Recent comments

  1. In Scoresby VIC on “Construction of (6) six...” at 649 Stud Road, Scoresby VIC 3179:

    Mey Leng commented

    This is a very well thought proposal as it will provide a range of affordable housing in an area of 6 schools within a 2km radius. There is also a smartbus line just outside this property and local Scoresby shops very closeby. It is also minutes away from the Knox activity center.
    I believe we need more of these dense developmemts along our major roads like Stud Rd and Boronia Rd and the land should be utilized as much as possible.

    The service lane along these roads enable a much more comfortable access to these sites and help to lessen the visual impact of these developments, unlike some of the other major roads like Doncaster Road where there is no service lane.
    I am in full support of such developments along our major roads.

  2. In Melbourne VIC on “Proposed demolition of...” at Telstra Exhibition Exchange 288-326 Exhibition Street Melbourne VIC 3000:

    RONALD BUTTERS wrote to local councillor Jackie Watts

    The open green space at this site is well used by local residents, this is a high density area and more green space is needed rather than reducing green space, The development of this site will significantly increase the residentian population of the area and hence the need for more green space.

    Delivered to local councillor Jackie Watts. They are yet to respond.

  3. In Randwick NSW on “Minors area authorisation...” at 147 Avoca St, Randwick, NSW:

    Pauline commented

    This would be a welcome addition, we like to take the family there for dinner. The smell from the smokers area that wafts into the dining room should be addressed though

  4. In Fitzroy VIC on “Demolition, development and...” at 7 Hodgson St Fitzroy VIC 3065:

    Paul Beekman wrote to local councillor Sam Gaylard

    The tree proposed for demolition in this amendment is listed as a significant tree on of outstanding landscape value on the 2014 Yarra Significant Tree Register: http://www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/DownloadDocument.ashx?DocumentID=11198 It should be made very clear that residents and community members in Yarra expect no less than appropriate protection for significant trees in the municipality. As a result, we object to the demolition of the enormous 40-80 year old Grevilia Robusta at 227 Moor Street - particularly when it can be retained and protected during the building of the proposed development at 7 Hodgson Street. There are very few trees of this age and size remaining in Fitzroy, and the particular tree on this site is the only example of this species listed on the significant tree register for Fitzroy, and makes an outstanding contribution to the Moor and Hodgson Street streetscapes.

    Photo of Sam Gaylard
    Sam Gaylard local councillor for Yarra City Council
    replied to Paul Beekman

    Thanks Paul,
    I will forward your email as an objection to the above planning application. As I am not sure of the ability to include this in the consideration of the application, I will ask that your concerns also be directed to the appropriate officer for a response to you
    Kind regards
    Sam

    Sam Gaylard
    Greens Councillor for Nicholls Ward
    City of Yarra
    PO Box 168 Richmond 3121

    0448 586 884

    On 8 Jul 2016, at 8:40 AM, Paul Beekman <> wrote:

    The tree proposed for demolition in this amendment is listed as a significant tree on of outstanding landscape value on the 2014 Yarra Significant Tree Register: http://www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/DownloadDocument.ashx?DocumentID=11198 It should be made very clear that residents and community members in Yarra expect no less than appropriate protection for significant trees in the municipality. As a result, we object to the demolition of the enormous 40-80 year old Grevilia Robusta at 227 Moor Street - particularly when it can be retained and protected during the building of the proposed development at 7 Hodgson Street. There are very few trees of this age and size remaining in Fitzroy, and the particular tree on this site is the only example of this species listed on the significant tree register for Fitzroy, and makes an outstanding contribution to the Moor and Hodgson Street streetscapes.

    From Paul Beekman to local councillor Sam Gaylard

    =========================================================================

    Paul Beekman posted this message to you on PlanningAlerts in response to the following planning application.

    Your reply, and any other response to this email, will be sent to Paul Beekman and posted on the PlanningAlerts website publicly.

    Planning Application for 7 Hodgson St Fitzroy VIC 3065

    Description: Demolition, development and use of the land for a 7 storey building containing 10 dwellings with a reduction (to zero) of the car parking requirements

    Read more and see what others have to say here:
    https://www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/686806?utm_campaign=view-application&utm_medium=email&utm_source=councillor-notifications

    Best wishes,

    PlanningAlerts
    DISCLAIMER: The information in this electronic mail is confidential and may contain personal or health information. It is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, copying or use of the information is strictly prohibited. If
    you have received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately from your system and inform us by e-mail to

    Council does not guarantee the integrity of the information in this electronic mail or any attached files, or warrant or represent the information as being free from errors or omission. Any recipient who relies upon the information does so at their own risk, and Council will not be liable for any loss or damage caused as a result of such reliance. If a recipient wishes to act on the information provided, he or she should seek advice from Council in person before doing so.

    Please consider the environment before printing this email.

    Photo of Sam Gaylard
    Sam Gaylard local councillor for Yarra City Council
    replied to Paul Beekman

    Hi Paul /Sam

    The proposed amendment for the planning application at 7 Hodgson Street is to delete Conditions 7 and 8 which required an arborist report to address the impact of the development on the tree to the south of the site (at 227 Moor Street) and identify any construction or built form modifications to ensure the development did not impact the health of the tree.

    Since the time of the original permit, the owner of the subject site has purchased the site known as No. 227 Moor Street and an application to remove the tree (associated with the aforementioned conditions) was granted under Council's Local Law. There are no planning tree controls for the site.

    Council's planning officer took the amendment to its internal Development Assessment Panel today (8/7/16) for an exemption from advertising and subsequent to this a decision has been made on the application..

    Please let me know if you need any further information.

    Thanks

    Mary

    Mary Osman
    Manager Statutory Planning
    City of Yarra PO Box 168 Richmond 3121
    T (03) 9205 5334 F (03) 8417 6666
    E
    W www.yarracity.vic.gov.au

    [BESS_email-signature]

    From: Gaylard, Sam Cr
    Sent: Friday, 8 July 2016 8:57 AM
    To: Paul Beekman
    Cc: Councillors Support Unit; Osman, Mary
    Subject: Re: Planning application at 7 Hodgson St Fitzroy VIC 3065

    Thanks Paul,
    I will forward your email as an objection to the above planning application. As I am not sure of the ability to include this in the consideration of the application, I will ask that your concerns also be directed to the appropriate officer for a response to you
    Kind regards
    Sam

    Sam Gaylard
    Greens Councillor for Nicholls Ward
    City of Yarra
    PO Box 168 Richmond 3121

    0448 586 884

    On 8 Jul 2016, at 8:40 AM, Paul Beekman <> wrote:
    The tree proposed for demolition in this amendment is listed as a significant tree on of outstanding landscape value on the 2014 Yarra Significant Tree Register: http://www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/DownloadDocument.ashx?DocumentID=11198 It should be made very clear that residents and community members in Yarra expect no less than appropriate protection for significant trees in the municipality. As a result, we object to the demolition of the enormous 40-80 year old Grevilia Robusta at 227 Moor Street - particularly when it can be retained and protected during the building of the proposed development at 7 Hodgson Street. There are very few trees of this age and size remaining in Fitzroy, and the particular tree on this site is the only example of this species listed on the significant tree register for Fitzroy, and makes an outstanding contribution to the Moor and Hodgson Street streetscapes.

    From Paul Beekman to local councillor Sam Gaylard

    =========================================================================

    Paul Beekman posted this message to you on PlanningAlerts in response to the following planning application.

    Your reply, and any other response to this email, will be sent to Paul Beekman and posted on the PlanningAlerts website publicly.

    Planning Application for 7 Hodgson St Fitzroy VIC 3065

    Description: Demolition, development and use of the land for a 7 storey building containing 10 dwellings with a reduction (to zero) of the car parking requirements

    Read more and see what others have to say here:
    https://www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/686806?utm_campaign=view-application&utm_medium=email&utm_source=councillor-notifications

    Best wishes,

    PlanningAlerts
    DISCLAIMER: The information in this electronic mail is confidential and may contain personal or health information. It is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, copying or use of the information is strictly prohibited. If
    you have received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately from your system and inform us by e-mail to

    Council does not guarantee the integrity of the information in this electronic mail or any attached files, or warrant or represent the information as being free from errors or omission. Any recipient who relies upon the information does so at their own risk, and Council will not be liable for any loss or damage caused as a result of such reliance. If a recipient wishes to act on the information provided, he or she should seek advice from Council in person before doing so.

    Please consider the environment before printing this email.

  5. In Melbourne VIC on “Proposed demolition of...” at 109-111 Little Lonsdale Street Melbourne VIC 3000:

    Ronald Butters wrote to local councillor Ken Ong

    This seems to be an over development of the site when you consider the area, the existing buildings in close proximity and other proposed towers.
    These two buildings have wonderful street appeal and add to the historic streetscape.
    The amenity of residents in existing buildings will be adversely affected.
    An hotel will add more vehicle and pedestrian traffic to the already strained Little Lon and its surrounding lanes.
    This is the time to include all existing and proposed developments into the 3D Development Activity Monitor used by the City's GIS team so we can all see the overdevelopment of this area.

    Photo of Ken Ong
    Ken Ong local councillor for Melbourne City Council
    replied to Ronald Butters

    Hello Roland
    After VCAT's decision to support Council's refusal, Brady is trying again as a residential hotel. It is being assessed and all your matters will be considered. I will also ask planners for the 3D presentation of the area.
    Regards
    Ken

    Cr Ken Ong
    Sent from my iPhone
    This email is intended solely for the named addressee.
    If you are not the addressee indicated please delete it immediately.

  6. In Cardiff NSW on “Child care facility &...” at 40 Ada Street, Cardiff NSW 2285:

    Fi Forester commented

    What use is another child care centre in this area? There is a great risk of saturating the market when more centres are being approved while the current ones are struggling to fill places.
    I also believe the severe parking issues and limitation of Cardiff town centre need to be addressed before adding investments and increasing traffic.

  7. In Glendale NSW on “Child Care Centre” at 15 Alfred Street, Glendale NSW 2285:

    Fi Forester commented

    Increased traffic, parked cars and pedestrian activity in the middle of this residential area will have a negative impact on the neighbourhood. This hazardous intersection would only be made worse.
    I also feel there is little to no need for another child care centre in the area. There are several other, better situated options with vacancies in the area.

  8. In Cardiff NSW on “Child Care Centre” at 17 Kelton Street, Cardiff NSW 2285:

    Fiona wrote to local councillor Barney Langford

    Parking in Cardiff is a serious community issue which has not been adequately addressed despite the ongoing expansion and improvements in the area. Adding ANOTHER childcare centre (there are already at least 2 just around the corner) will only add to congestion and make parking even more difficult.

    Photo of Barney Langford
    Barney Langford local councillor for Lake Macquarie City Council
    replied to Fiona

    thanks Fiona,

    I will seek a briefing on this by council staff.

    Regards,

    Barney

    Barney Langford
    Councillor, North Ward
    0417137758
    ________________________________________
    From: [] on behalf of Fiona []
    Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2016 7:12 PM
    To: Cr Barney Langford
    Subject: Planning application at 17 Kelton Street, Cardiff NSW 2285

    Parking in Cardiff is a serious community issue which has not been adequately addressed despite the ongoing expansion and improvements in the area. Adding ANOTHER childcare centre (there are already at least 2 just around the corner) will only add to congestion and make parking even more difficult.

    From Fiona to local councillor Barney Langford

    =========================================================================

    Fiona posted this message to you on PlanningAlerts in response to the following planning application.

    Your reply, and any other response to this email, will be sent to Fiona and posted on the PlanningAlerts website publicly.

    Planning Application for 17 Kelton Street, Cardiff NSW 2285

    Description: Child Care Centre

    Read more and see what others have to say here:
    https://www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/666669?utm_campaign=view-application&utm_medium=email&utm_source=councillor-notifications

    Best wishes,

    PlanningAlerts
    This information is intended for the addressee only. The use, copying or distribution of this message or any information it contains, by anyone other than the addressee is prohibited by the sender.

    Any views expressed in this communication are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Council.

    Information provided to Council in correspondence, submissions or requests (verbal, electronic or written), including personal information such as your name and address, may be made publicly available, including via Council website, in accordance with the Government Information (Public Access) Act (GIPA Act) 2009.

  9. In Newtown VIC on “Use of Land for an Office...” at 302 Pakington Street, Newtown, VIC:

    Danny Hayes commented

    Buxtons colors are black - I think the caramel color that is presently there adds to the nice tree scape and is not imposing. Black is a bleak dark color and is imposing on the residents, there is enough black in the world, perhaps the building could be painted another color like white, pink or leave it the color it is?? I also think if Buxton do inhabit this building it should be called "Buxton Willow" as it sounds a lot nicer. Also some of those young kids that drive there late model european cars that they cannot afford, drive fast in the local streets, I would like to see new zoning put in place in that area as I believe Buxton have some 50 staff, this will impact significantly in the area particulaly with noise. There is a school crossing within 20 meters of the premise. I hope you can take this into consideration as I am a local resident with a young family.

  10. In Boronia VIC on “Multi-dwelling development” at 75 Albert Avenue, Boronia VIC 3155:

    mitchell commented

    how many units are being built??

    Where do we get access to the plans,

    we have questions/concerns about traffic congestion depending on the amount and set up of units aswell as building

  11. In Brunswick VIC on “Development of the land for...” at 808-810 Sydney Road, Brunswick VIC 3056:

    Keith Heaton wrote to local councillor Lenka Thompson

    Are you kidding?Seven storeys high and a reduction in car parking.
    Were will these people park.
    There are already numerous multi storey buildings within 100mt of this project and there residents park in local surrounding streets which clogs them up. Sydney rd has no parking as it is a clearway
    Seven Storey high. What a eyesore. Whats next twenty storey towers with no parking.
    Morel a nd council is ruining Sydney Road

    Delivered to local councillor Lenka Thompson. They are yet to respond.

  12. In Wyong NSW on “Demolition of dwellings &...” at 12 Jennings Road Wyong NSW 2259:

    Sue Biviano commented

    I believe that 35 Units in this small dead end street will not be viable.
    The road itself is not capable of handling this much traffic on a daily basis let alone the fact that there is not enough street parking, I do understand there is parking for residence under the 35 units, but has the extra parking this will incur been taken into account?
    I would like to ask for an extension on this application so it can be discussed by the residents in the street to see if this is actually a viable situation.

  13. In Lilyfield NSW on “Demolition of sheds and...” at 12 May Street Lilyfield NSW 2040:

    Dee Smith commented

    I wouldn't be surprised if the sheds were heritage sheds. My grandparents owned this house and block with the sheds. They were living there in 1930 from memory up until their death so I not sure how long before the house was built. It was a lovely old home and we had many fun times as children there. Very sad that there is no respect for our old heritage these days.

  14. In Thornleigh NSW on “Other - Demolition - Heritage” at 9 Station Street Thornleigh NSW 2120 Australia:

    Annette Johnson commented

    Another federation home being demolished. An irreversable loss and shame.

  15. In South Plympton SA on “Land Division Residential...” at 75 Castle St South Plympton:

    Jennifer Vincen wrote to local councillor Tim Pfeiffer

    Please note this house is on Castle Street which I believe has no parking on street. The traffic which uses the roads from Cross to Towers, includes 241 buses, school traffic, and daily very heavy traffic. It is at end of a 'sort of T junction" Please attend concerns before going any further with applications for this address.

    Photo of Tim Pfeiffer
    Tim Pfeiffer local councillor for City of Marion
    replied to Jennifer Vincen

    Hi Jenn,

    I'm following this up with staff.

    Kind regards,
    Tim

    Sent from my iPhone
    on street. The traffic which uses the roads from Cross to Towers,
    includes 241 buses, school traffic, and daily very heavy traffic. It is
    at end of a 'sort of T junction" Please attend concerns before going any
    further with applications for this address.
    to the following planning application.
    Jennifer Vincen and posted on the PlanningAlerts website publicly.
    allotments
    https://www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/686156?utm_campaign=view-application&utm_medium=email&utm_source=councillor-notifications
    Security System.

    Tim Pfeiffer
    Woodlands Ward Councillor | City of Marion

    P 08 7420 6483 | M 0401 776 523
    E | W www.marion.sa.gov.au

    PO Box 21 Oaklands Park SA 5046-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The contents of this email are intended only for the named recipient and may be confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please contact us then delete the email and any attachments. You must not copy, distribute or disclose this message or any part of it to anyone.

    No representation is made that the disk or email is free of viruses or other defects. Virus scanning is recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient. The contents of this message may express views and opinions not necessarily shared by the City of Marion.

    The City of Marion is committed to providing our customers with excellent service. If we can assist you in any way please either telephone (08) 8375 6600 or visit our web site www.marion.sa.gov.au.

    THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT

  16. In Winston Hills NSW on “Shop T37 - an amendment to...” at Winston Hills Shopping Centre, 180-192 Caroline Chisholm Drive, Winston Hills NSW 2153:

    Kerry Bailey commented

    I object to this application. This does not suit the needs of the Winston Hills community for which the shops are meant to serve. The use of the shop in this way deprives the community of a shop which will serve more people's needs than a sales office for a development project.

  17. In Coal Point NSW on “Boat Shed - Alterations and...” at 202 Skye Point Road, Coal Point NSW 2283:

    Kevin and Elizabeth O'Connor commented

    As the next door neighbour who overlooks the boat shed in this application, we have no objection to the development. In fact we believe it will enhance the waterfront as the existing boat shed is not very attractive.

  18. In Sutherland NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 507 President Ave Sutherland 2232:

    Andrew Fyfe commented

    Units in the proximity are only three stories in height, this project should be kept the same. I'm very unhappy as a resident to even see this plan even go to council. I hope the DA restrict this developer to the height of the other units in the area.

  19. In Moorang QLD on “Mcu rol” at 1939 Tarome Road, Moorang QLD 4340:

    Mrs Christine Turner commented

    I have been looking at real estate on Tarome Road with a view to buying there to get
    away from the factories at Wacol. Lots of B Doubles and other awful smelling industry
    in the area. Now thanks to Madeline Luck Grillon and her words above I will have to think
    long about buying the Taaffe-Grillon place. I had liked it before reading the comments.
    Naturally I can see how such a development would impact on me if I bought the place.
    My sympathies are with the people on Tarome Road. When we came to Wacol 43 years
    ago it too was quiet country. Now we have the train/ road to Springfield , Forest lake and much needed factories all around us.Soon the last few blocks beside us will be developed.It is necessary as the people need work. I guess I shall have to look elsewhere once again. I agree that the development should be rejected yet where can it go?

  20. In Canterbury NSW on “Demolition of all...” at 261 Canterbury Road, Canterbury NSW:

    Ludmilla Gouliaev commented

    I agree with Michael Joukhador Canterbury is already over-developed with lots of units. Corner cafe and retail would be better. A nice garden on the end of Phillips Ave (where it meets Canterbury Road) would smarten up the place It is on the way to Canterbury pool. There is off street parking in Phillips Ave. Canterbury Road is already wall-wall unit development. There are already so many FOR SALE signs in the front of the blocks making for VISUAL POLLUTION.

  21. In Canterbury NSW on “Demolition of all...” at 261 Canterbury Road, Canterbury NSW:

    Ludmilla Gouliaev commented

    I agree withM. Michael Joukhdor. Canterbury is already over-developed with lots of units. Corner cafe and retail would be better. A nice garden on the end of Phillips Ave (where it meets Canterbury Road) would smarten up the place It is on the way to Canterbury pool. There is off street parking in Phillips Ave. Canterbury Road is already wall-wall unit development. There are already so many FOR SALE signs in the front of the blocks making for VISUAL POLLUTION.

  22. In Jamberoo NSW on “Modified - two (2) lot...” at 41 Churchill St, Jamberoo, NSW 2533:

    Mrs V Baker commented

    Good Morning,
    Another one bites the dust.
    No I haven't the money to give to anyone yet alone the council. It would be prudent you get over it yourself. We protected you so quit the red tape.
    Thank you

  23. In Jamberoo NSW on “Modified - two (2) lot...” at 41 Churchill St, Jamberoo, NSW 2533:

    Mrs V Baker commented

    Dear everyone,
    NO more Jamberoo has had enough of the construction site for over 2 years. Over it.

    NO I haven't donated anything to any council or councillor and never will even after I kick the bucket.

  24. In Enmore NSW on “To install an in-ground...” at 7/151-153 Edgeware Road Enmore NSW 2042:

    Y Liu commented

    A pool should not be built on this land considering the limited lot size, increase in noise, loss of green area and privacy etc ... The proposed construction will cause significant trouble to adjoining neighbors in terms of dust, noise and potential safety issues.

  25. In Eltham VIC on “Development of the land for...” at 26 Pryor Street, Eltham VIC 3095:

    LK commented

    I am concerned about this high-density development in Eltham. What will be done to improve traffic conditions in the area? This will potentially bring in an extra 200 cars. As it is the traffic along Main Road to Fitzsimmons Lane is backed up to John Street by 7.30am! Bolton Street is gridlocked every morning and evening. Bridge Street is also jammed.
    Not to mention the terrible car parking at ALL of our Supermarkets! Bible Street is becoming hazardous to drive along as traffic tries to manoeuvre around cars parked on either side. Due to the gridlock that has become Main Road many cars cut through Bible Street .
    Eltham has not been designed for high-density housing, 108 units are way too many on that land, do we really need that many? Couldn't they build less?

  26. In Blaxland NSW on “Additions and alterations...” at 1 - 11 Layton Avenue, Blaxland, NSW:

    Annette LEGGE commented

    Re: Environmental Impact of Blaxland McDonalds Carpark Entry/Exit & Layton Ave

    I regret that I was not able to contact Council earlier to comment on the Development Proposal relating to McDonalds at Blaxland. Unfortunately I was in hospital and this is really the first opportunity I have had to make my position known.
    Basically, I share the same view of other members of my family at No.s 23, 25 and 27 Layton Ave Blaxland. Our concerns relate primarily to safety issues but also to environmental factors as well.
    Whilst living just down the road from the existing McDonalds over the past 9 months, since moving here last September, we have noticed:

    1. Traffic congestion/ blockage of Layton Ave to through traffic at the entrance/exit to McDonalds caused by the poor set out of Layton Ave from the Gt Western Hwy to the McDonalds entrance. It is a one-lane road that is blocked by;
    a) Patrons queuing to enter McDonalds that form a line of stopped traffic back to the Gt Western Hwy due to lack of parking in McDonalds and the drive through service driveway being backed right up to the entrance not allowing patrons entry.
    b) The fact that patrons park on the side of Layton Ave between the Gt Western Hwy and the McDonalds entrance not allowing through traffic to pass to the left side of the line of cars queued to enter McDonalds.
    This section of Layton Ave from the Gt Western Hwy to the McDonalds entrance should be dual lanes with a right turn only lane for the entrance into McDonalds. There should be no parking along this section of road so that through traffic can pass by the patrons lined up waiting to enter the McDonalds car park.

    2. Many vehicles turning into our driveways to do a U-turn, sometimes proving to be a hazardous action with obstruction to oncoming traffic and near accident misses

    3. A significant amount of litter, as customers of McDonalds walk past and dispose of their rubbish, McDonalds packaging etc by throwing it onto our front lawn/s and leaving it at the bus stop seat/bench at the front of 27 Layton Ave.

    4. Due to the location of the existing entry/exit to McDonalds, near or on the bend about 40 metres from the traffic lights at the intersection of the Great Western Hwy and Layton Ave, there is a real and great risk of accidents involving both cars and pedestrians. This is particularly problematic during the afternoons at the end of the school day, evenings as commuters travel home from work and, especially on weekends any time of the day or evening. We have witnessed and experienced traffic jams all the way down Layton Ave from the McDonalds car park entry/exit, sometimes to the Stop Sign just before the underpass.

    It is my/our view that the location of this entrance/exit should be given serious consideration as part of any Development Proposal/Application. Given that there is a large parcel of vacant land in front of McDonalds on the Great Western Highway, perhaps if this land was made available to McDonalds to purchase from the RTA (presuming such land is owned by the RTA) and McDonalds was willing to purchase this land, then that would be a much more suitable location for a car park entry/exit. It would be far safer to access and less intrusive on nearby residents.

    Please consider these points in your appraisal of McDonalds Development Proposal and as part of your overall town planning to ensure improved safety and better traffic flow generally, thank you.

    Kind regards
    Annette Legge and family

  27. In Newtown NSW on “To Torrens title subdivide...” at 134 Lennox Street Newtown NSW 2042:

    Kelly Wallwork commented

    The DA for this site looks oversize, the heritage wall on Hoffman Lane will be overshadowed. For at least 3 terraces down, our backyards will probably lose sunshine in winter . Also 15 bedrooms but no new car spaces in this congested area surely defies council regulations. It could mean a further 20 cars fighting for limited street space . Residents already compete with St Josephs Church, the Asylum Seekers Centre, Subud Hall and Lennox Street Artist Studios in this block. I object to this DA in it's current form.

  28. In Canterbury NSW on “Demolition of all...” at 261 Canterbury Road, Canterbury NSW:

    Michael Joukhador commented

    I agree with Michael Anderson. This site sits on the corner and can therefore support more cafes and retail sites across Canterbury road and Philips avenue. The local community is growing rapidly and would benefit from a vibrant retail/café strip along Canterbury road.

  29. In Canterbury NSW on “Demolition of all...” at 261 Canterbury Road, Canterbury NSW:

    Michael Anderson commented

    The two new buildings next to this site don't have any commercial premises/shops in them and it's made the area a cold dead spot on Canterbury road.

    This new development only proposes 2 shop fronts which is not enough, this area should be a vibrant space for the community not a cold group of concrete towers.

  30. In Buttaba NSW on “Dual Occupancy - Modify...” at 100 Clydebank Road, Buttaba NSW 2283:

    Rebecca Stowe commented

    I reside next door to this development and I have some issues/ objections-
    - The drainage, I understand the subdivision will be retained, is there sufficient drainage?
    - The proximity to the boundary line of both properties. Both properties are barely metres from my boundary fence. When I look out my north facing windows I will now see large imposing brick walls.
    - The lack of privacy with both properties overlooking my home.
    - The loss of sunlight and shadows that will now significantly impact on my yard, for the majority of the day. The north side is the only side of my yard that I have sunlight, this will be seriously impacted. I have a lovely view from those windows that will now be replaced with walls.
    - This development is out of character with the other residences in the estate, with overcrowding on the block.
    - The planting of trees along Clydebank road- will they impact my view when reversing from my steep driveway?

    I have a very strong objection to the two properties being developed on a block of less than 680 square metre. I am very concerned about how this will impact on my lifestyle and the neighbourhood.

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