Recent comments

  1. In Port Kembla NSW on “Change of Use - community...” at 27-29 Wentworth Street, Port Kembla NSW 2505:

    Stuart Porter commented

    I support the Darcy House move to Wentworth st Port Kembla for many reasons. The people who attend Darcy house do so to access services such as a meal, case management, help with housing issues, legal aid and help to reduce or quit smoking. Many of the people attending the service live in the area, so not addressing these issues will not make the issues dissapear and nor will the people who use the services become less visible.
    The current premise is too small for the large amount of people who need Darcy house help. So the move to the new premise will enable staff to perform their difficult job better and a larger building will be nicer for the people who attend. (better kitchen, better ambiance and people who access the service (many who are under stress already) will feel better.
    Over the years i have worked with Darcy house i have seen people come for help and get back on their feet and then giving back by volunteering at Darcy House. This small observation is evidence that the program helps people, which is a good thing.
    As a society we need to be more compassionate about those less fortunate and that is the spirit of Darcy House.

  2. In Kew VIC on “Post Request(S72)...” at 68 A Wellington Street Kew VIC 3101:

    Kerrie Knott commented

    Mae, my point is demolition in a heritage overlay should be prohibited. There are so many options. Boroondara is well on the way to losing it's much loved character and historic buildings.
    High density is already the hallmark in Boroondara just look around it's horrific.
    We do not have the infrastructure to cope with the increased population. Gridlock on main roads and side streets. I just don't think planning can cope with the influx. I agree the cost of the "paperless" office was exorbitant and came as a huge shock to ratepayers.

  3. In Springfield QLD on “Area Development Plan to...” at 7001 Panorama Drive Springfield QLD 4300:

    Kim Vellnagel commented

    I am curious as to the size of the proposed blocks. If they are small, why are we continuing to build such developments when it is proven these high density developments are not good for health or the environment. My other concern is the way these developments strip the area bare of trees. It is very clear that rate payers of Ipswich are not in favour of these types of development.

  4. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Oliver Scarponi commented

    Please Randwick council, do not allow this to happen, I strongly refuse this development DA Proposal DA/144/2019) to go ahead and I object to the construction of 40 units boarding house at 1038-1040 Anzac Parade, I live only meters from this site and as I father of two young girls ( 8yo & 4yo) I am concern for the social and infrastructure impact this will bring. We are already experiencing antisocial behaviour from early hours of the evening, crime and loud arguments from neighbours. Please stop this development ! I want to feel safe in my street. it will be too many additional cars and potentially temporarily residents who won't appreciate the sense of community we want to achieve here. thank you for your consideration.

  5. In Bondi Junction NSW on “New hotel development” at 5-11 Hollywood Avenue, Bondi Junction:

    Taylor Deckard commented

    To all concerned patrons: I have been a resident here in the Junction for over 35 years. The last thing we need is another abhorrent site taking our views and blocking our sunshine...
    After speaking to my local member of parliament: I am quite confident this development will not be passed, due to the fact that the Bondi junction Waverley Rsl club was knocked back in a similar fashion last year over a proposed “build” ,which mirrors this current project. It’s a plain and simple outcome: Don’t kid yourself The new council bracket formed could be up for liability (legal ramifications) if they chose to “pass” this in favour over the Rsl(s) previous failed DA application. Council chambers are more than “well aware” of this.

  6. In Bondi Junction NSW on “Remove one (1) tree from...” at 29 Allens Parade Bondi Junction NSW 2022:

    Phil Magroin commented

    @Gayle Walker

    You have both touched on an important and highly contentious issue.
    Where indeed will the birds, animals and native fish go?

    Fortunately, I have spoken to the aforementioned parties and they are happy to move to one of several other trees located in the immediate vicinity, and wider Sydney.

    There are two main reasons for this:

    (1) The animals have expressed their safety concerns as there are power lines running directly through their home.

    (2) They have also expressed that rent in the area is too high, and Ted the possum is having to work two jobs to live at this location.

    However, as you are dismayed, disappointed, stunned and everything else in between, perhaps this course of action is insufficient...

    As an alternative, could we just knock down the house behind the tree?

  7. In Bondi Junction NSW on “Remove one (1) tree from...” at 29 Allens Parade Bondi Junction NSW 2022:

    Gayle Walker commented

    As I looked more closely at the front of this house, I am wondering if the smaller tree is the one which they want removed. It looks like it might be planted too close to the larger tree, which also appears to have a possum box attached to it. This big tree, if it is used by possums, is significant and much needed in our area. If there is not room for the smaller tree to grow and if it is impeding the larger one, then I question whether the tree can be pruned to a smaller size or if it is removed, can another tree be planted farther from the large tree?

  8. In Bondi Junction NSW on “Remove one (1) tree from...” at 29 Allens Parade Bondi Junction NSW 2022:

    Gayle Walker commented

    I am dismayed, disappointed, stunned, you name it, at the number of tree removal applications in the Waverley LGA. There are no documents to view on council’s website as to the reason for clearing this tree. Is it wantonly desire or are there significant issues with the tree...and precisely which tree is it? Where are our native animals ( remember them?) going to find food and shelter when tree felling is so broad reaching? Our planet needs more trees, not fewer. We need a moratorium on tree removal. Will there be a replacement tree?

  9. In Lower Plenty VIC on “Construction of a single...” at 19 Woodfull Road , Lower Plenty, VIC:

    Lucy rose commented

    I don't understand why this would be approved if it's in a Significant landscape overlay and outside a building envelope
    Keep the trees
    Save green wedge land
    And Aboriginal land
    No more development

  10. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Hanh Hoang commented

    I object to the construction of the 40 unit boarding house at 1038-1040 Anzac Parade.

    I have concerns for the quality, securities and the capacity of infrastructure available to the existing residents in the neighbourhood. There is a mix of ageing population and families with small children in this areas whose daily routines will be heavily impacted by the demolition, the construction and the ongoing activities of this boarding house once in operation.

    Maroubra should not position itself as an area of mass population growth with these types of development. It needs to be a location where people wish to live with quality and order of security.

  11. In Beecroft NSW on “Complying Development...” at 23 Bambara Crescent Beecroft NSW 2119:

    Graeme Widmer commented

    Dear Parramatta City Council,

    It's alarming to see foreigners to this community submitting DAs to respected councillors. The Hornsby Shire Council is affected by submissions like this across the M4 and we'd like to keep our area prestigious in terms of our community.

    Please accept my objection to this DA immediately.

    Thanks,
    Graeme Widmer

  12. In Cheltenham NSW on “Residential alterations &...” at 14 Cobran Road Cheltenham NSW 2119:

    Graeme Widmer commented

    Dear Hornsby Shire Council,

    It's very disappointing to see foreign Hornsby Councillors and planners make decisions on who can make alterations in the community. The Beecroft/Cheltenham area is going down the drain with owners looking to just accommodate the foreigners making their way into the area.

    Please accept this as a strong objection to this application.

    Regards,
    G. Widmer

  13. In Kew VIC on “Post Request(S72)...” at 68 A Wellington Street Kew VIC 3101:

    Mae Kitwork commented

    Rules are in the planning scheme.

    Demolition is not prohibited nor is the construction of 2 dwellings but they do require a permit to be issued.

    Unless you enjoy your rates increasing year on year then I suggest increased density is the answer because cost cutting is clearly not on Councils agenda given the fees paid to update their website.

  14. In Bellbird Park QLD on “Material Change of Use –...” at 92-94 Fiona Street Bellbird Park QLD 4300:

    Rachel Grant commented

    I object to this MCU for a number of reasons.

    I believe a Buddhist temple is incompatible with the suburban setting, particularly given the applicant states most activity will occur on the weekend.

    In their application to Council, the applicant states the development will contribute to the diversity of places of worship available to the community. Given there are already two Buddhist temples located in Goodna and Bellbird Park, surely Council can see if anything the Buddhists are over-represented compared with other religions in the area and a third temple is not required.

    I object to the additional noise and traffic created by this development, particularly as it will occur on the only two days of the week when the suburb is a peaceful haven.

    But mostly I object to the underhanded way the monastery has gone about obtaining approval for this development, as the initial application was for a nun's retreat.
    Since purchasing the site, the owners have removed many mature gum trees in what is known koala habitat, thus now negating the potential for "adverse impacts on the natural environment" to be address in the MCU - which makes me think they had this plan in mind all along;

    I think if the applicant had been more open with the community and consulted with neighbours in the first place, they may have found less resistance to their plans. However there is now a strong feeling amongst residents that the owners are not to be trusted and therefore, general cynicism about what the future may hold for this site if this MCU is approved. Council, please do not approve this MCU.

  15. In Beecroft NSW on “Residential - new second...” at 17 Hannah Street Beecroft NSW 2119:

    Graeme Widmer commented

    Dear Hornsby Shire Council,

    I am a concerned, and long-time resident of the Beecroft and Cheltenham community and strongly seek your support to reject this application. It is extremely frustrating to see foreigners make their way into the area and take over the community. The area, the people we see day to day, is changing because of this shift and it's not great to see.

    Please file my objection to this matter.

    Thanks,
    Graeme

  16. In Darlinghurst NSW on “Use public footway on...” at 122-132 Darlinghurst Road Darlinghurst NSW 2010:

    Robert Downie commented

    As a local resident on Victoria St I fully support this application. I hope the city of Sydney will approve more applications like this to improve the economy and vibrancy of our area.

  17. In Booker Bay NSW on “Residential Flat Building...” at 358 Booker Bay Road, Booker Bay NSW 2257:

    Lesley commented

    When this development is being planned, can provision be made for a decent garden with space for shade trees?
    For too long, the Peninsula has lost many sizeable trees that provided shade and habitat. Shade reduces the now proven “urban heat island effect” that has taken hold here, pushing our summer temperatures up by 4 degrees compared to Pearl Beach.

  18. In Valentine NSW on “Multi Dwelling Housing -...” at 31 Berringar Road Valentine NSW 2280:

    B and J Owen commented

    As with the previous commenters, we would like to express disappointment that Lake Macquarie Council would consider yet another multi-dwelling development in Valentine. Our concerns relate to the impact on the community, on traffic, on local infrastructure/resources and the immediate neighbours. Living in Berringar Rd we have lived through the increase in noise and traffic both during and after other such developments in the area. This property is located at an already busy intersection and we can see real safety issues with vehicles from several dwellings entering and exiting the property. Existing residents in Tallawalla Road and Berringar Road consist of younger families and older community members who we believe live here due to how safe and community focused the area was. This is becoming less so with the numerous recent developments in the street which have acutely changed the feel of the neighbourhood. We think it's also relevant to note that some of the more recent high density property developments have been unable to be sold for considerable lengths of time, advertised but sitting vacant and opening up the area to a greater influx of people/traffic. Others have already commented on how the local school, facilities and recreation areas are just not able to accommodate development in such high numbers. Lake Macquarie Council please consider the damage you are doing to the suburb of Valentine with these approvals.

  19. In Darlinghurst NSW on “Use public footway on...” at 122-132 Darlinghurst Road Darlinghurst NSW 2010:

    Stephan Gyory commented

    As a long term resident I fully support this application. Sydney needs way more diverse night time offerings and this fits the bill perfectly.

  20. In Wyoming NSW on “Section 4.55 - Change to...” at 50 Renwick Street, Wyoming NSW 2250:

    Leanne stone commented

    I agree with comments already made , no yo mobile phone tower in wyoming. There is a park and oval where children and adults play sports. Safety and disruption to everyone. Not a good idea . Thank you

  21. In Port Kembla NSW on “Change of Use - community...” at 27-29 Wentworth Street, Port Kembla NSW 2505:

    Luciano Pontello commented

    I have worked for a local cafe delivering leftover food to Darcy House, it's such a great service, and sadly the needs of this disadvantaged group of people is growing in our community. With government funding being reduced year by year, we rely on NGO's such as Baptistcare to take this role on, please support it as you never know when someone you care about might cross that fine line between be ok and struggling!

  22. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Marcel and Jaqueline commented

    My family which includes our dog, absolutely and strongly object to the proposed DA proposal DA/144/2019 for a 40 bed Boarding house plus manager accommodation at 1038 - 1040 Anzac Parade, for up to 81 people and 20 car spaces.

    Our concerns match all the strong, realistic and social etc... reasons noted in all of the previous comments speaks volumes about the impact of this development on our community, and we support them all and urge Randwick council to reject this development immediately.

    Lastly, I can imagine that these so-called boarding house accommodations will be tiny and suffocating for the intended tenants, which does not bode well for a happy, social or comfortable place to live, long or short term.

    Randwick Council PLEASE reject this insane development in our home suburb South Maroubra.

  23. In South Yarra VIC on “Buildings and works...” at 93-103 Park Street South Yarra 3141:

    Andrew Bennett commented

    Local residents can contribute to the local discourse and in particular be appraised of the issues in relation to this application (and the previous iteration) by joining the local residents group. Melbourne South Yarra Residents Group. www.msyrg.com.au
    Email secretary@msyrg.com.au for further details as we have been extensively involved with protecting the streetscape in Park Street.

  24. In Bondi Junction NSW on “Remove one (1) tree from...” at 29 Allens Parade Bondi Junction NSW 2022:

    Rodney Scherer commented

    There are 3 trees in front of this property! which tree is being removed? There is no reason given as to why the tree is being removed. Looking at the streetscape the Eucalyptus is the only one in the street for some distance, As such, it is important as far as habitat and food for native birds.
    Eucalyptus in urban environments are very important and should only be removed as a last resort.

  25. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Andrew Zhao commented

    Dear Randwick Council,
    I object to the construction of the 40 unit boarding house at 1038-1040 Anzac Parade.

    The development will have no value add to our community and surrounding residents. We have already experienced an increase in traffic from the recent apartment developments and we do not need to further extend this type of high density housing.

    The introduction of short term renters at a boarding house would introduce concerns for surrounding residents. Concerns include noise pollution, increase traffic, increase crime.

    The only party to benefit from this development are the developers and their bank accounts. Please consider the surrounding residents before going forward with this application.

    Andrew

  26. In Kew VIC on “Post Request(S72)...” at 68 A Wellington Street Kew VIC 3101:

    Bob Appleyard wrote to local councillor Phillip Healey

    Good point. How about someone gets Boroondara to clearly clarify the rules for the benefit of concerned residents?

    Delivered to local councillor Phillip Healey. They are yet to respond.

  27. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Michael Cianci commented

    I am a concerned on the proposal to construct a 40 room boarding house at 1038 Anzac Parade and quiet shocked that Randwick Council would entertain such a proposal.

    This new development would bring an increase to the traffic in the area and impact on available parking spaces which is already struggling to cope. Has this consideration been taking into account as we have 30 parking spot in our complex of 20 townhouses and the new boarding house has a allowance of 20 spots for 40 rooms..Restricted parking on Anzac Parade which meaning Muarry Street and adjoining street will suffer keeping in mind Des Redfern leisure centre has it own issues with parking..

    This development is not in the interest of the area we live in and could be looked upon as a commercial type residence. Most of the people will be short term and don’t have any invested interest in the property and therefore the people it shall attract will not add any value.

    I’m concerned with the people this development will attract as they will be more than likely young single men and likely backpackers which will add to the noise, violence and possible crime..

    As this structure is over 50 years old it is more than likely going to expose asbestos in the demolition of the structure..How is this going to be managed?

    South Maroubra is a target for these ridicous proposals and the more these development get pushed through the more stress it puts on our infrustures..Eastgardens has just added thousands of units and now these things are popping up everywhere. These developments only line the pockets of developers and Randwick Council at our expense..

    With all the housing commission surrounding this area and the type of people it attracts this would only add more fuel for the fire..I would suggest Maroubra Police Station to move up a lot closer as they will be spending most of their time up here..

    Outraged!! this development must not go ahead and I hope the Council come to their senses and see this before it is too late..

  28. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    jeanette northall commented

    I was really upset to receive the DA proposal DA/144/2019 in regards to a 40 bed Boarding house plus manager accommodation for 1038 - 1040 Anzac parade. It just seems totally out of keeping with the area. I live next door to this block and as an elderly retiree am really concerned about having up to 80 people living the other side of the fence. Surely this is hotel size and should not even be considered for this block. The increase in noise, lack of privacy with the block looking into my courtyard are an issue but from a security point of view it is a nightmare.

    I agree with all the other comments so will not repeat them. We are all just so concerned about what will happen to the area if this goes ahead. Please do not let this happen to this area.

  29. In South Yarra VIC on “Buildings and works...” at 93-103 Park Street South Yarra 3141:

    Michelle commented

    I agree with Ant, it would be useful to know at least if this is total demolition or partial. And if they are keeping the facade and demolishing everything?

  30. In Bellbird Park QLD on “Material Change of Use –...” at 92-94 Fiona Street Bellbird Park QLD 4300:

    David Harris commented

    I object to this development. MCU 2572 / 2019. It is a massive overdevelopment with a daily use .the traffic flow will lead to a significant increase. The developers should be made more than aware of their potential impact on the environment, in particular, the removal of many gum trees. This area is having much pressure put on it without any overall development plan. This is a further example of a piecemeal approach to the carving up of this neighbourhood. The QLD ' New Planning document" states clearly that the "community must be involved with planning and should be central to development which in this case sees no structured integrated approach to making decisions in line with community expectations. Every application for development in this particular area always involves the clearing of bush and the local community have their amenity Negatively impacted. The council should know that there are strong signals from the local community that future development should be appropriate to the area. This development is not. The council must work closely with the local community group "friends of Bellbird Park" who have an intimate knowledge of community needs and expectations in this area. If the council were to work closely with the local community and make it clear as to the requirements, in particular in the respect of the environment, then developers would have a clear idea as to what is appropriate and what is not. This application clearly falls outside of community expectations for this 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