Recent comments

  1. In Wayville SA on “Remove significant Corymbia...” at 39A Davenport Terrace, Wayville 5034, SA:

    Emma Miller commented

    I agree with the comments of a Wendy and Sylvia. I wish the ‘public consultation’ phase of this approval process actually included real consultation instead of this tick a box exercise. Publishing no rationale for the removal of significant trees and ignoring any comments about the application is not consultation. Even so, I will continue to register my extreme distress in the ongoing denuding of our once leafy suburbs in completely rejecting this application, particularly given there is no reason provided for the removal of this tree.

  2. In Milperra NSW on “Procedural paper...” at 56 Prescott Parade, Milperra NSW 2214:

    Julia commented

    This development will have such a negative impact on our great suburb. The environmental impact will be be devastating., not only to the fauna and flora but the surrounding streets, which do not cope at the best of times. Please consider the great green belt that has been a haven.

  3. In Gerroa NSW on “Dwelling, shed, swimming...” at 16 Crooked River Rd, Gerroa, NSW 2534:

    ROY Schmidt commented

    Based on the importance of the location, I question whether a residential house, a LARGE shed, a good size pool & a wood heater can be achieved for $400,000?? That is, will the design & quality of the properties be appropriate for the location?
    Plus I agree with the comment by Julienne Seymour re phasing out wood heaters! The morning after impact in Gerroa can be horrific!

  4. In Milperra NSW on “Procedural paper...” at 56 Prescott Parade, Milperra NSW 2214:

    Michelle Hutchinson commented

    I am against this development taking place. Milperra does not currently have the infrastructure to cope with not only this new development but also the other one that Mirvac has planned at the University. Our roads, internet, power are not coping as it is. Traffic is a nightmare at the best of times on Henry Lawson Drive and Bullecourt Ave. It is at a standstill and it gets gridlocked if there has been a breakdown or an accident on any of the surrounding roads.
    Internet services will be under more stress and residents are always complaining about inadequate internet services that we have already.
    The loss of parkland and the effect that this will have on our native animals will be devastating. We do not have a coed public school in area which leaves parents to apply for schools out of area.
    Our public transport system in Milperra is ridiculous. Buses are limited and it is our only option. Car parking at East Hills station is very limited, and trains often bypass as Revesby is the main station in the area. Catching a train during peak time is extremely crowded and I do not know how we are going to keep fitting more and more people on an already busting at the seams public transports system. This means that most people opt to drive and as already stated our roads are just not coping.
    Milperra is a small, quiet community which will change greatly if this development and the uni development are built. Our little suburb will nearly double in size and double in car capacity.
    This land would be better utilized as open parkland as once we lose our green parklands we will never get them back again. After the loss of so much bushland over the last few months, isnt it best to keep what bushland we have and plant more trees.

  5. In Milperra NSW on “Procedural paper...” at 56 Prescott Parade, Milperra NSW 2214:

    Jenny Henville commented

    There are already far too many “planned” developments for Milperra it’s madness - all up we are talking up 1,000 homes / 2,000 cars - that is crazy. Milperra does not have the infrastructure to cope with this influx of homes and people and we already have crowded roads / limited bus services / no trains / no co-Ed schools it is just not feasible or justified.
    Please save our environment and wildlife from these crazy developments for the safety and sake of our younger generation

  6. In Wollongong NSW on “Residential - Eight storey...” at 9 Park Street, Wollongong NSW 2500:

    Ashley Miller commented

    9-11 Park St, Wollongong 2500. DA-2019/1356

    I Ashley Miller of 4/13 Park St, Wollongong OBJECT to this application for the current reasons.


    As this new development will be on the north of our building this will shade my townhouse from 12 noon for the rest of the day in winter. My townhouse is already shaded from 16 Church St until around 11am. This will leave us with 1 hour of sunlight per day. With almost all windows facing north this will make a dramatic difference. This will not only make it cold and dark but a problem of mould and moisture may also occur.


    With the new development planning to have 2 level basement parking I believe a very deep hole will need to be dug in the ground. I am worried this will affect the foundations of our building. With us being on the higher side of the hill I feel it would be possible for our building to slightly slide towards the excavated area. Causing cracking and movement to our foundations and brickwork.


    With the new development housing up to 15 units this will put a lot of stress on street parking. There is lucky to be any parking on the street at the moment. Let alone with all these possible extra residents. Through the construction period there probably won't be any parking for residents. If any at all.


    8 stories is an unreasonable height for this street. With a building at 6 stories on our South we will be completely engulfed by 2 taller buildings. All other buildings in the street are 4 stories or less. This 8 story monstrosity just doesn't fit in with the street landscape/environment.


    Noise is obviously a factor of all construction sites. It's something that is going to happen no matter what. The problem is with a job this size this noise will go for an unbearably long amount of time. With infants, new mums and pets in this area they may be forced to stay elsewhere during the day for an extended period of time.

  7. In Milperra NSW on “Procedural paper...” at 56 Prescott Parade, Milperra NSW 2214:

    Tauhid commented

    This development will have no positive affect to the community what so ever. The suburb itself will be over crowded as the infrastructure are not adequate enough to carter this development. Furthermore given the current circumstances and millions of animals lost their lives, we should be preserving this area for flora and fauna.

  8. In Wayville SA on “Remove significant Corymbia...” at 39A Davenport Terrace, Wayville 5034, SA:

    Sylvia Wade commented

    We support Wendy Bevan in her comments re the further destruction of our local significant and regulated trees. Two in one week - 21 Florence St Fullarton with the removal of River Red Gum, a glorious regulated tree and now, this significant tree, a Lemon Scented Gum, so vital for our dwindling, compromised wildlife and birds.
    The community feels despair as we see the area torn apart by this uncontrolled destruction supported by authorities who do not care nor even listen. We express our concern yet decisions are pushed through in the guise of safety when the underlying reason, in most cases, is development and/or renovations that motivate the majority of applications to destroy our trees.
    Shame on all who continue to allow it to happen.

  9. In North Bondi NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 10 Patterson Street North Bondi NSW 2026:

    Cameron commented

    Is the cost of work accurate? 16K to demolish a house doesn't sound right. What is being built here?

  10. In Lawnton QLD on “Reconfiguring a Lot -...” at 142 Francis Road, Lawnton QLD 4501:

    Mary commented

    There seems to be a lack of consideration towards the street appeal on Francis Road. The landscape plan states there will be a retaining wall along Francis Road, with no other greenery or plants. The new estate next door looks the same - it's popped up on top of a retaining wall and looks depressing.
    It's disappointing that such high density, small lots are earmarked for this area, at the very least I would strongly like to see much more thought into how this will improve the visual aspect of the area. Bray Park is ageing, and I believe that new developments could improve the area, if done properly. If we continue with proposals like these we have a serious risk of devaluing the area with poorly built, concrete dense, back to back houses with no value on urban design.

  11. In Milperra NSW on “Procedural paper...” at 56 Prescott Parade, Milperra NSW 2214:

    Rowena Moss commented

    I am totally against this development.

    With an estimated some 450 million Australian native animals effected by the worst bushfires Australia has ever seen, I gotta say I’m horrified that you would even consider an application to develop the home of what could be some of the last remaining populations of some species.
    With all the devastation to their natural habitat it just seems incomprehensible that you would approve any development that would put them further at risk.
    Sadly many of these native birds, wildlife and plants species will be endangered or extinct after these devastating bushfires and its up to us to do everything we can to save them from this fate.
    Not to mention the major impact this will have on all residents within the district. There is simply not enough infrastructure for this development. We already have traffic problems on Henry Lawson Drive from Milperra Road to the M5.
    What about the extra traffic in the local streets, including past the primary school? What impact will this have on our already slow water pressure and congested telephone/broadband connections? There are also flood issues around the Riverlands Golf Course.
    This development would add at least two more cars per dwelling and we are talking around 241 dwellings. This would be an absolute gridlock and an environmental disaster. The community of Milperra is horrified as to what could happen to our safe and quiet suburb! We are totally against this development!
    The community of Milperra is horrified as to what could happen to our safe and quiet suburb! We are totally against the development of Riverlands Golf Course.

  12. In Wayville SA on “Remove significant Corymbia...” at 39A Davenport Terrace, Wayville 5034, SA:

    Wendy Bevan commented

    There must be a very compelling reason to remove yet another significant tree from the area. The trees provide shade and habitats for birds, possums and bats and insects and cool the suburb. This is a terrible decision

  13. In Gerroa NSW on “Dwelling, shed, swimming...” at 16 Crooked River Rd, Gerroa, NSW 2534:

    Julieanne Seymour commented

    Please , let’s start phasing out wood heaters in our communities and keep our air clean.

  14. In Bellerive TAS on “Change of Use to Dwelling” at 1 Cambridge Road, Bellerive, TAS:

    Zac Shutt commented

    This property should be used for something more productive for the community. Prime location for shops and restaurants that the growing community requires.

  15. In Narre Warren South VIC on “Four Lot Subdivision and...” at 338-340 Pound Road Narre Warren South, VIC:

    M. Lee commented

    The building is un finished and we are hearing loud calls to.prayer over loud speakers after 9pm tonight. Is this going to be an ongoing event? I live a fair distance from the site and it is loud inside my house!!

  16. In Surry Hills NSW on “Alterations and additions...” at 146 Foveaux Street Surry Hills NSW 2010:

    Madeleine commented

    Please consider the construction noise impact on the residents of Fitzroy Street when approving this. We already hear constant construction from the apartment building construction in Fitzroy Place, and the renovations of several terrace houses on the block. As those constructions appear to be reaching a close, we were looking forward to some long awaited quiet.

    This proposal is right next to residential properties and the shared Sheas Ln in between. This would be a considerable quality of life decrease for all residents who have already tolerated a lot of disruption for the sake of the neighbourhood's growth. Also as renters we do not realise the long term gains, such as property value increase, of these initiatives.

  17. In Bongaree QLD on “Material Change of Use -...” at 215 First Avenue, Bongaree QLD 4507:

    Janette Buchanan commented

    I have no objection to the business as such, but am concerned at the traffic hazard this could create.
    One of the target markets would be the 4WDs coming off the beach at Woorim, who wash the salt water off their vehicles.
    The positioning of this business would create a high number of vehicles that will have to turn right across two lanes of oncoming traffic to enter this business, and then turn right across two lanes of traffic to exit the business after cleaning their vehicles, to head north again on their homeward journey.
    This stretch of road and businesses already creates issues with vehicles trying to turn right (north) out of businesses.
    Not an ideal solution, but perhaps a roundabout at the corner of McMahon and First Ave, with a fence from here north to the roundabout at Goodwin & First Ave, would make it a safer stretch of road.

  18. In Surrey Hills VIC on “Construction of four new...” at 53 Park Road, Surrey Hills VIC 3127:

    geoffrey james commented

    We oppose this application. We bought 1/55 Park rd 4years ago well aware that one day 53 would be developed but we assumed it would be 3 units {not4] consistent with previous and recent development at 61 park rd.All unit development between Ferndale rd and Alandale rd are3 units and we believe this is appropriate to maintain the character and integrity of the area. Within weeks of the sale of 53 park rd the 70 year old Norfolk Island pine tree at the rear of the property mysteriously died?We also oppose the possible closing of any rear lane access to our property.The lane is required for MFB and maintenance access.We believe it is the duty of the council to protect the integrity of the area bow to the wishes of greedy developers. Let us assure you strongly that we will do all we can to oppose the building of 4 units at 53 park rd.

  19. In Lawnton QLD on “Reconfiguring a Lot -...” at 142 Francis Road, Lawnton QLD 4501:

    Mark Walder commented

    The self fulfilling prophecy is included in the submission by the developer :
    ".....the site is zoned as Next Generation Neighbourhood – General Residential which means the landscape will become generally more unsuitable for Koalas in the future. Rehabilitating and retaining Koala trees would have the effect of promoting Koala activity in areas which are to become increasingly hostile and dangerous for Koalas in the future."
    Here's another prophecy :
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got til its gone
    They paved paradise and put up a parking lot
    They took all the trees and put 'em in a tree museum
    They charged the people a dollar and a half to seem 'em
    Joni Mitchell

  20. In North Bondi NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 10 Patterson Street North Bondi NSW 2026:

    Emma Smythe commented

    Is there a planning application to build a dwelling? I don't think anything should be torn down unless there's a plan to build.

  21. In Werri Beach NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 57 Werri St, Werri Beach, NSW 2534:

    bernadette black commented

    I think that wood heaters should not be allowed in built up areas. The smoke from such heaters can cause problems for neighbours. I have no problem with them on farm properties with acreage.
    Bernadette Black

  22. In Blakehurst NSW on “Construction of a...” at 513 Princes Highway, Blakehurst, NSW Australia:

    Alan Taylor commented

    Since the approved development of Dwyer lane, 10 ywars ago. The addition of a Foot bridge for access to Blakehurst Primary School. Additional places and facilities at the Secondary School.The development of the past Motel will make the area even more intolerable with congestion for existing residents. This is a major thourough fare with poor turning into Primcess Hwy.

  23. In Wellington Point QLD on “Standard Format - 1 into 6...” at 41 Mindarie Crescent, Wellington Point QLD 4160:

    Helen and Donald Gilmour commented

    We have several concerns related to this DA as follows:
    1. The conversion of one large block to six very small blocks will change significantly the overall tone and ambience of the Mindarie Cres neighbourhood from low density to medium density. This change should be something about which the neighbours were consulted. This is particularly relevant at the cul de sac end of the crescent as there is likely to be an additional 12 vehicles moving in and out of a small and restricted area if the development goes ahead.
    2. The construction of a proposed easement and associated earthworks is likely to impact on our property, particularly on the concrete parking area and sleeper wall at the western end of our house. We require assurances that no impact will occur to this or other parts of our property.
    3. The construction of a proposed easement and associated earthworks, particularly the construction of a sediment trap, has a high probability of adversely impacting the trees and other native vegetation on our property (as was alluded to on page 10 of the DA Decision Notice--dated 5-12-19).It should be noted that our property is registered as "Land for Wildlife" with the RCC and is included as a "Remnant Koala Habitat" and a "Regional Ecosystem of Concern" in the RCC environmental overlays. We require assurances that there will be no adverse impact on the environmental (or other) values of our property.

  24. In Burraneer NSW on “Tree Application” at 1/116 Woolooware Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    Colin Bisset commented

    Agree with previous comment. There is nothing wrong with this tree.

  25. In Rokeby TAS on “48 Lot Subdivision” at 80 Burtonia Street, Rokeby, TAS:

    Dennis Matthews commented

    I urge the Clarence Councillors to seriously consider any negative ramifications of this project. If this project does not IMPROVE the lifestyle of existing residents, why would you approve it?
    As with any real estate project, the existing residents welfare and wellbeing must not be negatively impacted. Infrastructure, facilities, schools, medical and child care must not be put under strain with the additional residents.

    In making their decision on this project, Councillors should ensure that there is no pressure from State Government, nor a sense of obligation to approve a project that may ease accommodation issues in this city. Houses will be here for many decades, but accommodation issues may be solved in a couple of years with proper decision making.
    Rokeby ratepayers would be appalled if Councillors approved a project that would effectively "dump" new residents into the suburb whose services are already under strain.
    This may be a case of "Less is more"...

  26. In Winston Hills NSW on “Development Application -...” at 5 Lois Street Winston Hills NSW 2153:

    Just a concerned resident commented

    The photo that you display is a photo of the old house which was demolished about 4 years ago. The dwelling that the alterations are proposed for is a two- storied townhouse which has already had changes carried out altering the finished dwelling . After many petitions and appeals to Council while the original dwelling was being erected it was found that the building did not comply with the specifications and amendments had to be carried out so the building would comply. We hope the Council is being vigilant with all the alterations already carried out and those that are now proposed. We would appreciate the photo of the house being shown be the house that these matters refer to. Will these alterations meet the guidelines or exceed the ratio of area of block to size of building . Reference numberDA/725/2019

  27. In Bardwell Park NSW on “Construction of semi...” at 10 Lambert Road, Bardwell Park NSW 2207:

    Noah Faber commented

    This DA has caused too much controversy in the community, it should be taken into account that this DA just doesn’t suit the neighbourhood. Bardwell Park is one of the quietest suburbs within 15km of Sydney’s CBD. It should be kept this way and I suggest that maybe the developer should consider a building a single freestanding home rather than a giant duplex.

  28. In Kingsgrove NSW on “Alterations & Additions to...” at 52 Poole Street, Kingsgrove NSW 2208:

    Noah Faber commented

    I’m thinking this may be an issue with the website, but when I try to view more information there are no attached documents. I’m just concerned that myself and others aren’t able to view the specifics to this DA when all we can see is that alterations and additions will be made. This is incredibly vague as it could mean anything from adding a pool to extending the basement to make room for 10 off street car spaces. It would be a great help to me if I could have this clarified to me.
    Thank you.

  29. In Sandy Beach NSW on “Development Application...” at 66 A Morgans Road, Sandy Beach NSW 2456:

    Trish Cahill commented

    I would like to inquire as to the outcome of the DA mentioned in this application where the quarry proposed to expand outside their approved operational area by removing the eastern (sound buffer) rock wall. I, along with other residents, sent a submission against the DA and have not been informed as to the outcome.

    This current DA application does not provide much information and I gather that it is a request to relinquish responsibility for the easement ie; (positive covenant)? Please explain what it all means in layman's terms!!


  30. In Burraneer NSW on “Tree Application” at 1/116 Woolooware Road Burraneer NSW 2230:

    nick deguingand commented

    Please disallow this tree removal application. THe tree cover in this area is being destroyed application by application, and the area's amenity is being destroyed.

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