Recent comments

  1. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Jan Olver commented

    I object to the proposal as the building should be retained to preserve the history of the area.

  2. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Don Mackintosh commented

    The development application for the demolition of the Alexandria Pub building should not be accepted. Although there are a number of personal and community reasons not to proceed because its a great place and we have had many good times there, I believe the true reason this shouldn't proceed is because the design of the new building does not add any significant value aesthetically to the suburb/site.

    If you look around Alexandria and Redfern, and backed up by the report the reason the that there is no Heritage or similar buildings on the area, is because the council continues to let Development get in the way of history and heritage. And that's the only way the applicant can respond to the Heritage debate. Unfortunately (or fortunately) the applicant is also arguing in favour of keeping this older building in place by answering this way - depending which way you read it.

    Is the building in ruins? No in fact there has been recent renovations of the building.
    Can the area cope with more apartments? Possibly, but the Carparking situation is problematic already.
    Could the Pub remain with apartments on top? For sure! but this would cost a lot more money for the developer to work with.
    Regarding the Technology Park (with significant older heritage buildings!..if you walk through this site you see how they have tried to keep the heritage intact) - would an UGLY building on the corner fit in with what the Park and council has tried to achieve? NO

    Lets hope we don't lose another part of Alexandria's history. Whats next - maybe we put some new apartments at the other end of Garden St - in the park - or perhaps sell the Hall on Garden St and turn it into a multi dwelling unit block!

    Hopefully a compromise can be established and the developer can dig a bit deeper into their pockets, and think a bit out of the square and redesign a building that includes the current establishment and maintain some of the suburbs and sites history.

  3. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Victoria Gracey commented

    I strongly object to the demolition of The Alexandria Hotel. Progress should not include destroying a building that is part of heritage to replace it with more soulless apartments and shopping villages. There are so few buildings that remain in their original state and it's this that gives an area character. The Alex is a unique hotel, with many original features; as well as a large beer garden, that is family friendly. It would be an utter shame to lose this venue to the local residents.
    The area is already highly populated, with minimal parking options for current residents. This proposal will make this issue significantly worse.

    Please Save The Alex!

  4. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Emma Larkin commented

    I object to the application that will demolish the Alexandria Hotel. This hotel is a well known landmark in the area. Alexandria has changed dramatically in the last decade, with streets now full of characterless multistory mixed-purpose buildings. They bring nothing to Alexandria, no history, no character and no style.

    The Alexandria Hotel is a historic and unique building in this part of Sydney, and the pub should be preserved for generations to come.

    Councils really have a lot to answer for. The proposed demolition is not in the best interests of anyone other than property developers.

  5. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Erin straker commented

    As a local resedent I object. In an area where the colour of paint on the outside of your house has to be of heritage colours and a 11year old apartment is turned down an internal exstention due to heritage factors, how on earth can they justify pulling down the last standing worker pub. The Alex is an icon. The focus of the city of Sydney is to build community I thought, how is that achieved by removing one of the biggest long landing establishments.

  6. In Petersham NSW on “To carry out demolition of...” at 102 New Canterbury Road Petersham NSW 2049:

    Scott MacArthur, Vice-President, Marrickville Heritage Society commented

    The Marrickville Heritage Society does not support this development and calls on Council to reject it.

    As is acknowledged in the Heritage Impact Statement, ‘The principal issue is the visual relationship between the existing facades and the new building behind.’ The building is dramatically overscaled for this heritage precinct, and this is accentuated by the fact that the existing heritage facades on the site are predominantly only a single storey high. The fenestration makes no attempt to reflect the character of the precinct, which is characterised by rendered facades and regular small scale fenestration on the upper floors.

    The treatment of the blind end walls is another particular concern. These appear to be unadorned face brick, and would be highly intrusive and uncharacteristic of the area.

    The building exceeds the height limits imposed by Marrickville LEP 2011, which only exacerbates the lack of concern exhibited by the proponent for the character and amenity of this heritage precinct.

    The Society calls on Council to reject this application.

  7. In Elermore Vale NSW on “Erection of 25 attached two...” at 18 Nerigai Close Elermore vale, NSW:

    John and Heather Stephens commented

    We are writing to strongly object to the proposed development of lot 7 DP 842408 18 Nerigai Close Elermore Vale.

    1. This development is highly inappropriate in the area proposed. It is to sit on a wedge of land at the very end of a 700 metre long narrow winding, series of three of no through roads (Kerry Ave, Melinda Ave and Nerigai Close). It abuts but is not connected by road to Robinia Close. This development consists of 25 tightly packed attached units either side of a narrow connecting road. At the Nerigai end sits what we can only assume is a refuse dump. It is not clear from the plans provided but it appears to be either a storage area for we assume is either 75 wheelie bins (normal, recycle and green) or, as has been suggested, several large skips. This repository is in very close proximity to the end houses of Nerigai Close and Kerry Avenue. This is a health risk!

    2. Both the Melinda Estate (as was the development name of Melinda Ave and Nerigai Close area) and more recently Robinia Close had legally binding covenants on the land we built on. This limited us to non attached single story brick and tile construction. I believe the Melinda covenants have lapsed however all the houses have adhered to this standard. Robinia covenants still apply. The proposal is to wedge between these two estates a totally different style of multi story terraced construction. The diagram's provided are reminiscent of a tarted up 19th century English mill town. We the people of this area believe that the development of 18 Nerigai Close should comply if not legally then ethically and morally to the standards we have worked to. As proposed this development is totally out of step with the look and feel of the rest of Melinda, Nerigai and Robinia.

    3. The land this is proposed to be built on has drainage problems. It is set between two watercourses. It is in effect a flood plain. One is an established retention basin and the one at the end of Nerigai is usually dry but floods easily after heavy rain. Considerable drainage work will have to be done once this is converted to a concrete desert. We believe the existing flooding problems in Croudace Road, Cheryl Close & Watkins Road will be exacerbated.

    4. This development is an over development. With the current 25 units we can expect a population of probably 100 persons. This makes it as big as the total Melinda estate. This is an isolated area with the only access a 700 metre drive up Nerigai Cl, down Melinda and along Kerry to the one and only exit from this entire area, the junction of Kerry Ave and Watkins Road. Feeding this intersection are six dead-end roads namely Nerigai Close, Melinda Ave, Willow Close, Cheryl Close, Max Street and Duncan Close with a total of over 200 homes. Twenty years ago I had reason to address the full Newcastle council on another matter. As an aside, I had discussion with the then lord mayor John McNaughton, Councillor Sutton and several other councillors, in respect to this limited road access. It was agreed at that time that no further large scale development should be considered by Council until this single road access was resolved. I was shown the then existing plan to extend Kerry Ave to Cardiff Road. I believe to is no longer possible. I believe that for safety / fire access there should be an investigation of other possible exits from this area before approving this proposal. If approved it would close off the Kerry - Robinia corridor. This option is the only viable alternate entry to this area..

    5. In Australia we have .78 cars per person (Australian bureau of statistics). With up to 100 persons in this development that equates to 78 cars. In reality it would probably be less than this, 50 to 60 is a possible realistic number. The plan shows spaces for 36?? I know this is all that is required by planing regulations (these must have been drawn up in the 1980's) but the remainder of homes in Melinda Estate have off street parking for at least two cars. However, there are always cars parked in the street. Where is the overflow of cars from the new development going to end up?? Parked up Nerigai Close?? This imposition of 50 cars will mean a heavy increase in traffic through Nerigai and Melinda of probably 100 plus movements per day. Additionally, the intersection of Melinda and Nerigai has sight limitations and should always be used with extreme caution.

    6. Unless a car is used there are no services available to the future residents of 18 Nerigai Close. The nearest bus stop is more than a kilometre away. The nearest shops are over 2 kilometres away. The plan of this development shows no grass, trees or gardens in the main area of housing except for a small strip behind the second r ow of terraces. Where will the children play? Nerigai Close?? This is pretty poor for 100 people.

    7. Road access for large trucks is very limited. There is no turning area currently available in Nerigai Close. Council garbage trucks come down the street and pick up bins from the left hand side of the road then reverse the 150 metres up the hill around the corner to where they can turn. Will the current residents be expected to put up with heavy truck movements and street parking during construction? This is a heavy impost on current residents!

    John and Heather Stephens

  8. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Monique Ward commented

    I object to the DA D/2015/772 on the following basis:

    Heritage Significance of the site:
    * The venue has retained original features which are unique in the area. It's frequent use in film and television is evidence of this;
    * The facade and the building's lengthy history together with it's ties to the Eveleigh railyards are an important legacy for the area;

    Cultural importance of the venue:
    * The size of the land / block has enabled large functions for many years;
    * The size of the outdoor beer garden facilitates a family / pet friendly environment;

    Proposed use puts undue pressure on the area;
    * The four storey height would create significant shadows for local residents;
    * The parking to apartment ratio is grossly inadequate given existing conditions;
    * The lack of shared green space is not sympathetic with the leafy neighbourhood;
    * The structure itself is not sympathetic with the surrounding structures;
    * The density of the area is already increasing - local housing needs are being met by other emerging developments.

  9. In South Yarra VIC on “Construction of a four...” at 3-5 Chambers Street, South Yarra, VIC:

    Patrick Power commented

    We oppose the proposed development for the following reasons:

    A four-storey building on a small block of land at the end of a dead-end street, with poor access, represents over development, and adverse impact on existing residents of Chambers Street.

    The absence of visitor car parking will exacerbate an already critical lack of street parking in the vicinity. Chambers Street is a favoured parking area for Chapel Street shoppers.

    Chambers Street is a thoroughfare for vehicles avoiding the Chapel Street/Toorak Road intersection. As well, large commercial delivery vans and refuse tracks regularly service the shops on Chapel and Chambers Streets and Toorak Road. The proposed four-storey apartment complex would presumably house 10 to 15 apartments and therefore multiple additional vehicles will have a dramatic impact on a narrow street which is already grid locked at many times during the day.

    As long-term residents of the North Ward, we have seen a massive increase in accommodation density in our vicinity, with no improvement to infrastructure, and no increase in passive recreation areas.

    In the interests of the amenity of existing residents and traders in Chambers Street, we urge Stonnington Council to reject the proposal.

    Isabella & Patrick Power
    11/38 Chambers Street
    South Yarra VIC 3141

  10. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    James Dempster commented

    I would like to oppose the Development Application Number D/2015/772 to redevelop the Alexandria Hotel.

    To redevelop is to destroy Heritage and you can’t bring that back. It’s like green spaces you never get them back.

    The Sydney City Council talk about a city of villages, you don’t build villages out of new soulless apartment blocks, they are made around heritage buildings to create beauty and contrast.

    We are begging you not to allow this to happen. This building should be a listed Heritage building!!

  11. In South Yarra VIC on “Construction of a four...” at 3-5 Chambers Street, South Yarra, VIC:

    Gina Gutierrez commented

    This is an outrageous proposal. As the owner/occupiers of 5/20 Chambers Street we are vehemently opposed to this development and waiver. This pocket of our precinct is already overdeveloped and struggling with an inadequate infrastructure. The geography of Chambers Street and its surrounds does not support heavy duty traffic turnover. There needs to be some control over the parking system in the area rather than it declining into a free for all. As ratepayers we expect the Stonnington Council to show more sensitivity towards inappropriate development and to respect the needs of its residents. If the proposed development cannot supply carparking for its residents then it should not be considered by council for construction.
    This application should not be considered as it is environmentally unsound.

    Ivan& Gina Gutierrez

  12. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Amanda H commented

    Not only is the Alexandria Hotel iconic of Sydney's architectural and cultural heritage, it is also a social hub for the local community. Alexandria locals choose to live in this area because of its vibrant mix of old and new that complement each other. The demolishment of this treasured building to make way for more soulless and fast-dating apartments tips the balance and will be a very sad loss to the area. Why is this building not heritage protected!? I oppose the plans for this site.

  13. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Anna Bradshaw commented

    I strongly oppose the demolition of the Alexandria hotel. The original fittings and huge beer garden make this pub utterly unique for inner Sydney and would be a loss to the community. Further, as a resident of Garden st who always struggles to find a car park near my home, the lack of car parks in the proposal are very concerning for local residents. There is evidently broad opposition from the community. Please save the Alex!

  14. In Scoresby VIC on “Multiple Dwellings and...” at 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South VIC 3152:

    Mrs C Fuller commented

    Constant applications by developers for visitor parking requirements to be waived at multiple unit locations, if approved will lead to haphazard parking in streets, inconvenience to nearby owners/residents often through reduced access to their properties, crowded streets for council services and bonafide tradesmen. Specifically designed visitor parking is of paramount importance for multiple unit sites, especially as some unit residents may own two cars and the premises cater for only one.

  15. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Marty commented

    To whom it may concern,

    The Alexandria Hotel cannot be demolished, it is iconic, should be heritage listed, and it is a ridiculous outrage that the raglan across the road is yet the alex isn’t!

    It is a piece of Aussie history and one of the the best part's of the local culture, step inside it and have a look for yourself, it would be a crying shame to lose it in the name of ‘progress’ - knock down the cricketers arms 100m down the road that is full of delinquents and undesirables for example or one of the other 100 ghetto like buildings in the area/Redfern not something that adds character and value to the local community..!



  16. In Lewisham NSW on “To demolish improvements...” at 27 Railway Terrace Lewisham NSW 2049:

    Abigail Groves commented

    I would also like to register my objection to this proposed development (Lewisham DA201500333), for two reasons. First, as the previous comment suggested, it will have a negative impact on traffic in an already congested area. Second, as a resident of the neighbouring property (3 Victoria St) it will directly affect my amenity. I live at Unit 1, 3 Victoria St Lewisham. The windows of my ground floor unit face north towards the fenceline between the properties. While there is no view from these windows - which face directly onto a fence - they do receive light, particularly in the mornings. This development appears planned to extend close to the boundary between the properties and will block any light entering 3 Victoria St from the north side. How is that ok?

    I hope that you will give consideration to my concerns.

  17. In Parramatta NSW on “Demolition of clubhouse &...” at 143 George Street Parramatta NSW 2150:

    J Edmunds commented


    People are demolishing these properties RIGHT NOW @ 22:12pm Sunday 5 July.

    I called triple zero today at approximately 19:10pm, when I first noticed people sneaking around (In the backyard of 147 George Street, Parramatta) in the dark, cutting metal bars off the windows and removing items from the rear of 147 & 145 properties. They gained access inside the demountable at the rear of 145 and removed more items, which they loaded onto their waiting truck in the driveway of 145. I thought it was a break-in and I was very scared.

    Police arrived promptly. The officers spoke with a man and a woman found on the property at 145 George St.

    Two police officers then proceeded to inform me that the people who were on the properties were -"ALLOWED"- to be there, as they are the contractors who will be DEMOLISHING both properties.

    I was assured by police that this was not a break-in and allowed return home.

    As the police seemed satisfied that the people had permission to be at the properties, they left the scene. The man found on the property went with the police. The woman found on the property stayed behind at 145 George St and continued to 'demolish' in the dark and load the truck. Currently at 23:45pm, the truck is still in the driveway of 145.

    I would like to please know;

    - Who approved this Development Applcation for demolition of these properties?
    - What date was this Development Application approved on?
    - Why was demolition started
    IN THE DARK with no light on a Sunday night at 7pm?
    - Why has demolition begun when no safety precautions have been taken and there seems to have been no enviromental considerations?
    - Is 145 or 147 George Street Parramatta, a Heritage buildings?
    -Do any buildings or structures at 145 or 147 George Street Parramatta, contain asbestos?

    I only received DA/387/2015 via mail on Friday 3 July 2015 dated 2 July 2015. This letter stated that the dates of the Notification Period: 9 July 2015 to 10 August 2015.

    I attempted to get clarification from Parramatta City Council's after hours emergency phone line, however I was unsucessful. The operator did say she would follow up on my call.

    Due to numerous serious concerns, I have also reported this information to WorkCover NSW.

    I am shocked and very confused by the way in which this has been handled.

    I am awaiting your response. Thank you very kindly.

  18. In Lewisham NSW on “To demolish improvements...” at 27 Railway Terrace Lewisham NSW 2049:

    Jennifer O'Callaghan commented

    Dear Sir/Madam.

    RE: 27 Railway Terrace, Lewisham DA201500333

    I am a local Lewisham resident, living in the area for 8 years.

    I object to this development as it will cause further traffic congestion to an already congested street. Railway Terrace, in Lewisham, is grid-locked with traffic during peak hour (from 4pm) every weekday. The development will only compound this problem further.

    Thanking you for your consideration in this matter.
    Jennifer OCallaghan

  19. In Elermore Vale NSW on “Erection of 25 attached two...” at 18 Nerigai Close Elermore vale, NSW:

    Kevin Barbie commented

    We have a number of concerns regarding this development.

    1. Traffic: Nerigai Close is only 7.5 metres wide & there is no way cars can pass safely when there is a car parked on the kerb.
    I feel the easier alternative would be to come in from Kerry Avenue, if this development was to go ahead.
    In 1997 an application for 9 dwellings was not approved for this site, because of the traffic flow in Kerry Avenue (also very narrow when cars parked on side of road).

    2. Garbage collection: Council already has to send a smaller garbage removal truck to Nerigai Close as it is unable to turn around, because of it being too narrow. This subdivision has no street frontage, how will they expect to collect 50 waste bins.

    3. The storm water runoff would be one of the main concerns. We have held three meetings in our street over this subdivision. Many of the residents were very concerned,as they have already experienced flooding in Croudace Road, Cheryl Close & Watkins Road.

    4. Emergency exit for the surrounding streets is already a concern as the whole area relies on Kerry Avenue, this was raised by the fire brigade back in 1997.

    5.Nerigai Close was built with strict building rules.Class 10, with minimum block sizes etc, this development does not meet these rules & goes against the existing infrastructure in this area. Also Robinia Close was also built under strict rules only ten yeas ago & having this development built at their back fences is very inconsiderate.Their back yards will never see the sun & their privacy will be taken away by this eyesaw.
    Single storey dwellings would be more suitable.

    6.Wildlife in this area, possums, frog mouth owls, bandicoots, blue tongue lizards , frilled neck lizards all have been sighted in this area.

    7. Parking: With 25 units all jammed into this small space you will see Nerigai Close full of parked cars.

    8. Future development was having Nerigai Close meet up with Kerry Avenue & go across to Cardiff Road. This development would not allow this.

  20. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    David Prestney commented

    I am surprised and appalled to find that this iconic pub / building is not heritage protected. Sydney's beautiful old pubs are one of the greatest pieces of this wonderful city and the Alexandria is a suburb example.
    I always take my overseas visitors to the Alexandria and they love the Aussie-ness of it.
    Apartment blocks are a dime a dozen. Pubs / buildings like this can never be replicated.
    This must NOT be allowed to happen. PLEASE save this.

  21. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Renate Cross commented

    I object to the demolition of this building. There is historical and cultural value in retaining the Alexandria Hotel. It has not been diminished by surrounding architecture. It stands alone as a landmark to the past as so many of its original features remain. Please consider the development application carefully. This building should not be demolished.

  22. In Newport NSW on “Boonchu Thai Restaurant -...” at Shop 11 331-335 Barrenjoey Rd, Newport 2106:

    Barry Rhodes commented

    This Should only be a change of name for licensee, not a transfer of the liquor license to another location. I am the current licensee and am transferring to another person, the licensee is attached to the premises shop 14 331-335 Barrenjoey Rd, Newport NSW 2106

  23. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Tim commented

    I object this proposal based on the lack of parking provided.
    The suggestion that the pub attracts lots of cars already is quite silly, most locals walk to the pub not drive.
    Buildings need to be designed along with parking spaces. The traffic situation is already terrible.
    Their wont be much left for locals to do in the area.
    Its obvious this location has huge community support.

  24. In Eveleigh NSW on “Proposed demolition of the...” at 35 Henderson Road Eveleigh NSW 2015:

    Clare commented

    We object to the demolition of The Alexandria. This is yet again the loss of a historical building in favour for a load of shoebox appartments which will take the charm away from this Suburb.

    This is one of the few venues that has an amazing set garden that local families can enjoy.

  25. In Wantirna South VIC on “Apartment Building - 24...” at 15 White Road, Wantirna South VIC 3152:

    Sam commented

    That looks like two much traffic for a court location. I sympathise with the neighbours. I would never buy a house in that court location ever if there was so many residents in one spot amongst houses. There goes the idea of letting your child play out in a safe court. That will depreciate all properties around there. Knox seems to be allowing multiple residents which is more of a congested feel. Wantirna will depreciate. Residents like myself love the large blocks and our own piece of paradise.

  26. In Harris Park NSW on “Change of use to restaurant” at 53 Marion Street Harris Park NSW 2150:

    rajiv malhotra commented

    1. Applicant wish to build structure on existing parking area, right now in Harris park, parking is the biggest problem specially for restaurant business. Every evening so many people struck in traffic because people are looking for parking and causing traffic problem. so in my opinion council should not wish to increase more cars and traffic for new expansion in the cost of existing parking.

    2. This property is close to railway station and track, after building solid structure will obstruct view form and to.

    3. There are other business in this street which also ask for extension in future after this permission will cause more traffic and obstruct view.

    4. yes, of courser bigger restaurant will attract more costumers to the business but right now this business doesn't full fill the council's guild line for hygiene and as well previously alter the kitchen and major layout without council's concerns and get away by the local council's regulations. I think councils first look into the matter first.

    5. Every now and than water leaks form this premises comes on street, god know this is fresh water or greasy water of restaurant.

    6. exactly the back of this property has two big blocks of residential units as well so we need to consider their privacy and noise pollution.

    7. more people that means more cooking. so need work on suaver and restaurant water waste, is their any suitable arrangement is their as per councils requirements.

    considering all this aspects council should not approved this application and find out existing approval for this premises for carried out a restaurant business.

  27. In Wantirna South VIC on “Apartment Building - 24...” at 15 White Road, Wantirna South VIC 3152:

    Barry Oxley commented

    Knox Council has been selling out the area for years. When they agreed to allow the Punt Hill Apartments in Stud Road was just the beginning. That building would have to be the ugliest development in the outer East. The corner of Stud Road and Burwood Highway had the potential to become something special the gateway to the Dandenongs and look want the council has agreed too. They have only have one thing on their mind and that is maximizing revenue from rates.
    Now they have agreed to high density developments in White and Jackson Road is a disgrace. The area has the potential of becoming a ghetto. Inviting the wrong type of people to the area. If they are agree to waiving carparking in a 24 unit development we are going to see more crime, cars being damaged etc. It is a no win situation.
    Knox Council lift your game you are destroying Wantirna South.

  28. In Epping NSW on “Section 96 (1a) -...” at 50 Cliff Road Epping NSW 2121, NSW:

    Cheryl Hayward commented

    Another future slum in the planning. Is there no-one who can stop this insanity? And how many "overseas investors" will be acquiring these little boxes? Glad I won't be around to deal with the road rage, laundry flapping from every balcony, and stinking cooking smells wafting over the multiple towers being erected in our once beautiful suburb.

  29. In Saint Ives NSW on “Additions and Alterations...” at 7 Torokina Avenue, St Ives, NSW:

    Deborah Stoddart commented

    I am happy with this development. I am a working St Ives mum who in 2013 had to take my two children to daycare in East Lindfield because I couldn't find two spaces here after our inner city daycare closed. (Our eldest daughter now attends SIPS). All addition local spaces are needed as more and more people return to work after having children.

  30. In Rockdale NSW on “Modification to place of...” at 2 Frederick Street, Rockdale NSW 2216:

    Therese Perry-Bowman commented

    This building is already heavily overcrowded during prayer time. Increasing the patrons by over 60% will have a detrimental impact on traffic flow and further add to the 'ghetto reputation' of the area. I doubt that 110 people can comfortably fit inside this building, certainly not 336!
    We wish to also bring to council's attention the recent opening up of a driveway to the subject property accesible from the overhead railway bridge. Was a traffic impact study conducted before this driveway was built? On 2 occasions now, my husband has had to brake heavily after driving over the overpass to avoid colliding into cars that queue across the road leading into the prayer hall. These come into view as one prepares to negotiate the right-left turn onto Frederick street and is a major accident black spot.
    We heavily object to to the proposed opening times. These are nothing short of ridiculous. We don't know of any type of business or community centre that opens at 4am and continues until 1am in the morning, particularly ones that attract large gatherings as is being proposed. The property backs on to residential apartments and the noise created by these gatherings is not sympathetic to families and residents in the area.

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