Recent comments

  1. In Melbourne VIC on “Removal of native vegetation” at Greensborough Bypass, Greensborough:

    jennifer gibson commented

    It is not clear from the details provided where this native vegetation is, how much of it is being cleared, what reason it is being cleared and what offsets are being implemented. Please provide this information so that the impacts can be assessed before any vegetation is removed.
    many thanks.

  2. In Werribee VIC on “Demolish existing weather...” at 2 Geelong Road Werribee VIC 3030:

    Lin jellet commented

    Lisa, great news indeed, hopefully the beginning of Council taking into account the groundswell of community concerns regarding how some planning policies and guidelines are applied to the detriment of the suburb.

  3. In Northcote VIC on “Proposed construction of...” at 4 Arthurton Road Northcote VIC 3070:

    Rhona O'Loughlin commented

    8 stories on Arthurton Road is just too high, based on the width of the road. The 4 stories of the apartment development at 13 Arthurton Road is more sympathetic to the overall feel of the street scape.

  4. In Rozelle NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 28 Waterloo Street Rozelle NSW 2039:

    Felicia Finlayson commented

    Assessment of asbestos content and correct removal is of high priority. The future plans are totally out of character to the existing fine grain residential dwellings on Waterloo. Removal of two car parking spaces on this street is of concern.

  5. In Surrey Hills VIC on “Construction of a six...” at 2 / 426 Canterbury Road Surrey Hills VIC 3127:

    Bridget Larkin commented

    Local development is out of control. This application should have been refused at the onset, it’s footprint and impact in this location is nothing but deangerous and ill thought. CANTERBURY Rd/Union Rd is already gridlock & dangerous. The Planning Department need to consider a plan rather than this endless change driven by developers greed/profits. Impact on these developments is destroying our neighbourhood. Provision of parking needs to be increased (not decreased).....roads are constantly being made narrower by parking, bus lanes, bicycle lanes etc.....residents must be able to park off street at all developments (including massive houses) and the spaces large enough to accommodate a family car (Coles Union/Croydon Rds) provided some parking but many spaces too small and difficult to negotiate so bigger cars are regularly parked illegally on the streets and nature strips......enough is enough. Infrastructure needs upgrading before any more huge bulk apartments in Surrey Hills.

  6. In Henley Beach SA on “Two storey dwelling...” at 231 Esplanade Henley Beach SA 5022:

    Tina Koch commented

    The height of this new development is problematic. It is several meters in excess of neighbouring buildings on the sea side. The street scape will be altered. Its position is next to heritage listed property. The front of this house 231 is possibly heritage listed too as it was built at the same time as 227 & 229. Can this be checked? When I viewed the plans a year ago the front of house was to remain unchanged in terms of height - the two story section was at the back and unobtrusive.

  7. In Werribee VIC on “Demolish existing weather...” at 2 Geelong Road Werribee VIC 3030:

    Lisa commented

    Linda, the application has actually been withdrawn because of what we have mentioned above. It is not going ahead, so no - our objections didn't fall on deaf ears. Cheers.

  8. In Rozelle NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 28 Waterloo Street Rozelle NSW 2039:

    Rachael Blackwell commented

    Losing the parking spaces would be a major blow to local residents who are already struggling to find a place to park due to the high volume of visitors to the area. It would also remove two much needed spaces that currently cater for high turnover of local shoppers on a daily basis, particularly on a weekend. The existing footpath is on a downhill slope and is already very uneven due to protruding tree roots. The new driveway will exacerbate this problem, making the footpath even more hazardous for young children and the elderly.

  9. In Wahroonga NSW on “Proposed construction of 6...” at 27 Braeside Street Wahroonga NSW 2076:

    William S commented

    This property is wholly inappropriate for 6 dwellings in this area and particularly this street at this number. I also recall the street scape is heritage listed. I also attended the open viewings at the sale of this house as a local resident and this is an abuse of the over 55 / diasabilty provisions. There is an abuse of such housing by ruthless developers already north of Junction Rd. Where does the rot end?

  10. In Bulli NSW on “Sandon Point Residential...” at , Sandon Point,:

    Shayne Green commented

    Why must we continually allow the very things that bring us to the area to be destroyed for commercial gain?
    Leave the trees there. Let us continue, everyone continue, residents and visitors alike, to walk, ride, skate, perambulate with this wonderful vista that will never be regained once lost.
    Unbelievable that goverment allows it's citizens to be last priority. Again. And again.
    Buildings can be built anywhere, but you can only have the view and smell and sensation of the coastline.... on the coastline.
    Stop it, you're killing us. Is this the Illawarra and Australia you want for your kids?

  11. In Surrey Hills VIC on “Construction of a six...” at 2 / 426 Canterbury Road Surrey Hills VIC 3127:

    Peter Kidman commented

    Don't usually comment on developments in Surrey Hills, as most are well guided by either Boroondara or Whitehorse councils. Are these people on drugs, building a six storey building on the most gridlocked and congested though fare, within a 5 kilometre radius. (And just wait until the drain works on Warrigal road, are completed and the traffic will get heavier)Just totally inappropriate the area can't handle any additional traffic, that this development will invite. If I'm reading this right a café & Gym, but with reduced onsite parking. Total madness, even Snap Gyms 200 metres on the other side provides parking for their patrons, and that's never enough, plus there's a café. There isn't any off street parking at all!

  12. In Bulli NSW on “Sandon Point Residential...” at , Sandon Point,:

    Don Humphreys commented

    I object to the proposed Anglicare overdevelopment of the Sandon Point site on the following grounds:

    - the Turpentine Forest at this site must be preserved
    - the current local infrastructure is incapable of supporting this development
    - there is only one access road through Thirroul, which is already overburdened
    - the South Coast rail line is inadequate due to timetable changes and parking around Thirroul station is a huge problem. The development will only add to this problem.

  13. In Kidman Park SA on “Land Division – 252/D307/18...” at 3 Morris Street Kidman Park SA 5025:

    Rosa Ameduri commented

    I'm happy for this but as you understand we value our privacy as we have a pool so if windows on top level facing our property can be that glass you cant see out clearly that would be fantastic .1a morris street kidman park

  14. In Sawtell NSW on “Subdivision-Non Strata - 57...” at Sawtel Road Tormina NSW 2452:

    Valerie Stevens commented

    We do not want the Koala Corridor disturbed, we overlook part of the reserve so far very peaceful abundant birds, and many more creatures.,, NO WAY THIS SHOULD GO AHEAD. already too overcrowded as is.
    .

  15. In Diamond Creek VIC on “Use of the land for a micro...” at 25 Station Street, Diamond Creek VIC 3089:

    Sharon Wright commented

    I think this would be wonderful for Diamond Creek. I would go there.

  16. In St Leonards NSW on “Rezoning Review of North...” at 601 Pacific Highway St Leonards:

    David and Bronwyn Wilson commented

    We are in favour of well thought out developments that are set back from the highway, provide lane way access to the streets behind as well as some open spaces with garden and public seating, child care facilities, cafes and boutiques. Having just returned from Chicago where design in architecture is highly regarded we would love to see the same approach here, rather than the ubiquitous high rise that usually mushrooms up to blight the landscape. Its not so much the size of the building, its more the ugliness and vulgarity that we object to. St Leonards has been a neglected area for many years, due to intersecting geographic boundaries and conflicting council policies rather than the nimbyism of the over 70’s that is disrespectfully referred to in an earlier post.

  17. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    David and Marianne Seldon commented

    We strongly object to this application.
    It will devastate several hectares of pristine bush that is such an important part of Noosa and the site is totally unsuited for a development of this magnitude.
    The ground is unstable and the massive run-off generated will cause problems down-stream for Council's infrastructure.
    Ecologically, it is a disaster. The area is home to many species and the removal of the natural forest will have a massive impact. They can't just re-locate to concrete.
    The visual impact on those bordering the site will be catastrophic - a transformation from natural jungle to having to face a concrete jungle, and the extra cars, noise and people will have a significant detrimental effect on the area.
    Please - this application is a disaster waiting to happen. You can't undo it once it's approved.

  18. In Rozelle NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 28 Waterloo Street Rozelle NSW 2039:

    Alan Moffatt commented

    I live next door to the site and there is already an issue with a shortage of parking spaces for the local residents and losing another 2 parking spaces in the street will make parking even harder and council should support the local residents by not allocating any more private parking to local residents

  19. In Peats Ridge NSW on “DESIGNATED/INTEGRATED...” at 1411 Peats Ridge Road, Peats Ridge NSW 2250:

    Suzanne Fletcher commented

    I visit and stay with my friends on the mountain and they have 2 chicken farms in sight of their property.The smell from from airbourne dust being airborne pollutants is unbearable and we are often forced to go indoors. There are neighbours who are seriously ill due to the chicken dust and they have medical certificates to support their claim. I strongly object to this intensive industrial sizeed poultry growing facility. The number of trucks that will be generated is too awful to contemplate. I come up from Sydney and the number of trucks now make the road unnerving and dangerous.

  20. In Peats Ridge NSW on “DESIGNATED/INTEGRATED...” at 1411 Peats Ridge Road, Peats Ridge NSW 2250:

    Chrissi Nicholas commented

    I can't believe there's another massive development in the pipeline. This time the applicant has anticipated the obvious objections and drummed up friends and associates to support them. So apparently more stench, dust and massive speeding trucks is what we can expect. So often when driving past Peats Ridge School the stench is disgusting. One wonders hoe the poor children and teachers cope with it. People at the nearest receptors have proven respiratory illnesses directly caused by poultry dust.
    This self regulated industry is out of control.

  21. In St Leonards NSW on “Rezoning Review of North...” at 601 Pacific Highway St Leonards:

    David C commented

    I'm not opposed to expansion and development as it goods for the city and much needed but it needs to be sustainable.

    The amount of development of high rise appartments in St Leonards and the pacific highway corridor down to North Sydney is currently saturated and I have so far not seen any proposals on building out the infrastructure to support this.

    Yes, Crows Nest station is being build out but the train system will not be able to cope with this expansion + the increased traffic flowing from the hills on these lines. On top of this I don't see any new schools being built, or re-developed, to support the increase in population in these areas.

    I also feel that neither Lane Cove and North Sydney councils have shown enough consideration or due diligence in these expansion plans and therefore I feel that all future planning proposals for appartments of over 10 floors in these areas councils should go to the Sydney council for approval and to verify that this growth is sustainable for the infrastructure around it.

  22. In Diamond Creek VIC on “Use of the land for a micro...” at 25 Station Street, Diamond Creek VIC 3089:

    Janelle Smith commented

    I support this proposal. It will be a fantastic addition to the street, lifting the profile of the area and Diamond Creek as a whole. There’s nothing like this anywhere in the Diamond Valley or nearby suburbs. It will be fantastic.

  23. In Warradale SA on “Three tow storey row dwellings” at 19 Gardiner Av Warradale:

    Johanna den Dekker commented

    Also Ferna. On the corner of Lascelles and Struan Ave they have asked for approval for three units !!!
    How can we keep protesting.? I am of the older generation where it probably won't affect me too much as I won't be around. I just look out the window and catch glimpses of the blue sky with clouds and a bit of the sunset at times and feel good. Anyone involved in the mental health care will tell you to appreciate those moments. I am just concerned about our children and grandchildren who will not be able to have those breathing moments

  24. In Revesby NSW on “Demolition of Existing...” at 89 Mackenzie Street Revesby NSW 2212:

    EMIL MIHALJEVIC commented

    I am writing in regards to the construction of 89 Mackenzie Revesby
    On behalf of the owners and residents of 1 and 1D Langdale avenue Revesby which is located to the right side of 89 Mackenzie St.

    Collectively we have major concerns, primarily regarding 2 full length windows approximately 1800mm in hight which are located to the back of the new development on the right side, 2nd floor (presumably master bedroom). They eliminate any type of privacy for both residencies, including pool area for 1 Langdale avenue, alfresco area and backyard for 1D Langdale avenue and all 4 rear bedrooms of 1 and 1D Langdale avenue.

    As a secondary concern there are two full length roughly 1800mm in hight, right side 2nd floor, (presumably bathroom) windows. However looking over the plans we have come to the conclusion that they may have frosted glass in which case this is ok, but we are not happy that they will be able to be opened because this again defeats the purpose of having frosted glass and privacy is compromised.

    All other windows on the right side, top floor, (3 in total) are longer in width, and shorter in hight, and placed towards the top of the ceiling (starting roughly at 1800mm from the floor) and we are happy with these windows because in our opinion they do not ruin our privacy AS MUCH as the full length windows. However we would be even more grateful if these windows were to have frosted glass as well.

    In conclusion, please review and consider making all the windows from the right side facing 1 and 1D Langdale avenue the same as the 3 shorter window we approve of. The current plan as it stands completely eradicates our privacy and will be uncomfortable for not only us but the new residents of 89 Mackenzie street because our bedrooms will be looking straight into each other.
    In the best interest of both parties please consider this application as a serious one.

    Thank you in advance

  25. In St Leonards NSW on “Rezoning Review of North...” at 601 Pacific Highway St Leonards:

    Rosemary Than-Aye commented

    Think its time to slow development in St Leonards the Chinese developers think only of how much money they can make and an increase from 49m to 212m is really excessive. Whilst development can be good but not at the expense of quality of life, sunlight , traffic conjection for the current residents,. Not only do we have increased traffic from more residents where resident car parks open out onto small laneways but many of the streets are becoming short cuts between suburbs with hugely increase traffic. Also some streets such as Albany are already become darkened wind tunnels. What will be the point of having nice cafes and restaurants when we cannot sit outside because there is no sun!

  26. In Diamond Creek VIC on “Use of the land for a micro...” at 25 Station Street, Diamond Creek VIC 3089:

    allan barnes commented

    i surrport the proposal. great for jobs and bringing people into the community. plenty of parking around at both footy gronds and netball courts bring it on.good to see more manufacturing trying to build up in the area

  27. In Fairfield VIC on “Construct and use a five...” at 72A Station Street Fairfield VIC 3078:

    Guy Sansom commented

    This horrendous eyesore is a joke. Totally amazed it was allowed to get through. Its a blight on the landscape.

  28. In Diamond Creek VIC on “Use of the land for a micro...” at 25 Station Street, Diamond Creek VIC 3089:

    Kristy commented

    I absolutely support this proposal. Not only will the venue create new jobs for the area it will also create an exciting new eatery for families, a gathering place for sporting clubs in the area that have end of season break ups as well as coffee catch ups after school drop off. How exciting!

  29. In Bardwell Valley NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 53 Hannam Street, Bardwell Valley NSW 2207:

    Cameron Hons commented

    I object to the proposal of a new boarding house development in this location.
    The notification I received from Council today states that they planned for 10 rooms but the proposal here states that they are wanting 15 rooms.
    I'm more-so concerned about the fact that this property is too close to Coolibah Reserve and I would not want that site to be affected in any way during the development.
    Boarding houses also have a reputation for insecurity and other safety issues in residential zones.

  30. In Diamond Creek VIC on “Use of the land for a micro...” at 25 Station Street, Diamond Creek VIC 3089:

    Katrina commented

    I support this proposal. Wow Looks amazing and will create jobs and money for the area. Well done

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