Recent comments

  1. In Burraneer NSW on “To stop bird faeces, leaves...” at 2/136C Woolooware Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    B.Dalton commented

    That should have said buy a cover for your car.

  2. In Burraneer NSW on “To stop bird faeces, leaves...” at 2/136C Woolooware Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    B.Dalton commented

    Surely we cant start cutting down tress because of leaves and bird dropping ? We would end up with most streets clear of trees. It has nothing to do with how many duplexs or sub divisions there is, its about common sense, park somewhere else or in your garage or buy a viver for you car. This should not be approved

  3. In Machans Beach QLD on “Material Change of Use...” at 79-81 Tucker Street Machans Beach QLD 4878:

    Brett Hitchens and Martha Goldman commented

    Dear Cairns Council,
    I am writing to voice my objection to the proposed development for multiple dwellings on the property Lot 1 on RP736477.

    The application is for 4 high set houses instead of single lowest house that is on the property at present. The applicant is seeking approval for “material change of use”. The application is one single title of 1,079 square metres.

    The title is zoned Res A. The applicants are seeking to change it to a Res C medium density. The gross Floor Area of the footprint of the current house is a stated 230sq metres.

    The footprint of the additional dwellings will bring the overall GFA to 788 Sq metres, this may not include all driveways, bin storage and footpaths etc ‐ Which will impact the Green space.

    As residents of Machans Beach and frequent users of Tucker St we have a few objections to the planned development.

    1. The proposed development will intrude on the quiet enjoyment of the neighbourhood.

    2. Surrounding privacy will be violated due to the height and number of Buildings. Looking into neighbouring gardens and creating a vista over neighbouring pool.

    3. The green space will be removed and sanitize the locality. Machans beach is a leafy suburb that is enjoyed by residents and wildlife alike.

    4. The residential zoning will be changed from a zone A to C. Machans beach Community Association Lobbied to zone down to a Res A about 20 years ago.
    This re zoning was approved to fit in with the character and quiet enjoyment of the suburb a feature highly valued by those who reside here and many who have more recently purchased here.

    5. The published plan shows double car spaces for each unit, however the car space of the front LHS building allows no room for a car door to open once the 2 cars as shown are parked in it.

    Many thanks for considering our objection to the proposed development.
    Yours sincerely

  4. In Epping NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 73 Kent Street, Epping NSW 2121:

    Amy Li commented

    We strongly oppose the development of boarding houses in our area which is zoned R2.
    At present the area has dwellings for families and and has a friendly community minded feeling. Allowing a boarding house into this area with mainly transient people living there will lessen this feeling and family safety. This could have a detrimental effect on the
    local community of feeling a sense of belonging, safety and community spirit Already there are high rise buildings on the opposite side of the street which increases traffic into the area and making parking a problem for all.
    We do not need this type of development

  5. In Waverley NSW on “New footpath dining for...” at 24 Arden Street Waverley NSW 2024:

    Local resident ( for 86 years...and counting ) commented

    Firstly its a joke that a cafe wanting 3 tables on the footpath needs to considered via this onerous process , secondly to actually have someone object to it?!?.. honestly , some people need a hobby .

  6. In Athelstone SA on “To erect a double storey...” at 15A Fox Avenue Athelstone SA 5076:

    Julie Muirson commented

    How sad! Another SIGNIFICANT tree”bites the dust in Athelstone. I fear that this suburb will ultimately be bare of any trees and instead will be wall to wall concrete.
    Our significant trees aren’t significant enough it would seem!

  7. In Woolloomooloo NSW on “Use 15sqm of outdoor dining...” at 129-131 Dowling Street Woolloomooloo NSW 2011:

    Stephan Gyory commented

    As a 20 year resident and business owner in Easy Sydney I fully support this proposal.

  8. In Burraneer NSW on “To stop bird faeces, leaves...” at 2/136C Woolooware Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    Julie commented

    I agree, far too many duplexes and units - most owners/tenants seem to use the garage for storage and park 1-2 cars, boats, vans, trucks etc on the streets

  9. In Machans Beach QLD on “Material Change of Use...” at 79-81 Tucker Street Machans Beach QLD 4878:

    Mellisa Trommestad commented

    Hello, I am writing to express my disapproval of the medium density housing proposal for this lot in Machans Beach. As a long term resident of this unique character precinct, I am disappointed to learn of this medium density housing project that is awaiting approval. The established, well-treed block is home to many critters already and following on from Ergons recent reckless destruction of the oldest recorded native Bloodwood in Machans Beach, destruction of habitat is forefront on many residents minds. I implore council to visit the site for yourselves and realise the value in retaining the existing low density housing nature of this character precinct, noted as Cairns' oldest established beachside suburb. I feel that the proposed dwelling is unnecessary and inapropriate for the street and the character precinct and should not set a precedent. The Existing zone is I believe A, this development proposes to change this lot to C, in my opinion, to the demise of the peaceful green nature of the street and area/precinct. Thank you for your Consideration.

  10. In Banksia NSW on “Review of rejected DA.” at 13 Short Street, Banksia NSW 2216:

    concerned resident commented

    This application has already been through the process of DA and was knocked back by council and the planning panel.

    The developer has resubmitted with relatively minor changes. But the original reason for the refusal still stand.

    NSW State Regulations for boarding houses are about to change because the system has been exploited. Approving this application now means that these developers are trying to rush through their application to beat the system.

  11. In Kensington NSW on “Integrated Development...” at 172 Anzac Parade Kensington NSW 2033:

    Dean commented

    Just pointing out the obvious,
    To allow such an oversized student accommodation development owned by foreign interests could mean that income typically generated by foreign student rent would no longer benefit our local community but instead leave our shores and benefit other countries.

    I’ve seen it happen in other countries where locals miss out by large developments that then siphon out wealth from communities.

  12. In Griffin QLD on “Material Change of Use -...” at 287 Brays Road, Griffin QLD 4503:

    Lisa commented

    I completely agree with Desiree, I have almost finished building my very first home in Griffin and the reason we chose this suburb was for it's greenspace and family appeal. The over development of town houses creates an excess and overflow of traffic that overwhelms local infrastructure. Most of these town houses will have a 1 car space allocation at best but likely to have 3 cars per allotment. If we cannot provide off street parking to all vehicles that reside per dwelling then we are creating a nuisance for the rest of the community by limiting safety and causing road blockages and high traffic density.

    I plan to stay in this suburb for a long time and hope that it can remain a residential suburb focused on community, quality and greenery.

    Please do not approve any more town houses, we are only lessening the appeal to our beautiful suburb. Overdevelopment does not help drive the prices of residential real estate up it instead diminishes the appeal of the suburb and area as a whole.

  13. In Mornington VIC on “Proposed building works to...” at Target 1M/78 Barkly Street Mornington VIC 3931:

    Tony M commented

    I am led to believe that Woolies will be closing down at Mornington Village Shopping Centre and they will move into where the existing Target is. Not all of the space will be used by Woolies and so there will be other new retail shops there as well. I have it on good sources that Mornington Village Shopping Centre is up for sale and it is possible that apartments might end up there.

  14. In Oyster Bay NSW on “Subdivision of one lot into...” at 39 Como Road Oyster Bay NSW 2225:

    Susan Gardiner commented

    In this submission, consideration should be given to the implied loss of a large number of Angophera trees on this land.

    It is a tragedy for the whole community to have their leafy suburb continually under threat from over development and in this case we stand to loose a large tree canopy which can never be replaced.

    Surely there has to be some balance between the individual right to make money vs natural environment conservation / healthy community living?

  15. In Noosaville QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 8 Hygieta St Noosaville QLD 4566:

    Linda Beilby commented

    Not sure if this a good idea for this site. With a shared driveway and close living constant groups would need to be thoroughly informed as to the need for consideration to neighbours and protocols for shared spaces and occupants. I know how difficult it was with long term letting let alone short term letting. Being near the canal noise levels are higher and it travels along the waterway.

  16. In Burleigh Heads QLD on “Material Change of Use Code...” at 1 Second Avenue, Burleigh Heads QLD 4220:

    Mary commented

    Greg Carson, this is an absolute joke. I cannot believe that something like this is given any consideration. What is the GCCC doing? There is supposed to be a Town Plan but that is another joke. When is TT going to start doing his job. This means listening to those that live and work here. The visitors don’t care as long as they have somewhere to stay. I noted on tonight’s news that he’s all for high rise. Well those that live here are sick over the overdevelopment, they’re sick of the lifestyle changes imposed upon them, they’re sick of all the shadows on the beaches. In fact, they’re pretty much sick of most of TT’s decisions that are supposedly made on their behalf.

  17. In Old Noarlunga SA on “Outdoor firing range and...” at 1559 Piggott Range Road, Old Noarlunga SA 5168:

    christos commented

    Hi Sarah, we understand your keenness now that you & your son have licences.
    & yes a place to use & improve your skills would be important to you both.
    I ask the question ....Where do you live? Old Noarlunga? We very much doubt that??
    We feel your statement to council is orchestrated...

  18. In Schofields NSW on “Section 4.55 (2)...” at 81 South Street Schofields NSW 2762:

    Lorraine Bean commented

    I have had a return email from Katharine Szuminska to resubmit my comment for removal as I thought it was South Street Marsden Park so I want it to be removed I don’t understand why the heading said abuse alerts?

  19. In Griffin QLD on “Material Change of Use -...” at 287 Brays Road, Griffin QLD 4503:

    Desiree commented

    Hi, I’m Desiree.

    I’ve been living in the area for about 8 years and I have to say that in my opinion this development is inappropriate. There has been an explosion of townhouses being built in the area and the higher population density has brought about more traffic issues and more crime. We simply don’t have the infrastructure to support more people in this suburb with the current roads and services.

    I also feel that we are a suburb for young families with kids and backyards. This kind of high density development is not compatible with Griffin.

  20. In Beaudesert QLD on “Dual Occupancy (Residential...” at 17 Selwyn Street, Beaudesert QLD 4285:

    Andrew Berghuis commented

    Roofing should be specified as colourbond to be in keeping with the majority of surrounding houses.

  21. In Westmeadows VIC on “Development of land for a...” at 11-17 Ardlie St Westmeadows VIC 3049:

    Neil scott commented

    One thing I have noticed with all the development in westmeadows is the impact on people's tolerance due to congestion I have witnessed serious road rage due to to much development and no where to park cars. And to top it off the council approve these developments and then fine the residents for parking illegally.
    Please Hume council have a good look at this development from the people who reside in this community's point of view. Developers and investors seem to have to much control on council decisions.
    Surely there are so many better options for this land than the proposed plan. Or is the decision based purely on the revenue for Hume council.
    What about the impact it will have on the westmeadows tavern will that eventually go out of business and be demolished for more high rise developments.
    The area is currently struggling with to much development. Has any impact studies been completed to determine if the the area can cope with the location of the development.
    This development will not be sustainable with the support of the local community it will require a major percentage of business from outside of the local community which will cause major traffic congestion and parking problems for the area.
    I hope the planning of this development can be reconsidered as it just seems so inappropriate for the area.

  22. In Mornington VIC on “Proposed building works to...” at Target 1M/78 Barkly Street Mornington VIC 3931:

    Kim Redfern commented

    We have just moved to Mornington area from Knox and I already miss the options of a basic dept store. The Target in Mornington is not as good variety/selection as some of the larger Target stores but at least it provides the necessities that the locals need. Boutiques on Main Street are okay for the tourists but are not for the everyday needs of local families. If Target closes, I totally agree with majority of other comments on this page....that it needs to be replaced with a like store such as a KMart or BigW. Another supermarket is not needed.

  23. In Kensington NSW on “Integrated Development...” at 172 Anzac Parade Kensington NSW 2033:

    Rachael Dunne commented

    We don’t want these ridiculously tall boarding houses. It’s not in keeping with the rest of the area and will lead to further overcrowding, congestion, lack of parking, over shadowing of current residential properties.

    How about shifting focus to long term accommodation for long term residents like professionals and families.


  24. In Palm Beach QLD on “Material Change of Use Code...” at 488-492 The Esplanade, Palm Beach QLD 4221:

    Jeffrey Barker commented

    I agree with H Goodman that 3 visitor car parks are not sufficient for 21 apartments. Cars park illegally on the grass in The Esplanade currently so this is going to make it worse.

  25. In Miami QLD on “Material Change of Use...” at 264 The Esplanade, Miami QLD 4220:

    Dianne Murray commented

    As a very frequent visitor to this area , I am very concerned of the impact of a 24 story high building being built as expressed, I am very aware that this area has been past for a 15 story project which is acceptable, so please understand the residents objecting to such a height . it is such a pleasurable place to come and relax and enjoy So many people come here for their weekends enjoyment of our beautiful beaches and areas .
    it would be an absolute shame to spoil what we have . as the parking is quite inadequate as it is now so council please show a little piece of consideration for your ratepayers.

  26. In Kingswood NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 27 Park Avenue, Kingswood NSW 2747:

    Shaun commented

    We do not need more developments like this in our Council area. The drain on roads, Public transport, water, electricity, police, ambulance etc is unsustainable. The traffic around Penrith is horrendous now and doesn’t need anymore of the congested housing types. That only the immediate residents get officially notified is a disgrace because by the time others find out it’s generally too late. Stop these types of buildings now and provide letters to all residents in the future.

  27. In Schofields NSW on “Construction of a 2 storey...” at 135 Alex Avenue Schofields NSW 2762:

    sunil commented

    HI ,
    can I please have name of child care operator who will be operating this care facility once setup, living so close to this place, already going through a lot due to vacancy issues of preferred operators, dont want to miss on this too.

  28. In Waverley NSW on “New footpath dining for...” at 24 Arden Street Waverley NSW 2024:

    Local Resident commented

    Considering this as a long term resident and customer, this application should not be allowed. The Northern corner of Varna St and Arden St already experiences high pedestrian activity, and blind spots for both pedestrians and cars. With the existing tables and chairs on Arden St, the corner is often unusable by pedestrians due to it being occupied by standing customers, seated customers, and customers and staff in transit (staff regularly travel between Arden St and the two entrances to bakery storage areas on Varna St), along with dogs, prams, school children etc (all of which need their own access as well). There are already many movements a day impeding easy and safe pedestrian access. There have been a number of instances where the only space to walk on Arden St has been the road (obviously not safe), and on Varna St, in order to try navigate through all the other users I have tripped and fallen, badly injuring myself. Allowing the tables and chairs on Varna St would only exacerbate these problems for a large number of the public (when only for private use by a very small number of people).

  29. In Burraneer NSW on “To stop bird faeces, leaves...” at 2/136C Woolooware Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    Carolyn Cryer commented

    This highlights that there are too many duplexes and units being built without enough storage and garage spaces.

  30. In Kingswood NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 27 Park Avenue, Kingswood NSW 2747:

    Jason Q commented

    This is becoming a joke.
    People in Government are happy to overcrowd Suburbs that they don't have to live in with little regard for the residents that do have to live there.
    This kind of money grabbing from developers needs to stop.

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