All recent comments on applications from Albury City Council, NSW

I would like to object to the proposed alterations to the property at 87 Kookaburra Way in East Albury for a few of reasons;

1- The original application included a full-size tennis court. That was denied and instead, a smaller 'pickle court' was applied for and approved. This current application again asks for a full-sized tennis court be approved (when it had already been rejected).
2- The location of the proposed main residence has been moved further south and appears to be larger than the residence in the original location.
3- I have my concerns about why the large "she" would require a full kitchen. It makes me wonder whether there are ulterior intentions for the purpose of the shed.

I thank you in advance for your consideration of my, (and many others) concerns.
Kind regards,
Penelope Power

I am a property owner near this proposed demolition. I am interested in the future development/ use of this land.
In the current housing crisis it would be disappointing for these rental properties to be demolished and for the vacant land to sit idle for years. As is the case with other land in predominant positions throughout central Albury, ie. 674-676 David St.

I am the owner of property next door and have not yet seen any details other than this demolition notice. I would like to find out how the boundary will be affected.

I am resident at 28 Samantha court

I have no objections to the proposed development at 136 Alexandra way Table Top

Regards
Barinder singh

I am happy with Subdivision. It’s great for our area and I happy to have neighbours. I have received the plan and I no obligation on the plan. I would be really happy if council can approve the plan as earliest they can.

Regards
Barinder singh

When this parcel of land 124 Alexandra Way Table Top was submitted for subdivision, into two blocks, a building envelope was set in place on the block 136 Alexandra way Table Top, to protect the resident next to this block, from being too close to the boundary line.
When the envelope was placed on the plan of this block (136) the residents agreed and the envelope and subdivision was approved by council.
The Envelope was large enough for a house, shed and pool.
The proposed building application has been submitted for a house, shed, pool and alteration to the building envelope
This proposed alteration to the envelope will be larger that the existing as approved by council, and the house as proposed on the drawing can be moved within the new envelope, and could be closed to the residents next door on the lower side.
I do not object to the house, shed and pool to be built but it must be with the existing building envelope.
A building envelope must be treated in the same way as an easement ( no building, structure can be built over or on an easement.
To alter the building envelope means that a person can do what they like.
If approved, the effected persons are the neighbors. not the approving authority.
The persons lodging the DA must find an alternate design to stay within the building envelope.

I strongly object to the alteration of the proposed envelope.

By objecting to the building envelope then we will be objecting to the DA as submitted.
.

Recieved a letter today re this proposed development, went online to read the info where it stated that the structure was already built, so now they are just getting approval for it.
How does this work? This decorative watertank was built ages ago instead of another windmill! There was no notifications until this one, again how does this work?
If I built a structure in my back yard before getting it approved, I would be in all sorts of trouble yet this child care centre seems to be able to do that! Will it be the same when the medical centre supposedly goes up? One rule for one and another for us ratepayers.

has that already been demolished old news

Consider not removing the remaining vegetation within lavington. It reduces the heat and provides shade. Consider including it in the design

There Is only one way in to the area so I don’t think that it is safe and two cars cannot fit on both sides of the road. And it is a residential area which we got told it was only houses . And coming in from a busy road is not good. And I don’t think it should be at the front of a new area coming out is going to be really bad. And there is a lot of daycare is now closing their rooms because they don’t have enough staff to fill them because I don’t have the stuff right now because everyone is taking their staff so they are have to close rooms so I’ll be looking into the other daycare centres around because I don’t have to staff to feel there room anymore . They already have one daycare centre and two new ones why would they want to put one out in front of our court .

There Is only one way in to the area so I don’t think that it is safe and two cars cannot fit on both sides of the road. And it is a residential area which we got told it was only houses . And coming in from a busy road is not good. And I don’t think it should be at the front of a new area coming out is going to be really bad. And there is a lot of daycare is now closing their rooms because they don’t have enough staff to fill them because I don’t have the stuff right now because everyone is taking their staff so they are have to close rooms so I’ll be looking into the other daycare centres around because I don’t have to staff to feel there room anymore . They already have one daycare centre and two new ones why would they want to put one out in front of our court .

The vertical mental cladding /corrugated panels are not consistent with any other building in the area. This mental cladding combined with a "timber look" cladding is a very primitive and minimalistic look which is at odds and does not connect positively with the neighbouring brick constructions.

The brick wall front façade, square/rectangle hooded windows and A frame roofline take on a shed like disconnected to local environment.

Future structures should remain true to the street and be consistent to ensure lasting character and appeal. The simplistic nature of this construction does not improve the overall appeal of the area and distracts from the beauty of older style homes, which are predominant.

Hoping they are not going to be two storey. Do not want neighbours looking down into my place.

This development is putting families into a home with very little backyard. and two homes will be overlooked by a double storey dwelling.

There is no space for vegetation that would grow to provide enough shade on the driveway that accesses three double garages. Yet another island of concrete on the west aspect that will accentuate the high temperatures experienced in changing climate.

Ide be interested in purchasing one of this units if the owner is interested in selling
Regards
Leaha Koschitzke

No letter to the neighbours
No signs on the fence
Have begun demolition of facade ? Is there no Heritage rules?

We , being residents and rate payers of Nagle Road, Lavington for 28 years have strong objections to this application for a childcare centre in Nagle Road.
It is totally out of character for our residential street. It will decrease the value of all the quality homes built in the street. A Carpark and removal of mature trees is disgraceful. If for example - 50 enrolled children per day, will add 100 cars or more per day , dropping off and picking up at all hours , bringing noise and disturbance. Supply trucks, staff cars will add to congestion at either ends of the street which only has give way signs. Keep our street residential ONLY. No Businesses.

We would like to object to this proposal as it significantly affects our property.
The shipping container is located adjacent to our front entrance to our property directly on the boundary which we have to drive pass. The bulk of the Shipping container is increased with the contrasting dark color and vegetation either side on it and being located directly on the boundary would mean that the structure would not be able to be maintained in the future. The shipping container could be moved to adjacent their existing shed and then vegetation planted to screen it.
The fence in question is over 40 meters in length not 20, is in excess of 2.2 meters high.
The covenants on the state that boundary fences are to 1.2meters high and of a rural nature which we do not feel this complies
The fence is located directly in front of our house at a distance of 36 meters, 70 meters from their property and has a extremely highly visual impact against the skyline and the rural aspects of Table Top. The construction is of a single sided colorbond fence. I have concerns in regarding the structural integrity and safety on this fence. The fence has had panels have blown off in wind in the past and his cattle have also damaged the fence. It is close to 90 sqm meter of fence in an open area, in the wind we can hear it rattling in the wing and is extremely flimsy for a structure of that size.
These concerns have been brought to the attention of the council and the structure did not comply with regulations, We are happy to discuss further if needed

Why seek comments after the event.
These planners should re-name Kiewa Street to Kaput Street, as it’s officially now gone.

Too late. New residence constructed and inhabited.

A lovely example of the many beautiful residences that once adorned tree-lined Kiewa Street . Many larger residences were set back on spacious blocks & sadly have been demolished, others set closer but each home had its own character & unique style.
It would be pleasing to see it retained by ACC even if it's not listed as historically significant, it will be a visible example of a classic post- war red brick house & as important as the grander ones built years before.

The composition of old central Albury housing should be protected. This beautiful home has multiple possibilities for duel residence without being demolished.

Planning Authority Department

Nagle Rd is unique in it’s land size and layout. On the east side the average block size is over 1000 sq meters and to the west side land size averages at 3500 sq meters plus.

If the proposal for subdivision of lot 540 is approved for 4 blocks it would not be in sympathy with the rest of Nagle Rd. This would then set a precedent for subdivision of Lot 536 for another 4 or 5 blocks.

Using a minimum of 2 cars per household, when in actuality it would be more with young adults still living at home and driving, this would increase traffic flow at a minimum of 18 cars. These blocks are not large enough to offer adequate parking to their occupants let alone visitors which will cause an increase in on street parking.

There are Supported Accommodation Premises in both Nagle Rd and Nicola Pl where residents travel daily along Nagle Rd in their motorised wheel chairs. Their safety will be severely compromised by increased traffic flow and cars parked on the street.

There are numerous subdivisions which consist of smaller blocks in our area eg: Meera Crt Estate which has 20 blocks of approximately 380sq meters. This development on it’s own will cause serious issues for Nagle Rd.

There is a huge demand for larger blocks for bigger family homes and families and the owner/developer of Lots 540 and 536 should cater to these buyers instead and would still make a healthy profit.

All residents of Nagle Rd have chosen to live here because of the large blocks whether it be for a large house, swimming pool etc and the privacy it provides. This proposed development at Lot 540 has the potential to completely erase the character and quietness of Nagle Rd.

I strongly oppose this proposed development and ask to be informed of any further information, upcoming meetings etc.

Janene & Colin ELLIS commented less than a minute ago
We have owned and lived in our Nagle Road house since 1993. we are not in agreeance with plans to yet again destroy the character of our street. Our road has been always been one of larger properties for those wanting space , larger gardens and recreation areas for children - so important in these times of covid confinement. We do not want the small handkerchief size blocks spoiling that character and tradition of Nagle Road. It brings so much more unwanted traffic movement, cars parking on nature strips,noise, and lack of space for kids to play outdoors. This development is certainly not in keeping with the type of existing houses on Nagle road. The block of land has potential for larger homes ( a trend that is of renewed interest ) and with beautiful views that your applicant will destroy in squeezing 4 homes in on tiny blocks. We strongly object to this type of development off our road.

We have owned and lived in our Nagle Road house since 1993. we are not in agreeance with plans to yet again destroy the character of our street. Our road has been always been one of larger properties for those wanting space , larger gardens and recreation areas for children - so important in these times of covid confinement. We do not want the small handkerchief size blocks spoiling that character and tradition of Nagle Road. It brings so much more unwanted traffic movement, cars parking on nature strips,noise, and lack of space for kids to play outdoors. This development is certainly not in keeping with the type of existing houses on Nagle road. The block of land has potential for larger homes ( a trend that is of renewed interest ) and with beautiful views that your applicant will destroy in squeezing 4 homes in on tiny blocks. We strongly object to this type of development off our road.