Recent comments

  1. In Epping NSW on “Tree Application - 4 x remove” at 78 Dunlop Street Epping NSW 2121:

    Local resident commented

    No documents recorded

  2. In Ocean Grove VIC on “Construction of...” at 89 - 91 The Avenue, Ocean Grove, VIC:

    Oliver Gant commented

    Not appropriate size or design for ocean grove. Especially moving that far away from centre of town.

  3. In South Yarra VIC on “Works in a Heritage Overlay” at South Yarra Station, 167 Toorak Road, South Yarra VIC 3141:

    Ant commented

    More information is needed for all regarding this application.
    South yarra station is an icon of Toorak rd and any alterations should not be taken lightly and considerable thought must be applied

  4. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Lisa Smith-Silk commented

    There is townhouses approved in Pass Ave Thirroul, another development in High Street Thirroul approved for 10 blocks, 9 of which can be subdivided. Pass Ave is a narrow street with high volume traffic already to bipass the Lawrence Hargrave gridlock. Common sense needs to prevail,

  5. In Bellevue Hill NSW on “Residential Flat Building 3...” at 11 Buller Street, Bellevue Hill, NSW:

    Ami Gale commented

    We would like to object to the proposed redevelopment of 11 and 13 Buller St, Bellevue Hill, on the following grounds:

    1. The number of apartments (proposal being 6) will increase the traffic and the load on street parking significantly, especially when only one visitor parking is proposed. We are located in a cul-de-sac, which is already overloaded by traffic from school (Bellevue Hill Public School), the local shops and residents.

    2. The building will be very dominant and out of character within the neighbourhood.

    3. There should also be provisions for additional privacy screens, from the overlooking balconies.

    4. There should be a few additional visitor parking as the proposal of a single parking would be insufficient.

    5. The proposed tandem parking for residents will encourage tenants/residents to park on the street due to the lack of connivence to park this way. There should be an alternate solution to this.

    6. Young kids also utilise the street and increased traffic will cause restrictions for kids to be able to enjoy the street and the outdoors.

    We think there should be a maximum of 4 apartments due to the limited space, the narrow street and being able to maintain a standard of living without too much congestion within our already over developed neighbourhood.

  6. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Tom coburn commented

    Keep Thirroul as a nice coastal town not an extension of Sydney. We don’t need more units and the traffic situation is bad enough already.

  7. In Baulkham Hills NSW on “Bull and Bush Hotel Site...” at 360 Windsor Road, Baulkham Hills:

    Peter Kelly commented

    The traffic overload on Seven Hills Rd -as noted by every other objector - has long been evident; there can be no argument that the proposed development of the Bull & Bush site will not exacerbate the traffic/parking chaos in central Baulkham Hills. Residents were assured that traffic lights at Arthur St would be provided with contributions from the developments already completed on Seven Hills Rd; five years later and not one piece of infrastructure or traffic management!
    Elderly or disabled residents or mothers with prams will not walk along the eastern side of Seven Hills Rd because Arthur St has no safe crossing (and the footpath is treacherous). People must cross Seven Hills Rd -again no safe crossing point - to avoid the Arthur St debacle. Pedestrian safety is greatly compromised by the dangerous exits at Centrelink and the new apartment complex; since Seven Hills Rd provides the only pedestrian access to central Baulkham Hills, traffic management infrastructure must be implemented (not merely promised) before another of these 'instant slums' is built.

  8. In Bondi Beach NSW on “Demolition of two detached...” at 15 Lamrock Avenue Bondi Beach NSW 2026:

    David Lane commented

    The scale of this development is too big, being 4 stories of residential, and 93 lodgers is excessive. Parking provisions are inadequate. Parking is already a problem in Lamrock Ave. There are too many units for the available space. If this is not officially another backpackers, and nor it should be, then it sets an unsatisfactory precedent to development in Lamrock Ave.

  9. In Ashfield NSW on “To demolish a shed and...” at 122 Victoria Street Dulwich Hill NSW 2203:

    L. Azzopardi commented

    This is the property on Victoria St Dulwich Hill. I managed to have some of my own concerns addressed directly with the builders when I was walking past the site and they informed me that Heritage experts have been engaged to prepare detailed drawings and that their intention is indeed to restore this property to its former glory however there was some significant rectification that needed to occur in order for that to happen.

    As a local I'm excited to see what the outcome of this project will be as it was in desperate need of a face lift!

  10. In Morisset NSW on “Subdivision 3 into 20 Lot...” at 51 Beauty Point Road Morisset NSW 2264:

    T Morgan commented

    I would have to agree with N Potts. The idea of a 20 home addition in this little street is quite scary. Additional to the road problems of stopping on Freemans Drive to enter into beauty Point Road is the traffic on the actual road itself. We cannot drive from our house to Freemans drive now without having to pull over to let traffic past as the road is simply not wide enough to allow for opposing traffic to both travel and pass each other. There is most certainly not enough parking for such an addition. By all means allow development on the block but definitely not to this scale. This street will not cope with high density housing like this.

  11. In Ryde NSW on “Demolition, excavation,...” at 155 Church St Ryde NSW 2112:

    David commented

    Response to Yan Cheng
    There is already a small Chinese Supermarket on the Corner and directly opposite the proposed site and it would be a damn shame to put them out of business with all their hard work and we need to support local businesses that are rapidly disappearing.
    A 10 minute walk is very good for you if you need more.
    Please consider what has happened in this area for many years without any sensible consideration to the locals or the infrastructure.
    It is absolutely the right time to cease any further developments until this has been done.
    Please just look at the traffic chaos in Church Street and can you possibly imagine what will happen with traffic trying to turn off here into a Supermarket?
    More traffic jams, more accidents, more chaos.

  12. In North Sydney NSW on “Change of use to motel” at 13 Eden Street, North Sydney NSW 2060:

    David and Bronwyn Wilson commented

    We object to this DA whereby ground floor offices at 13 Eden Street are proposed to be converted into a motel business with 24/7 hours of operation.
    Previous DA’s requesting 24/7 operations for the same offices have been refused by council.
    A motel business with 24/7 hours is not a suitable fit in Eden Street which is now predominantly residential and we request council to reject this latest proposal.

  13. In Cleveland QLD on “Tenancy Layout - Shop...” at 4 / Ross Court, Cleveland QLD 4163:

    Mrs Heather Hagen commented

    This planned authority is seriously inconsiderate of the health food shop and the small bakery/cafe. To say nothing of shopping trolleys and parking hazards and children, when every other driver of vehicles large and small, and trailers and caravans, is focused on getting in and out of the motor registry office as efficiently as possible. Did Council do a feasibility study? A traffic study?

  14. In North Sydney NSW on “Change of use to motel” at 13 Eden Street, North Sydney NSW 2060:

    Philip Newnham commented

    The owner of this property is very desperate to do something with it,how many ideas can they come up with,what kind of a motel,this could mean anything. I will walk up today and have my ideas on how to stop this.

  15. In Thirroul NSW on “Residential - demolition of...” at 28 George Street, Thirroul NSW 2515:

    Jane Coburn commented

    Traffic increase must be added to standard council deliberations on DAs in this congested suburb. We receive very high traffic volumes on weekends from tourists, as well as serious peak hour traffic from residents coming from McCauley's estate and local housing. Thirroul must be passed through by residents further north if heading to Wollongong or Bullli Pass.
    George St is right in the middle of this mayhem, and Thirroul has seen numerous DAs where a single dwelling is turned into 2, or 4 residences. Each DA is assessed on it's own merits, there does not appear to be an overarching plan for managing congestion in 2515. It is the single most talked about topic for residents.
    So I object strenuously to this development, the street and surrounds are full of character homes and this will change this for locals. Traffic. Traffic.Traffic. This will decrease amenity for everyone.

  16. In North Sydney NSW on “Change of use to motel” at 13 Eden Street, North Sydney NSW 2060:

    Anna Lynch commented

    I again object to this. MODOG are just trying to get 24/7 usage under the disguise of a motel application. This is an absurd location for a motel. This street is the wrong spot for a motel.

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

    Emma Forster commented

    We have concerns in regards to the health risks this could potentially create in the future for residents living in this area.

    The microwaves from cell phone towers can interfere with your body's own EMF's causing a variety of potential health problems including:
    3.Memory Loss
    4.Birth defects
    5.Cardiovascular stress

    Study has found cancer rates tripled among people living within 400 metres of a cell phone tower.

    Knowing there is a risk to my family and to the rest of the community living close by, I strongly object to this project.

  18. In Winston Hills NSW on “Building Certificate - A...” at 58 Caroline Chisholm Drive Winston Hills NSW 2153:

    joseph Camilleri commented

    I totally agree with the points made by mr Martyn, in highlighting the council should strongly adhere to the council regulations, god knows how many trees and backyard alterations that are carried out in the area. Example of property in Hera place having every tree on the property removed which was quite heavy handed in keeping with the property’s surrounding and leaving it totally devoid of any green softening of what was previously in place,

  19. In Morisset NSW on “Change of use and...” at 55 Ironbark Road Morisset NSW 2264:

    Abby commented

    I agree with Helen
    There are too many developments getting approved by the council without the appropriate infrastructure being in place
    Some of us have been paying rates for over 50 years and are still without footpaths or kerb and guttering.

  20. In Morisset NSW on “Subdivision 3 into 20 Lot...” at 51 Beauty Point Road Morisset NSW 2264:

    N Potts commented

    I have serious concerns for 20 new homes to be built here.Can this little street cope with another 20 cars going up and down it. With recent homes and extra people living in the st it is already difficult at times to turn from Freemans Dr into Beauty pt rd without getting nearly rear ended by traffic heading to Cooranbong whilst you wait to turn. This intersection is getting dangerous. I have had 3 close calls in the past 2 months where i have had to abort my turn and drive into cooranbong and turn around just to avoid gettin hit.Not to mention the damage to the rd from the trucks. Such as the damage caused from recent build at no.9 for the new group home.( my new storm water pipes were driven on and parked on by work trucks and cracked or broken several times) This was once a quiet street now it's becoming way too busy and flooding it's aesthetic. Please only allow normal residential property here not more GROUP HOMES or a stack of ticky tacky boxes all in a row. I am not against development but I do have concerns for overpopulation

  21. In Coburg VIC on “Buildings and works for a...” at 387 Sydney Road, Coburg VIC 3058:

    Jacob Wyley commented

    I support more development in Coburg. The suburb is stuck in a different era and not in a good way. New injection and more competition is needed for the majority of the shops along Sydney road to get their act together. We have the worst Coles I've come across and a number of arcades that looked tired in the 90s. Just make sure it's a half decent design.

  22. In Doonside NSW on “Construction of a community...” at Reserve 770 Kareela Street Doonside NSW 2767:

    Charlene Smith commented

    I agree that this is an unusual location in a residential area and on a busy corner. My understanding is that this is a community facility for people who have experienced trauma and loss. The site is extremely exposed, there's no green screening from the busy corner of Doonside and Knox road and a large school and church is across the road. The area is busy and noisy and can be difficult to access due to commuters on most week days. There's heavy foot traffic to and from the station to the new estate - Bunya. There are cars that sometimes do burn outs on the weekend along this road. The philosophy behind the centre and hard work of the founders is commendable but I do wonder if this is the best location for a trauma centre and place of healing.

  23. In Hampton Park VIC on “Section 23 (Creation of...” at 89W Pound Road, Hampton Park, VIC:

    wayne rickards wrote to local councillor Susan Serey

    This is suppose to do is this drainage system, it is open or under ground? How does it impact on the creek? What is the aim of this proposal?
    Is the area impact between Willow drive and Hallam creek?

    Delivered to local councillor Susan Serey. They are yet to respond.

  24. In Doonside NSW on “Construction of a community...” at Reserve 770 Kareela Street Doonside NSW 2767:

    Victor commented

    This is a residential area normal family house in the whole area and surrounding area's. Talk about a building sticking out like a sore thumb. No idea why council would think this building would fit in with the area or style of the area. Think coucil should run by the town planners first.Would more suit a area with units and town house. Not residential area

  25. In Gladesville NSW on “New secondary dwelling on...” at 10 Pile St Gladesville NSW 2111:

    Sandra Clarke commented

    I support this application. I don't believe it would detract from the streetscape in any way whatsoever.

  26. In Morisset NSW on “Change of use and...” at 55 Ironbark Road Morisset NSW 2264:

    Helen Adams commented

    DA - 818/2019 dated 7/6/2019

    Helen Adams 14 Boonal Rd Morisset

    In relation to the proposed development namely the acquisition of further land and rezoning for school usage.
    The following items I feel require investigation and adherance to Council Planning for Development and Rezoning in the undermentioned areas:

    Sewerage and Drainage
    Are there to be drainage pits and extra drains installed to hold the stormwater and to
    assist in the amount of water flow across the road? These installations are necessary with any new development but should be addressed at the rezoning stage to eliminate any misrepresentations in the future. The corner and the lower end of Ironbark Road is flooded every time there is a reasonable downpour creating both water and debris lying on the road.
    This water naturally makes its way into the mangroves and the lake so it is absolutely necessary as a matter of health and safety to ensure it captivity and treatment if necessary.
    The existing drains are always blocked and need to be constantly cleared.

    Parking and Footpaths Curb and Guttering
    There is NO roadside parking available at all on this area of Ironbark Road and will not be necessary due to the proposal however:
    There are buses parked everywhere on both sides of the road, as well as cars, SUV's both morning and afternoon which creates massive problems with children and parents collecting and dropping off students - and standing to chat. NOT a problem with that however it is very difficult to see if anyone is about to dart across the road.
    There is NO school crossing or person in attendance overseeing safety as with other schools in the area.
    There are NO footpaths for the children to walk/ride or skateboard - all of which happens on the road amongst cars at the moment. Residents walking have to weave between parked cars along the street or walk on the road.

    The corner of Ironbark Road and Marconi Road
    Council has placed safety markers on this corner but:
    The Buses are TOO large to turn safely utalising both sides of the road to turn and flatten markers each time they are replaced. Although the speed limit has been reduced cars continually speed and pass along Marconi Road.
    This corner needs a ROUNDABOUT to make it safe and usable for all and will assist the school with ongoing safety issues as well as curbing the speeding.

  27. In Bondi Beach NSW on “Demolition of two detached...” at 15 Lamrock Avenue Bondi Beach NSW 2026:

    Janine Baker commented

    I strongly object to the proposed four storey building (which already exceeds the height requirements, driveways too close to neighbouring properties and plans that exclude hallways) which has made no an attempt at addressing the overcrowding which already has existing “boarders” standing around outside until all hours drinking and partying to all hours in the neighbouring Boarding House at 19 Lamrock Ave. This includes lack of space for 24x240 litre bins curbed weekly or the additional pressure put on parking already at saturation point by proposing a shortfall of parking spaces internally, or visitors vehicles.

    I strongly object to the Boarding House proposal under the guise of “Affordable Housing” No guarantees or regulations have been established to ensure this is low cost housing for Sydney residents and it’s workers: what are the regulations/criteria for acceptance? The DA itself states there won’t be additional traffic/parking issues as it will accommodate tourists. A short residency/lease is not helping the housing crisis it’s simply providing Backpackers accommodation for commercial gain in an established residential zone for its owners with no regard for the current infrastructure, existing buildings or its residents.

  28. In Potts Point NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 21 Kellett Street Potts Point NSW 2011:

    Bianca spencer commented

    the road is narrow- the road has two lanes, each heading one way. and parking no wither side of the street. this development will cause serious traafick issues for residents who rely on this road to get in and out of their homes in elizabeth bay and further potts point regions. the street parking will be a nightmare due to the extra residences

  29. In Umina Beach NSW on “Senior Living Accommodation...” at 147 - 149 Springwood Street, Ettalong Beach NSW 2257:

    Lesley Harvey commented

    While this old IOOF group home site has been a sitting duck for re-development for years, can Council PLEASE ensure most of the trees and spaces for trees are retained?
    The tenants I know there love the open, quiet parkland feel of the space and the future residents should be able to benefit from that existing amenity (shade) for free.
    The contractors need to be strictly supervised in the demolition phase so they don't "accidently" reverse over perfectly established specimens. Locals I know are tired of seeing wanton destruction by workers, tired of arguing over proof of permissions and hard words on footpaths. This area is getting better because more locals are showing some forethought and planning for working around plants for future value and livability.

  30. In South Fremantle WA on “Two Storey Single House” at 1 Silver Street South Fremantle WA 6162:

    Damien Anthony wrote to local councillor Andrew Charles Sullivan

    Hi, We own the carpark next door and are interested in possibly developing this land in near future. As our land is currently a carpark this may not have been considered. Id like to see the design please. Can you confirm if the design is compliant or is a variation being sought?

    Delivered to local councillor Andrew Charles Sullivan. They are yet to respond.

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