Recent comments

  1. In Waterloo NSW on “Alterations to an existing...” at 899 South Dowling Street Zetland NSW 2017:

    Peter Keeda commented

    The position on the map and the Google image (which is about two years old) do not match up! Nor does the address 14 Defries Avenue. Defries Avenue and South Dowling Street do NOT converge. The map indicates a position north of O'Dea Avenue, but Defres Avenue does NOT extend north of O'Dea Avenue.

    Once the exact position is clarified I challenge why yet another community property is being handed over to a developer for her/his sole benefit and profit??!! What is she/he giving to the community in return?

  2. In Sydenham NSW on “To retain the existing shop...” at 66 Railway Road Sydenham NSW 2044:

    Jennifer Killen commented

    It is important that additional on-site parking is provided for the new flats - at least 4 spaces would be needed.

    It is also important that on-site storage of garbage bins is provided and any private garbage collection between the hours of 6pm and 8am is prohibited so as to avoid disturbing neighbours.

  3. In Newtown NSW on “Application under Section...” at 36 Alice Street Newtown NSW 2042:

    Jennifer Killen commented

    This application should be refused.

    The amount of parking is not sufficient for the number of flats..

    It is also important that on-site storage of garbage bins is provided with access for council trucks. If placed kerbside, the number of bins needed for this number of flats will not only be unsightly and probably smelly, but also make it difficult for pedestrians to use the footpath.

    Any private garbage collection between the hours of 6pm and 8am must be prohibited so as to avoid disturbing neighbours.

  4. In Enmore NSW on “To demolish part of the...” at 174 Enmore Road Enmore NSW 2042:

    Jennifer Killen commented

    It is important that adequate on-site parking is provided.

    It is also important that on-site storage of garbage bins is provided and any private garbage collection between the hours of 6pm and 8am is prohibited so as to avoid disturbing neighbours.

  5. In Richmond VIC on “Removal of Native Trees on...” at 516 Victoria St Richmond VIC 3121:

    Mark Blackburn commented

    Dear Sir/Madam

    I am writing with the hope that this application is rejected and more native trees are not cut down. There is already a desperately low number of trees in Richmond and especially so with native trees.

    Please consider other alternatives to destroying what little we have left of our natural world.

  6. In Kew VIC on “Construct twenty one (21)...” at 281 Barkers Road Kew VIC 3101:

    Jack Roach commented

    21 apartments on this site is too much on too little. This area is to be gazetted as a General Residential Zone which will stop this sort of development occuring. This is nothing more than an opportunistic application that deserves to be denied.
    Jack Roach

  7. In Kew VIC on “Construct twenty one (21)...” at 281 Barkers Road Kew VIC 3101:

    Ian Barnes commented

    I agree with Terry in terms of the car parking reduction approach and the little planning regard for the off site impacts on residents. In Hawthorn East the issue is worse with business development reductions in required car parking requirements, reductions in large unit development car parking requirements, and now the local residential streets now awash with competing residential and employee parking. A fixation with reducing onsite car parking requirements without regard to existing residents or their visitors or the reality in terms of the generated and related unit traffic, is having a negative social and amenity impact on residents. All new unit developments should provide for their needs onsite, including sufficient visitor parking. If the development can't meet this requirement, why is the development being approved?

  8. In Kew VIC on “Construct twenty one (21)...” at 281 Barkers Road Kew VIC 3101:

    terry dear commented

    21 dwellings on 908m2 with reduced carparking.
    Question: where will the cars park that visit or are not catered for by the 'reduced carparking'? Answer: Edgevale Road.
    Squeezing 21 dwellings on such a small plot by reducing the carparking requirements just reduces the amenity of the surrounding streets, further clogging them with cars.
    I know it's fashionable to say that people will catch the bus/train/tram or cycle and in reality they may but they will still have a car. And when these dwellings are rented, there will be multiple cars per dwelling. Barkers Road is a clearway twice a day so when people do possibly catch the bus - tram is too far away, ditto train, they will leave their cars in Edgevale Road. And no I don't live in any of these sides streets - but have just seen the same thing happen in many other locations in the broader area.
    Poor proposal - make the developer reduce the dwellings and not give them a reduction in carparking.

  9. In Eastwood NSW on “"Amended plans have been...” at 7-9 Rutledge Street, Eastwood:

    marjorie roche commented

    It will be a smart addition to the streetscape.

  10. In Yarramalong NSW on “Change of use to Community...” at 36 Rose Hill Lane Yarramalong NSW 2259:

    L. Court commented

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    Re: We urge Council to reject the Development Application 781/ 2013 to develop a "Community facility" at 36 Rose Hill Lane, Yarramalong:

    Just over a year ago, my partner and I spent a year living on Rose Hill Lane, Yarramalong. We felt extremely blessed to have spent this time in a part of Australia so close to Sydney, yet still so untouched by the corporate world.

    Towards the end of last year we were looking at buying a property in Yarramalong where we wanted to make a home and spend many years there. Throughout the process of going for a loan we learned of the application for a drug and alcohol centre for 36 Rose Hill Lane, Yarramalong. We were absolutely devastated and withdrew our application for purchase of the property in the valley immediately!

    When living in Yarramalong, we always felt safe. The valley is like no other place we have lived as far as a beautiful community feel, loving caring people and a comforting peace and quiet throughout the area. A real treasure of tranquil countryside beauty!

    My partner and I are writing today to air our grievances about the potential drug and alcohol centre and to let you know how much this would completely destroy the valley area. We are not against drug and alcohol centres, but feel that areas that are more built up with better public transport facilities and where more people can keep watch of what's going on where they live, would suit these centres better.

    The valley has no public transport, if attendees to the centre wanted to leave how would they get to Wyong or Tuggerah to the nearest train stations? Also, the amount of traffic in such a quiet area would be increased with the coming and going of employees, attendees and their visitors to the centre. If any of the attendees felt like leaving the premises at any time, on foot, what kind of things would be put in place to stop people from breaking and entering into nearby homes? I do not mean to imply at all, that people that attend these centres are criminals. However, there is substantiated evidence to say that some of these people may be inclined to steal if their addiction got the better of them. Most homes in the vicinity are on large blocks of land with no nearby neighbours to see what was going on.

    We also oppose the drug and alcohol centre because some of the buildings on the property have no council building permission and therefore shouldn't be permitted legally to be sold in the first place. On reading the application for the drug and alcohol centre I see that the centre wants to house 60 people at a time plus the extra people that are running the place (I note that the amount of employees needed to run the place are not in the application!) Again I do not see how this could be legal with clearly not enough space to house this many people with what is currently there, and again some of these buildings being illegal builds.

    We would like to mention the flooding in the area. While living in Yarramalong, on Rose Hill Lane in 2012, the area flooded heavily twice. Nobody could get in or out of the place for a few days during each flood with the vast amounts of water covering all of the lower field up to 36 Rose Hill Lane, also some of Rose Hill Lane itself, as well as Bunning Creek Road, (the road to exit the place) and its bridge. The water completely covered the bridge and rose up to the top of the bridge railings. I have photos should you wish to see them.

    On a final note I would be remiss if I did not mention the reputation of the Narconon centres across the world. There are many independent reviews to be read on the web. The centres lie about their success rates, have no certified help onsite and NO onsite doctors as they have been led to believe, and some of the centres' employees have been accused of taking drugs themselves while onsite.

    Here is an independent review of some of the centres throughout the world, filled out by people or their families that have attended Narconon centres world wide:
    (there are reviews from other countries at this link as well, including Australia)

    Here is an excerpt of just one of many devastating results from attending a Canadian Narconon centre:

    Narconon Survey Response #265
    This mother of a former client filled out the survey posthumously for her son because he committed suicide not long after leaving Narconon. She says that he lost all his self confidence when he was in the Narconon program, and never regained it after leaving. About housing, she says, "He said he had a room which was very sparse but since he was a bad person he didn't deserve anything better." She explains, "He started drinking after he left. He never drank before. He hated drink. He was also going to emergency rooms to get pills. He was not anything like the person that went there. He was so ashamed of what he had become after we had spent so much of our life savings on the program."

    This is a review from someone who attended the Melbourne, Australia Narconon centre:

    Did any of your experiences at Narconon bother you while you were in the program?
    Please elaborate.
    "There were many times I really needed to express my confusion about the program or my frustration and I was always Acknowledged with. "I understand" or "OK"! Or "The way out is the way through". Or "You need to push through this" Or "Harden up" Or "Its just stuck attention". Or "You're dramatising" It sometimes felt like I was talking to a wall. In the end I gave up trying to talk with these people, And it was at those moments when I needed some intelligent and reassuring conversation with the staff and all I was getting was getting nothingness. Thats when I knew there is something very odd with Narconon. Those experiences did bother me. In fact the whole program bothered me because I couldn't see how this had anything to do with kicking drugs and staying clean. All I got was 10 months of craziness and mumbo jumbo Hubbard Tech. And they were bad mouthing about the psychs whenever they get a chance to do so, They are obsessed about how bad the psychs are."

    Before considering the application for such a group to take up business in the Yarramalong valley, I implore you to read through the site links above and do your own research. There are VERY real concerns and some law suits in progress from attendees, their loved ones and ex employees from various Narconon centres all across the world including Melbourne, Australia!

    In accordance with Section 147 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, I declare that neither I, nor anybody associated with me, has made any political donation or gift to a councillor or council employee within the Wyong Shire Council or surrounding councils.

    Thank you for reading this letter to strongly request that the Narconon application be rejected!

    Kind regards,

  11. In Wantirna South VIC on “Staged construction of a...” at Lot S2, 408 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South VIC 3152:

    John Ferguson commented

    Why the reduction in car parking rates? there should be no reduction of car/vehicle parking.

  12. In Eastwood NSW on “"Amended plans have been...” at 7-9 Rutledge Street, Eastwood:

    IT is a amrt addition to the community. commented

    Is it possible to find out when these amended plans were submitted please/

  13. In Mentone VIC on “To Amend The Ground Floor...” at 114 Nepean Highway, Mentone, VIC:

    Robert Peck commented

    Professionally ran, and very safe,a great place to relax at the end of the week.
    Two thumbs up.

  14. In Sheidow Park SA on “Land Division Residential...” at 1002 Edward Beck Dr Sheidow Park:

    Philip Burrows commented


    We only found out about this by seeing stakes in the ground next to our property on the end of Currie Crt and then we found a note from the contractor DML.

    I think this is shocking communication, especially when these new properties are likely to over look our land. How many houses is contemplated, why have they marked out the slope that leads down to our property, etc.

    I tried to stop the council putting bollards on our property a couple of years ago but they just didn't listen and went ahead.

  15. In Bondi Beach NSW on “Wowcow - On-premises...” at Shop 2 16 Hall St, Bondi Beach 2026:

    Lenore Kulakauskas commented

    Dear Madam/Sir,

    On behalf of the Bondi Beach community I strongly object to this application. This is a shop selling ice-cream, a service that hardly warrants the selling of alcohol. Bondi Beach has been inundated with liquor licences over the past few years and the community is concerned, in light of the problems experienced at Kings Cross, that as we appear to have reached saturation point, any further liquor licences, particularly for an establishment that does not serve meals would be detrimental to the well-being of the community and the visitor attendances to this very popular beach.

    Of equal concern is the fact that this venue is located in a street that consists of mainly residential apartments, mostly strata'd.

    There are no conditions of consent as far as I am aware that would assist in lessening the adverse impact this establishment would have on the neighbourhood if a liquor licence was granted.

    Kind regards,
    Lenore Kulakauskas
    Convenor Bondi Beach Precinct
    BBP Alcohol Rep Waverley Council Liquor Working Group
    0407 170 680

  16. In Launceston TAS on “Business and Professional...” at 21 Brisbane Street Launceston TAS 7250:

    George Smilovich commented

    The signs on the outside of the building are already up so much for the process! I bet nobody makes them take them down either!

  17. In Mentone VIC on “To Amend The Ground Floor...” at 114 Nepean Highway, Mentone, VIC:

    Juni Bence commented

    Put simply I love Bar One Fourteen, I am a resident of Kingston and look forward to coming along every weekend to see the bands.

    Julie, Lou, Daniel & the bar staff are to be commended on the running of their business. The improvements are enormous compared to the previous owners and deserve to have the license application approved.

    Please don't disappoint all the patrons.

    Juni Bence

  18. In Perth WA on “Proposed Change of Use from...” at 423-425 William Street, Perth, WA, 6000:

    Lee Ashton commented

    As we are already experiencing problems with a Backpackers residence on Brisbane Street, it is felt that approving another one at the other end of our residence will only add to this problem.
    Although we appreciate and love the diverse mix of the area, it is felt that approving this application will lead to the frustration of residents who want to enjoy the overall peaceful residential aspect of it.

  19. In Perth WA on “Proposed Change of Use from...” at 423-425 William Street, Perth, WA, 6000:

    Erica & Jeff Jago commented

    Apologies for missing the comment period, however we would like to raise concerns of a backpackers lodging house being approved for this site. We already have an issue with the backpacker noise from around the corner in Brisbane Street and also feel that the vicinity of the nightclub will be problematic with increased potential for alcohol fuelled people milling around the street late at night.


  20. In Mentone VIC on “To Amend The Ground Floor...” at 114 Nepean Highway, Mentone, VIC:

    Lynn and David Peters commented

    Recently we attended OneFourteen in Mentone. I have a disability and use a wheel chair which can make it very difficult at some venues. We went to watch live music performed by Mae Parker and The King Beats as we've followed them for sometime now. We knew nothing about the venue prior to attending. We decided to go as a group of four and arranged to have dinner on the ground floor. We'd made several phone calls about access to the building, whether they would accommodate my special needs, the dress code and had found ALL staff that we spoke to extremely friendly and helpful. As we were coming from Yarragon we needed to be sure about entry and suitabilty as it's such a long way ( an hour and a half to two hours drive ). We looked up online the menu and looked at the positive remarks. The four of us were made very welcome and enjoyed delicious meals at a very reasonable price with larger servings than we'd expected, which was a bonus.
    The service from all staff was of a very high standard. The venue was spotless and very inviting. The crowd that attended were extremely well mannered and behaved. There was no-one out on the street and certainly a low level of noise when people left the venue. We noticed that the venue was frequented by a vast age group and that everyone was there to have a good time. The dance floor was packed all night with people mingling and dancing the night away.
    We believe it would be of great advantage to allow the well behaved patrons to have a drink in the outside area. This would also be a great place for people to eat as well and open up the area to make it more accessable to people who have difficulty with stairs for dining.
    The security staff were very polite and made their presence felt in a quiet mannered way, which helps make people feel secure and safe.
    We have no hesitation in recommending that this venue gets their permit approved. They certainly deserve it as the management work hard to provide a great venue for people to attend and have a good time. Great food. Great service. Great entertainment. Great, clean and bright venue. They're on the right track and deserve a fair go.
    Thank you.

  21. In Kew East VIC on “Construction of five (5)...” at 187 Kilby Road Kew East VIC 3102:

    P. Atkins commented

    A high density proposal such as this is not in keeping with neighbourhood character. Kilby Road is a local not main road and the approval of this project would create a precedent for changing the character of the local residential area. Although there is surrounding parkland much of this is inaccessible to local residents at peak times of weekends and evenings due to the domination of formal organised club based sport. High density development would therefore also put pressure on local infrastructure including access to local space, water run off and canopy tree cover.

  22. In Richmond VIC on “Demolition of existing...” at 8 Portland St Richmond VIC 3121:

    Hamish commented

    Is this a new application or an amendment to the exitsing one?

  23. In Mount Hutton NSW on “Subdivision 1 into 2 lots &...” at 30 Cowmeadow Road, Mount Hutton NSW 2290:

    Robyn Lockwood commented

    I am not in agreement for the application to be approved for the number of residences. This is a quiet rural area and to consider constructing the number and height of residences will destroy the peace and privacy of the residents whose properties these new dwelling will back onto. Drainage is an issue for No. 4 Cowmeadow Road and the road surface of Cowmeadow Road needs to be considered for the number of vehicles that would enter and leave this property as vision is restricted of vehicles driving up or down Cowmeadow Road past No. 30 Cowmeadow Road. It can be difficult now when there are vehicles parked in the street and additional vehicles will add to potential accidents.

    It is disappointing that development now seems to focus on how many residences can be squashed onto one site. Overcrowding of properties and residents brings with it social issues relating to noise of traffic daily living.

  24. In Glen Iris VIC on “Construct three (3)...” at 27 Lomond Street Glen Iris VIC 3146:

    F. Snape commented

    The traffic for this area is already dreadful. I strongly suggest the Council visit the area at 8.40 and 3.15 to see how adding 3 dwellings to an already congested No through road will affect the safety of children and local families.

  25. In Mentone VIC on “To Amend The Ground Floor...” at 114 Nepean Highway, Mentone, VIC:

    Chris Steele commented

    Oh dear. An obvious case of astroturfing (If you're not sure: going on here. Kingston Council isn't stupid.

    Frankly I don't care either way - approve it please, but the comments are CLEARLY seeded by the management of the bar. Pathetic really.

  26. In Parramatta NSW on “1 x tree removal or pruning” at 31 Crimea Street Parramatta NSW 2150:

    June M Bullivant OAM commented

    Tree Removal in Parramatta has been unbelieveable, there have been so many in 12 months the city will be bare.

  27. In Mentone VIC on “To Amend The Ground Floor...” at 114 Nepean Highway, Mentone, VIC:

    Concerned commented

    I personally do not attend this venue any more having witnessed an act if violence by a bar staff to a patron. The response I received from management was that he supported the violence. It is my understanding that the staff member is still employed there.

  28. In Wantirna VIC on “Construction of a single...” at 93 Raheen Avenue, Wantirna VIC 3152:

    Merrilyn Whitecross commented

    Turning the leafy green City of Knox into future slums is wrong.
    If people want to live cheek by jowel, let them live in the city.
    Stall all approvals until the current proposed amendments are implemented.

  29. In Cameron Park NSW on “IGA Cameron Park - Packaged...” at 97 Northlakes Dr, Cameron Park 2285:

    A Hodges commented

    Cameron Park is an estate growing day by day with families. Just down the road is a pub & 2 bottle shops. A liquor shop in the estate is just going to cause problems.
    There are so many parks around for kids to enjoy & play in & having a bottle shop near them will encourage underage drinking & will make it unsafe for kids to play with a higher chance of broken beer bottles etc.

  30. In Cameron Park NSW on “IGA Cameron Park - Packaged...” at 97 Northlakes Dr, Cameron Park 2285:

    Rebecca Jeffery commented

    I oppose the request of the liquor licence to be present in this IGA.

    The shop will be located within a residential area, full of families who already have sufficient access to alcohol with 2 bottle shops, a pub and a bowling club at Edgeworth. There is also liquor retailers at Glendale, Cardiff, and Wallsend.

    I oppose the IGA liquor licence as I do not want behaviour associated with alcohol in the streets around my family home. We have a walking path right beside our house which will be on a direct route to the store and we already deal with graffiti and alcoholic beverage rubbish being left behind. I feel this will only increase with the access of more alcohol in such close proximity.

    Please listen to my concerns, this liquor licence should not be approved

    Rebecca Jeffery

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