Recent comments

  1. In North Toowoomba QLD on “Boundary Realignment 4 into...” at 2 Chamberlain Street North Toowoomba QLD 4350:

    Belinda Nicholson wrote to local councillor Chris Tait

    True Ginny! But all I can say is 'Ascot House' .... Divided .... Conquered .... Long Expensive Comeback!

    Delivered to local councillor Chris Tait. They are yet to respond.

  2. In Saint Leonards NSW on “New 14 storey hotel and...” at 548 Pacific Hwy, St Leonards:

    Edmond Gock commented

    This hotel is too tall and will be an eyesore since it will be inconsistent with the surrounding buildings and will make the area more cramped/crowded.

    Having a hotel there will also increase the amount of congestion along this part of Pacific Highway with the amount of cars and taxis coming in and out of the building.

  3. In Chittaway Bay NSW on “Telecommunications facility...” at 46W Thomas Walker Dr Chittaway Bay NSW 2261:

    Andy penn commented

    Hey lysandra. You are an idiot. Go throw all your phones out and disconnect your Internet. Obviously all the radiation is affecting your brain

  4. In Panania NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 146 Lambeth Street Panania NSW 2213 Australia:

    Christine Pate commented

    Unfortunately, this is another example of over development in the area. This is directly opposite the primary school and is a very busy spot for parents parking and dropping off students to school. It is already chaotic enough with buses and traffic and all the trucks around the area, with all the other developments that are going up, without another development opposite the school. This area in Lambeth Street is not zoned for units, it is a LZN-B1 - B1 Neighbourhood Centre zoning - shops only.

    The surrounding streets have so many duplexes where people tend to park on the road instead of in their property as there is not enough room and use their very narrow garages for storage only, thus creating very busy streets, which is quite dangerous for students walking to nearby primary and high schools.

    For these reasons listed above I strongly object to the development application being approved.

  5. In Alexandria NSW on “Demolistion of existing...” at 74-76 Wyndham Street Alexandria NSW 2015:

    Geoff Mason commented

    Dear Wayne,

    We live one block south and your opinion and treatment by Council does not surprise me. For 10 years we have been surrounded by never ending construction, with developers and builders not giving a shit about anyone. Complaining to Council is futile and a waste of time as they don't give a shit either.

    Recently we had a site still pouring concrete at 10pm on a Saturday night (WTF ?). Complain and the builder gets a warning - it's happened 3 more times ?

    Fleets of vehicles parked on Botany Road footpath. Complain and Parking Rangers never respond, they chicken out to avoid confrontation and slink around the back streets hunting easy targets while ignoring real pedestrian safety issues.

    Alexandria (and Sydney) is now such a shit hole we have finally decided to move out instead of fighting battles you cannot win. If that's progress we've had enough, it's sad but it's only going to get worse in this quarter and I pity you living opposite the upcoming Metro project.

    Council staff will be very happy we are leaving as their various 'compliance' units will have a little less to do in future.

    We can't wait to LEAVE !

  6. In Petersham NSW on “Limited licence - single...” at 107 Crystal St, Petersham NSW, NSW:

    Michael Darby commented

    The organisers need to ensure that they clean up any rubbish and/or bottles that are usually left in Frederick St, Petersham NSW 2049 (street and gardens) as well as cigarette butts from smokers who enter the street to smoke outside the hall.

  7. In Petersham NSW on “Limited licence - single...” at 107 Crystal St, Petersham, NSW:

    Michael Darby commented

    The organisers need to ensure that they clean up any rubbish and/or bottles that are usually left in Frederick St, Petersham NSW 2049 (street and gardens) as well as cigarette butts from smokers who enter the street to smoke outside the hall.

  8. In Kirrawee NSW on “Alterations and additions...” at 112 Oak Road Kirrawee 2232:

    Philip Reader commented

    It states in the traffic and parking section of this DA161170 page 7:

    "SIDRA modelling results of the Princes Highway - Oak Road intersection indicated thatthe intersection is operating poorly with the intersection operating at a Level of Service F in the morning.

    This Level of Service is consistent with the high daily traffic volumes on Princes
    Highway."

    This is the junction most people accessing the child care centre will be using. You won't be able to exit right to the Warrath st roundabout as there will be 2 rows of stationary traffic in the morning and afternoon. Due to to inadequacy of road infrastructure this DA shoudn't be approved.

  9. In Saint Peters NSW on “To demolish existing...” at 30 May Street St Peters NSW 2044:

    Sarina Kilham commented

    I oppose this development as I do not think that it is in keeping with St Peters Triangle Master Plan. I agree with the points made by other residents (does not adhere to DCP, traffic, parking etc). St Peters is a wonderful suburb and we should be encouraging innovative, liveable high-density housing here with a mix of affordability. I see little evidence of green spaces, water re-use or housing for long-term use in this plan that would add to the amenity of St Peters.

  10. In Canterbury NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 2A Charles Street, Canterbury NSW:

    Ludmilla Gouliaev commented

    I agree completely with Wendy Peddell and Michael Thomson. The new units especially the Charles Street developments and along Canterbury Road look like trucking containers piled on top of each other. Canterbury Road is already very congested and has a very poor surface. Parking is a problem. There is no parking near the station. Many people park 5 blocks away and walk. More green space, solar, energy saving facilities should be included. Each unit has a large carbon footprint due to need to use clothes dryers, no compost facilities and efficient waste management.

  11. In Eltham VIC on “Buildings and works to...” at 172 Mount Pleasant Road, Eltham VIC 3095:

    ED commented

    NO! to over-development
    NO! to get rich schemes by building a second residence on your block.
    NO! to non-sustainable actions.
    NO! to ridding wildlife homes.
    NO! to clogging up our infrastructure.
    NO! to invading neighbours space
    NO! to councils allowing such actions.
    NO! to councils looking after the profit line.
    YES! to a peaceful and sustainable Eltham with its natural flora and fauna.

  12. In Woolgoolga NSW on “Multi-Dwelling Complex-New...” at 7 Beach Street Woolgoolga NSW 2456:

    amelia ward wrote to local councillor Sally Townley

    has this been approved,what about the fauna & floral

    Delivered to local councillor Sally Townley. They are yet to respond.

  13. In Bellbird Park QLD on “Multiple Residential Use...” at 26 Keidges Road Bellbird Park QLD 4300:

    Glen Costello wrote to local councillor Paul Tully

    I don't feel the infrastructure is nor will be in the future able to cope with multiple blocks of large capacity units. The intersection there is already at peek capacity and once the new shopping centre opens and the road works are complete from the roundabout at Kruger to School Rd there will be 13 sets of traffic lights but no upgrade to this particular intersection. 35 units I feel is too many for this area. Perhaps it should be scaled back to say 15 to 20 units and the have dedicated green space and off street parking for the units & include visitor parking.

    Photo of Paul Tully
    Paul Tully local councillor for Ipswich City Council
    replied to Glen Costello

    I'm not the councillor for that area but will pass your email on to the local Councillor Sheila Ireland.

    DEPUTY MAYOR PAUL TULLY - LLB JP(Qual) MAICD MMIA MMA MMEA FPIA(Hon)
    Councillor for Division 2 - Augustine Heights, Bellbird Park, Gailes, Goodna and Redbank
    City of Ipswich - Queensland's Regional Capital
    Australian Migration Agent No. 0002733

    PO Box 1
    18 Queen St
    Goodna QLD 4300

    T: 07 3818 6900
    F: 07 3818 1099

    E:
    W: tully.org.au
    W: Division2News.com
    F: facebook.com/PaulTully
    T: twitter.com/PaulTully
    I: instagram.com/PaulGTully
    L: linkedin.com/in/PaulGTully
    Y: youtube.com/user/PaulGTully
    G+: google.com/+PaulGTully
    SKYPE: PaulGTully
    ACMA: VK4FPGT

    * Ambassador Goodna Jacaranda Festival
    * Chair, Ipswich City Enterprises Pty Ltd
    * Chair, Ipswich City Properties Pty Ltd
    * Deputy Chair, Ipswich City Developments Pty Ltd
    * Deputy Chair, Ipswich Motorsport Precinct Pty Ltd
    * Deputy Chair, Ipswich Rivers Improvement Trust
    * Honorary Life Member Goodna Bowls Club
    * Patron Goodna Rugby League Football Club
    * Historian * Psephologist * Ripperologist

    Queensland's Longest-Serving Councillor 1979 - 2016

    On 14 Sep. 2016, at 8:00 pm, Glen Costello <> wrote:

    I don't feel the infrastructure is nor will be in the future able to cope with multiple blocks of large capacity units. The intersection there is already at peek capacity and once the new shopping centre opens and the road works are complete from the roundabout at Kruger to School Rd there will be 13 sets of traffic lights but no upgrade to this particular intersection. 35 units I feel is too many for this area. Perhaps it should be scaled back to say 15 to 20 units and the have dedicated green space and off street parking for the units & include visitor parking.

    From Glen Costello to local councillor Paul Tully

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

    Glen Costello 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 Glen Costello and posted on the PlanningAlerts website publicly.

    Planning Application for 26 Keidges Road Bellbird Park QLD 4300

    Description: Multiple Residential Use (35 Units)

    Read more and see what others have to say here:
    https://www.planningalerts.org.au/applications/717535?utm_campaign=view-application&utm_medium=email&utm_source=councillor-notifications

    Best wishes,

    PlanningAlerts
    The information contained in this email and any attachments is privileged and confidential and is intended for use only by the addressee. Copying, distributing, or disclosing the information contained in this email and any attachments is prohibited unless expressly authorised by the sender. If you are not the intended recipient, and you have received this message in error - do not read, copy or distribute this email. If you have received this message in error, please delete all copies of this message from your system and notify the sender by return email. It is recommended that you scan this email and any attachments for viruses. Ipswich City Council does not accept liability for any loss or damage incurred directly or indirectly caused by opening this email and/or any attachments.

  14. In Melbourne VIC on “Installation of signage” at Fairfax Guest House 392-396 Little Collins Street Melbourne VIC 3000:

    Anthony Giannecchini commented

    This is a heritage building which also requires owners Corp PS 336302K approval prior to any changes being made, over and above any approvals granted or such by Melb City Council.

  15. In Eltham VIC on “Buildings and works to...” at 172 Mount Pleasant Road, Eltham VIC 3095:

    Jodie Bareham commented

    I agree with Lucy Rose and I have concern about overdevelopment of the area given Eltham's green wedge and exposure to bush fire. Congestion and access out is an issue.

  16. In Alexandria NSW on “Demolistion of existing...” at 74-76 Wyndham Street Alexandria NSW 2015:

    Wayne Simpson wrote to local councillor Clover Moore

    We, 62-72 Botany Road objected to this DA over usage of common property laneway which DA property appears to have no right of access. DA was originally rejected and subsequently approved court. We were never notified of updates beyond lodging objection. Demolition has now commenced and the laneway is being used and being damaged. We have advised council with no resolution yet. Developer states council approved use of laneway.

    Delivered to local councillor Clover Moore. They are yet to respond.

  17. In Diamond Creek VIC on “Amendment - Subdivision of...” at 50 Fraser Street, Diamond Creek VIC 3089:

    Meera Govil commented

    I understand that An EPA report from 1999 deemed this parcel of land unfit for human habitation because of the presence of arsenic, cyanide etc. Peter Ramsay the environmental auditor say there is a subsequent assessment report which can be only accessed if Council requests it. Does the council have a copy of the report or any assessment report that states that the land can be safely used for development? I would like to sight this report.
    The citizens who live in adjoining the block have stated that trucks have been continuously moving contaminated soil away from the site. What inspections have been carried out to ensure that this is not harmful to the health of the community in the area? I would like an early response.

  18. In Asquith NSW on “Residential - New Multi...” at 18 Baldwin Avenue Asquith NSW 2077 Australia:

    Heidi Rousell commented

    We should be able to trust our Council, we shouldn't have to fight against totally inappropriate developments, isn't that what we elect Council for?
    It's difficult for the average ratepayer to understand why the Town Planning dept of council accepts these proposals when they obviously don't comply and are so vastly out of line with planning guidelines.
    Please Council with all that is going on in Asquith, please make sensible decisions so that we can all have some faith in the system.

  19. In Horsley NSW on “Subdivision - Torrens title...” at 44 Alkira Circuit, Horsley NSW 2530:

    Thomas lee gregory commented

    There is no suitable street parking for 3 properties. With half of the outside street parking with cerment barriers on the road.

    The built up dwellings will effect the light of surrounding proprities

    Most of the surrounding houses are Single or double storey family homes. They would build high density built up homes that wouldn't fit with the area.

    Because of the opertuntiy for a developer to make a quick buck we the residences of alkeria estate horsley have to have his development in our family estate

  20. In Newtown NSW on “Under Section 96 of the...” at 6 Mary Street Newtown NSW 2042:

    Sinead commented

    I am a neighbor of this premise (directly behind) and have been for 3-4 years. The patrons are always respectful when leaving and entering and we never experience any excessive noise from the venue, or any other issues for that matter. I support this application as I believe it will help reduce the wait time for entry leaving the footpath less clogged up on busy nights.

  21. In Newtown NSW on “Under Section 96 of the...” at 6 Mary Street Newtown NSW 2042:

    Sinead commented

    I am a neighbor of this premise (directly behind) and have been for 3-4 years. The patrons are always respectful when leaving and entering and we never experience any excessive noise from the venue, or any other issues for that matter. I support this application as I believe it will help reduce the wait time for entry leaving the footpath less clogged up on busy nights.

  22. In Canterbury NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 2A Charles Street, Canterbury NSW:

    Wendy Peddell commented

    I'm continuing to lodge protests on principle lately, not because I believe that Council, the Joint Regional Planning Panel or anyone else further up the planning food chain actually reads the comments or cares less about what's happening out here. Of course this isn't an isolated issue, it's a Sydney wide "dump".

    If the buildings that are going up were stand out examples of architecture and obviously incorporated eco friendly solar and water collection, or lots of green space, we might go quietly. But they aren't.

    What happens to all these extra commuters when the heavy rail line goes offline during the Metro construction phase?

  23. In Saint Peters NSW on “To demolish existing...” at 30 May Street St Peters NSW 2044:

    Vince Polito commented

    Large apartment developments are changing the character of the area in ways that do not fit with the Councils published plans.
    I am concerned about the traffic and parking impacts. Council also needs to ensure that large developments include provision for affordable housing. This proposal does not.
    Finally, with the chaos of Westconnex construction looming, additional large construction projects should be put on hold. There will already be too much construction traffic trying to travel and park in the area.

  24. In Woolooware NSW on “Construction of 238...” at 475 Captain Cook Drive:

    Tony Lindsell commented

    This Development will put excessive stress on the surrounding roads. It is ridiculous that there are Traffic lights put to exit the site when there are roundabouts at both ends of the complex for traffic to enter and exit without a set of traffic lights. With another 238 dwellings mentioned in this request it is definitely an over statement on what the area can cope with. If the past development is used as an example there will be continual changes to the DA as time moves on without public consultation.

  25. In Belmont NSW on “Seniors Housing” at 14 Halyard Way, Belmont NSW 2280:

    Allen and Patricia Gates commented

    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

    Re: 14 HALYARD WAY, BELMONT DA-1443/2016

    We strongly object to the proposed 'Seniors housing / Retirement village' being developed at 14 Halyard Way, Belmont. In November 2014 we purchased our current residence at 11 The Maindeck, Belmont due to the serenity, surrounding bushland, birdlife and outlook of the property, being of retirement age we would definitely find a forced move to relocate because of the proximity of this development to our residence extremely difficult. The area (bushland) at the rear of our property is used by ourselves, and other locals, to enjoy a quiet walk through the bush with our grandchildren (who being from a totally residential suburb without bushland) find the area extremely educational and peaceful. Another concern would be the access in and out of this development with the local streets already being too narrow for larger vehicles, currently when entering and leaving if a resident (or visitor) is parked on the street in front of their property it is required to drive on the other side of the roadway to pass, larger vehicles in the area would be a recipe for disaster of families (with young children) living in the local streets. We invite anyone with interest in this development to come and see the number of birds (on a daily basis) that come to our backyard or just sit on our back fence, has it been considered at all about where they may relocate to after their home territory is destroyed by development and noise!!!

  26. In Belmont NSW on “Seniors Housing” at 14 Halyard Way, Belmont NSW 2280:

    Allen and Patricia Gates wrote to local councillor Kay Fraser

    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

    Re: 14 HALYARD WAY, BELMONT DA-1443/2016

    We strongly object to the proposed 'Seniors housing / Retirement village' being developed at 14 Halyard Way, Belmont. In November 2014 we purchased our current residence at 11 The Maindeck, Belmont due to the serenity, surrounding bushland, birdlife and outlook of the property, being of retirement age we would definitely find a forced move to relocate because of the proximity of this development to our residence extremely difficult. The area (bushland) at the rear of our property is used by ourselves, and other locals, to enjoy a quiet walk through the bush with our grandchildren (who being from a totally residential suburb without bushland) find the area extremely educational and peaceful. Another concern would be the access in and out of this development with the local streets already being too narrow for larger vehicles, currently when entering and leaving if a resident (or visitor) is parked on the street in front of their property it is required to drive on the other side of the roadway to pass, larger vehicles in the area would be a recipe for disaster of families (with young children) living in the local streets. We invite anyone with interest in this development to come and see the number of birds (on a daily basis) that come to our backyard or just sit on our back fence, has it been considered at all about where they may relocate to after their home territory is destroyed by development and noise!!!

    Photo of Kay Fraser
    Kay Fraser local councillor for Lake Macquarie City Council
    replied to Allen and Patricia Gates

    Dear Allen and Patricia
    Thank you for your email and I will forward your objection to the assessing officer to make sure your views are taken into account.
    Kind regards
    Kay

    Sent from my iPad
    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.

  27. In Marrickville NSW on “To demolish existing...” at 27 Malakoff Street Marrickville NSW 2204:

    Petra Jones commented

    Consideration needs to be given of the impact of additional cars from two dwellings with no garage or off street parking. The plans should reintroduce garages.

  28. In Kirrawee NSW on “Alterations and additions...” at 112 Oak Road Kirrawee 2232:

    Stephen Davies commented

    Hi. Completely agree with previous comments. This intersection is already dysfunctional between 0700-1000 and 1500-1900 weekdays and on Saturday mornings. Just crossing the Princes Highway from one side of Kirrawee to the other can waste 20 mins of watching lights cycle green through red again and again. The brick pit development once open will create a traffic mess that is hard to even imagine - lengthy periods of gridlock in all directions I expect.

  29. In Eltham VIC on “Buildings and works to...” at 172 Mount Pleasant Road, Eltham VIC 3095:

    Lucy Rose commented

    I agree that Eltham has allowed too many applications to go through for monetary gain and a zealous over deveopment has occured seeing loss of habitat, busier roads loss of our peaceful suburbs

  30. In Kirrawee NSW on “Alterations and additions...” at 112 Oak Road Kirrawee 2232:

    Greg Nolan wrote to local councillor Peter Towell

    In the PM currently it can take 4 - 6 changes of lights to get through this intersection Oak Rd and turn onto the Hwy.

    Alternate entry and exit required prior to this development going ahead.

    I consider the traffic plan flawed and inaccurate.

    Delivered to local councillor Peter Towell. 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