel Grant commented

    Does 8 lots equal 16 houses (IE duplexes)? If recent developments are anything to go by, then yes. Eight lots on this site would be sustainable. Sixteen would be too many.

    Why? Because the residents will access Rosemary St via De Graff St, which is already an exit point for many others. It's also opposite the exit of Bellbird Gardens, home to some 43 houses when complete.

    Increased traffic volumes will make exiting onto nearby Jones Rd even more difficult.
    Bellbird Park cannot cope with these higher density developments until road and transport infrastructure is upgraded.

    Council, if you approve this development please stick to your guns and reject any future applications for dual occupancy developments!

  27. In Chatswood NSW on “Request to remove clump of...” at 8-14 Ellis Street Chatswood NSW 2067.:

    Meredith Anne Foley commented

    If these trees are unsafe (as implied by the tree contractor's report) could we please ensure that they are replaced with suitable native species to counteract the worst impacts of climate change and the loss of biodiversity in our suburbs.

  28. In Chatswood NSW on “Removal of 1 tree.” at 9 Centennial Avenue Chatswood NSW 2067.:

    Meredith Anne Foley commented

    Another landmark tree up for removal. Will Council request its replacement with another more suitable native tree?

  29. In Ettalong Beach NSW on “Demolition Residential” at 40 Palm Street, Ettalong Beach NSW 2257:

    Trevor Deighton commented

    Maintaining trees on the property add to the value of the property and the area. From a landscaping point of view an established tree provides a focal point for any gardening design as well as adding privacy.

  30. In Sapphire Beach NSW on “Centre-based childcare...” at 2 Beach Way, Sapphire Beach NSW 2450:

    Susan commented

    Sapphire beach Estate is unique with its ease for residents/ locals to access a cafe like Beachstone .
    It’s also a hotspot for people visiting Coffs Harbour as the Cafe is linked to a playground .
    I also often see red belly snakes in the area with several being spotted around perimeter of park and bush near car park , which can be dangerous around little ones.

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