Recent comments

  1. In Coolum Beach QLD on “Extension of Relevant...” at 288-316 Yandina-Coolum Rd Coolum Beach:

    Venetia de Chazal wrote to local councillor Rick Baberowski

    Absolutely disgusting this service station went ahead with the primary school and creek close by. So who is the shady greedy persons getting a cut out of it council?

    Delivered to local councillor Rick Baberowski. They are yet to respond.

  2. In North Bondi NSW on “Modification to dwelling...” at 23 Patterson Street North Bondi NSW 2026:

    Jeff Citizen commented

    With Bondi and other beaches being so close to pretty everywhere in Waverley, I'm just wondering if council is thinking about developing an overall policy on backyard pools.

    I have a pissy little one right next door to me: the pump whirrs loudly through the day and night, and the 24-hour underwater lights have robbed me of the delight of the night sky. It's been used perhaps a couple dozen times in the year or so since the house was completed, and takes up half of the backyard.

    These things are very energy intensive (pumps, chemicals, etc) and are generally used so infrequently, they are more often than not a fashion item.

    Anyone got any suggestions how to stop this pretentious disease from spreading through Waverley?

  3. In Grovedale VIC on “Construction of Forty Two...” at 98 Marshalltown Road, Grovedale, VIC:

    Bev Wigley commented

    The most silliest thing I have heard of ... 42 dwellings with a slim driveway , and one exit onto Marshalltown Road makes for a dangerous intersection close to a roundabout plus the roads like Barwarre Rd ,Marshalltown Rd with their intersections with Barwon Heads road can’t cope at the busy times of the day now.

    Plus if there was need for emergency service how will the get their vehicles into to such a long narrow entry road and people trying to get out at the same time.

  4. In East Toowoomba QLD on “Boundary Realignment 2 into...” at 27 Dunmore Street East Toowoomba QLD 4350:

    Paddy Boxall wrote to local councillor Geoff McDonald

    I trust that this application doesn't mean that another monstrosity will be foisted upon us. I believe that the owners own the property at the rear of 27 Dunmore Street. If so, maybe we will just have a sympathetic makeover. I wait in hope.

    Delivered to local councillor Geoff McDonald. They are yet to respond.

  5. In Denistone East NSW on “Dual Occupancy (attached)...” at 24 Richmond St Denistone East NSW 2112:

    Claudia Heer commented

    I live in Richmond St and am highly concerned about the amount of Dual Occupancies that have been approved/built in the last couple of years. The whole street is changing into "duplex land" and I think parking limits have been reached. People do not park their cars in garages but on the road (using garages for storage etc). On top of that Council seems to approve dual occupancies where blocks have not got the required minimum frontage.

  6. In Umina Beach NSW on “Remove of 1 x Lilly Pilly...” at 18 Nowack Avenue, Umina Beach NSW 2257:

    Lesley Harvey commented

    Can the owners work around the lilli pilli on this project? Too often, builds involve trashing perfectly useful trees and it is rare they are replaced making living on our coastal sand plain even hotter. An existing tree replaced takes twice as long to grow to shade height because of the sands holding little moisture & nutrients.
    Please keep the tree - prune it instead?

  7. In Ormiston QLD on “Reconfiguring a Lot -...” at 108 Sturgeon Street, Ormiston QLD 4160:

    Lynda Boyce commented

    I am concerned that this development will constitute overdevelopment of the area when taking into account the other new housing units built in recent years along Sturgeon Street. This has already had a detrimental affect on the koala population in the park opposite and on the amount of traffic travelling along Sturgeon Street.
    It is also in the area of school drop offs for Ormiston College and children cycling to school.

  8. In Bentleigh VIC on “Removal of restrictive...” at 2 Rose Street Bentleigh VIC 3204:

    Geoffrey Tittensor commented

    If you note my comment, it was not about four storey apartments, it referred to double storey townhouses, which to my way of thinking is a sensible way to create more housing, we can't continue to spread, so we have to have more population density. The restrictive covenant has effectively been pushed aside, if you look at the developments taking place in the area, both two and multi storey, so it seems that the covenant is an a relic from a past era, technology had overtaken it and it should be gotten rid of. As for the new apartments that are going up, I fail to see how they will be slums in the near future at the prices they are going for they are a significant investment in an upwardly mobile suburb.

  9. In Christies Beach SA on “Community Title Land...” at 22 Maturin Avenue, Christies Beach SA 5165:

    amanda Lindsay commented

    The townhouse development that has been constructed next door to this property (20) has already resulted in our street being being overcrowded with residents cars that do not fit onto the townhouse complex. We effectively have a one way street as a result and it is a nightmare trying to leave our properties as we cannot see oncoming traffic due to the parked cars everywhere. 8 townhouses = minimum 16 cars. Thank you also for ruining my view of 20 years. Now I get to see concrete blocks.

  10. In The Gap QLD on “Stormwater Drainage” at 159 Payne Rd The Gap QLD 4061:

    James Bryce commented

    Having a construction site of this size right next to a primary school is unfathomable. It will disrupt students ability to concentrate and learn.
    As a parent of a student of Payne Road Primary School, I am considering moving my child as the amount of air born dust pollution will undoubtedly trigger an adverse reaction to his asthma. The noise pollution will be deafening to nearly all of the school causing disruptions to learning that, as primary school students, could have ramifications that affect academic achievements long after the build is complete.
    I am not against people developing their land but the sheer size of this development and the effect on the students of the school must be considered,

  11. In Cremorne NSW on “Proposed studio above...” at 53 Belgrave Street, Cremorne NSW 2090:

    Louise Thomson commented

    I live directly behind this property and the extention will remove what little view left from my balcony. It appears to be the same height as the extension to the property next to it and that has removed the view to the north east.
    Subject to the windows it could also result in the people looking straight into my lounge room.

  12. In Matraville NSW on “Consolidate site into 1...” at 84 Perry Street Matraville NSW 2036:

    Ian Levitt commented

    This application must not be approved
    They want to cut into public land to allow 40 ft container trailers to reverse into their property
    This will cause multiple traffic jams not to mention the danger to the people especially those with prams or pets

    Parts of Perry St is zoned light industry and must have drive in drive out access
    This must be adhered to

    Perry Street is light traffic and all future approvals must respect that

    The demolition of these residential homes for light industy is terrible but should only be to create drive in drive out access for 84 84 and 88 Perry Street as it always should have been
    Street parking has already been lost to this premmises owner
    They can not be allowed to ruin Perry Street any more
    Ian.

  13. In North Willoughby NSW on “Request to remove one tree...” at 36 Hollywood Crescent North Willoughby NSW 2068.:

    Local Willoughy commented

    Lou. Have you renamed yourself Concerned Resident?

  14. In Taree NSW on “Manufactured Home Estate” at 34 Manikato Place, Taree NSW 2430:

    Lynette Matheson commented

    I would like you to note that if 2 vehicles are parked either side on Manikato pl there is only enough room for 1 car to pass(ie driving along the middle of the road) I believe the road needs to be widen if this is going to be the only entry/exit point. Also as this is a quiet neighborhood I query why there is not another entry or exit point onto Bushland drive only via Manikato place. I believe that 2 entry/exit points would better suit this type of development. I also query noise issues with so many houses with no age restrictions (ie families with children can take up residency)I would of supported it more if it was an over 50's type village. I believe there will be increase in noise affecting current residents as this is a quiet neighborhood most people purchased for this reason. when I looked into this area before purchasing i was told only 16 more properties would take place not 50. I believe this is over populating this area.
    I would like to Thankyou for considering my objections to this development without changes in road entry/exit points and also on noise.
    I look forward to your reply

  15. In Glenhaven NSW on “Place of Worship” at 1 Larapinta Place, Glenhaven:

    Deep Sh commented

    Glenhaven, is such a nice and beautiful piece of nature. Feel sorry for the residents now. Hope this is never approved and hope sanity prevail. Once this is approved. this part of hills will be a nightmare.

  16. In Bentleigh VIC on “Removal of restrictive...” at 2 Rose Street Bentleigh VIC 3204:

    Bill Best commented

    4 storey Stick apartment houses with timber floors will be a slum in 30 years so why should this covenant for brick be removed?

  17. In Coburg VIC on “Building and works to...” at 174 Bell Street, Coburg VIC 3058:

    Philip commented

    So will the extra cars be parking on Bell St?

  18. In Artarmon NSW on “Removal of 1 tree.” at 55 Godfrey Road Artarmon NSW 2064.:

    Concerned Resident commented

    As a last resort, tree removal is only option if threatens life. First option is pruning of trees and then next option is removal and replace with similar mature trees. Trees are necessary as they provide; oxygen to live, habitat for wildlife, wildlife promotes cross pollination of flora, this creates food for all life, shade from direct sunlight and beautification of our neighbourhood.

  19. In Chatswood NSW on “Request to remove one (1) tree” at 58 Eddy Road Chatswood NSW 2067.:

    Concerned Resident commented

    As a last resort, tree removal is only option if threatens life. First option is pruning of trees and then next option is removal and replace with similar mature trees. Trees are necessary as they provide; oxygen to live, habitat for wildlife, wildlife promotes cross pollination of flora, this creates food for all life, shade from direct sunlight and beautification of our neighbourhood.

  20. In Artarmon NSW on “Removal of 1 tree.” at 55 Godfrey Road Artarmon NSW 2064.:

    Concerned Resident commented

    As a last resort, tree removal is only option if threatens life. First option is pruning of trees and then next option is removal and replace with similar mature trees. Trees are necessary as they provide; oxygen to live, habitat for wildlife, wildlife promotes cross pollination of flora, this creates food for all life, shade from direct sunlight and beautification of our neighbourhood.

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

    Ben Cannon commented

    I strongly object to this development for the following reasons:
    - Parking on Lamrock avenue is already overcrowded, another 93 lodgers will make it impossible to find a park
    - Height requirements are exceeded
    - The noise and rubbish from the Village (neighbouring boarding house) is excessive, to add 93 lodgers would create even more of a dumping ground on the street.
    - The driveway is too close to the neighbouring property
    - The FSR appears not to include hallways, this should not be the case

  22. In Glenelg North SA on “Demolition of all existing...” at 19 Adelphi Terrace Glenelg North SA 5045:

    Paul Williams commented

    it states that it is only a two Storey development as long as it has room on site for owners and visitor parking and dose not impinge on Tod st or the surrounding area

  23. In Malvern East VIC on “Limited Licence - Renewable” at 26 Alma St, Malvern East 3145, VIC:

    Deb Morrison commented

    I was intrigued that a residential dwelling in a residential street would apply for "a Limited Licence - Renewable".
    Even more intriguing - and disturbing - is that the official period for commenting on this lasted for less than a minute and is now closed.
    Also disturbing is that any comment now cannot/will not be considered by the planning authority, but will be sent to the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation.
    This raises the uncomfortable question of just what the premises at 26 Alma Street, Malvern East are being used for?

  24. In Umina Beach NSW on “Construction Of A Two (2)...” at 454 Ocean Beach Road, Umina Beach NSW 2257:

    Martin Mitchell commented

    I object to this proposed development in Umina. Our suburb is slowly improving with quality infrastructure and housing and the demographics are changing in a positive way. A boarding house in this location will take us backwards. It needs to be located close to Woy Woy station or Gosford where the transport links are. There isn't even a a Centrelink office in Umina. It would have a detrimental impact on the community, is too close to the school and surf club and I don't know anyone who wants it here. Reject the proposal.

  25. In Telopea NSW on “Complying Development...” at 14 Felton Street Telopea NSW 2117:

    Wade Foster commented

    This is already a substantial residence in terms of dwelling size versus land size, and landscaping is minimal at best.
    If additional structure is to be added to the existing dwelling it would be nice to see additional landscape in the form of native tree species be added.
    Recommend the landscape plan for this dwelling be inspected - certainly street frontage presents no native platings.

  26. In Marrickville NSW on “Change of Use” at 23 Osgood Avenue Marrickville NSW 2204:

    Petra Jones commented

    There is no information available?

  27. In Brompton SA on “Removal of a regulated...” at 126 Chief Street Brompton SA 5007:

    Colin Ralph commented

    May I respectfully ask why this tree needs to be removed? I could find no reason on the planing application. If no valid reason is given then surely the application should not be approved

  28. In Korora NSW on “Intensive Plant Agriculture...” at 218 Bruxner Park Road, Korora NSW 2450:

    Mariette Eden commented

    To whom it may concern:
    I’m opposed to the netting application for the following reasons:

    1. At the time that the applicant did his soil preparation for the berry farm, I had a discussion with the farmer. He knew that he was not allowed to erect nets in this area but stated that he will go ahead anyway and first plant everything.

    He knew he was taking a risk that he would not get approval to erect netting.

    2. I have at that time also lodged complaints at the council about this , and voiced my concerns. I was assured that it is not allowed.

    3. In the time since the applicant started his blueberry farm ( about 2-3 years) he has shown no interest in accommodating complaints or have any discussions with us and I’m told that he had no discussions with his other neighbours either. He has not even tried to establish buffer zones, or any other attempt to assure that he will contain his spraying.

    4. the area that he has planted his berries is clearly intensifying his farming as he is now using a larger part of the land than previously used for bananas.

    5. the scenic appeal of this area is disturbed by the unsightly netting and has detrimental effects on our property value and approved uses. I had a da approval for extension on my house with a swimming pool and out door entertainment area and exercise annex. I can no longer build this for the purpose of which it was intended.

    6. The Chemicals will land on our roof and we will affect our water and therefore daily lives and health.

    7. The netting is a danger to the birdlife and the other creatures. Every year thousands of animals are injured in inappropriate netting of fruit trees. It entangles birds, lizards, snakes, bats and the occasional possum. The netting cuts their mouths to ribbons as they try to bite themselves free, and wraps so tightly around them that circulation is cut off and tissue dies, days or even weeks later. The animals die of thirst, starvation, strangulation or outright pain and fear in the nets

    I can not accept the methods that the berry farmers, like this one, use. Where they deliberately do things that are either against rules, regulations, bylaws and laws and then expect to get retrospective approval.

    Rules and regulations are there for everyone.
    It sets double standards and presidents for future problems.

    They do things first and seek approval later. It can simply not be tolerated.
    If they seek approval first, it will give all parties involved, in the interest of harmony and sustainability, the opportunity to address concerns and seek suitable solutions.

  29. In North Willoughby NSW on “Request to remove one tree...” at 36 Hollywood Crescent North Willoughby NSW 2068.:

    Castlecrag Birdfriend commented

    Make sure you submit a comment to council on the DA. I don’t think commenting here has much impact - but I’ll stand corrected if they do pay attention to this site.

  30. In Grovedale VIC on “Construction of Forty Two...” at 98 Marshalltown Road, Grovedale, VIC:

    Zoe McArdle commented

    42 dwellings is excessive considering the area. The traffic influx from surrounding suburbs is already ridiculous let alone allowing such a large scale subdivision to occur.

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