All recent comments on applications from Penrith City Council, NSW

Not a safe idea, given that this site is within only meters of a child care centre.

There is also a small park next door to the childcare centre which will no doubt be used by the residents to meet up and buy illicit drugs. Usage of drugs and needles, along with consumption of alcohol will also make its way into this small park. Residents in boarding houses will use surrounding areas to carry out antisocial activities, which endangers children using the park as access to attend childcare from surrounding streets.

Please do not build this here! I have moved next door only a year ago & was completely unaware of this planning!
There is already so much crime and rubbish on this street. Please consider moving this idea down near the station near 69 Park Ave. Keep them all together and build townhouses in its place.
I have a young child. Please don’t put all the young, hard working families peace & possessions at risk.
Please, please listen to all the comments and DONT do it!
No one wants it, we all have voiced it and you put the sign up anyway and are going ahead regardless.
There are daycare centres and children that don’t need the types of people that occupy or hang around these places.
Please, we’re all begging you to reconsider!!!

My concern with this is the parking.....60 apartments - There will need to be alot of parking included....at least 120 car spaces....finding car parking in Penrith is bad enough as it is.

Not opposed to the provision of a car wash facility here.

I just ask that Council by way of conditions ensures that light associated with any night trading of the business does not disperse in the surroundings.

All lighting associated with the use should be in recessed fixtures, directed, shielded, and of minimal intensity. Coverings by shade sails etc can assist in directing light and avoiding light spill beyond the premises.

Lighting associated with the proposed use should only be operated during the hours of trade and a short time after closing to assist with packing up equipment and tools.

All liquid waste should be discharged to the sewer network in line with requirements of the relevant water authority. Pavements should be graded and bunded so waste water cannot enter the stormwater network this may mean closing any redundant ground level stormwater pits in the relevant area.

Hi
Can you please clarify where this will be in relation to the proposed jordan Springs high school as it was announced by Pru Carr the school was going to be located on the corner of Armoury and Infantry
This application is for 63 residential lots on Infantry.

All very well but the outcome is your turning a once nice area into a slum. Enough is enough.

To the Penrith Council,

I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed housing development on Park Avenue. Please reconsider this project as it risks overcrowding our streets, which could lead to increased traffic, noise, and strain on local resources. Maintaining the quality of life for current residents should be a priority.
I am a hardworking family man with 3 kids under 10 and just bought a townhouse next door a month ago, ive been witnessing the situation near the station and it is so overcrowded and lots of rubbish on the streets.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Khris

Ratio of cars to residents, commercial, retail, guests and visitors use must be generous...and carefully considered.....also height of building otherwise thornton is in danger of turning into a ghetto...5 levels may be sufficielnt otherwise blocking sun in the suburb....also landscapre space around building needs to be generous....not enough parks and greenspace in the surrounding streets....

Good Day Respected Sir / Madam,
The major issue in Thornton is Residential (Extra Vehicles) and Guest Parking plus lack of many Recreation areas (incl. Basketball or Children's play areas) considering the growing number of Residential apartments currently in Thornton and in the plan (for e.g. Opposite Quest and now 172). It would be good to have Retail outlets with Recreation areas and lots of Parking but any more Residentail Apartments is a matter to be thought about.
PS: Residential Apartments next/close to train tracks?

How many car parking spaces will be built on this site. This should be a major consideration for the approval because of the lack of it in the surrounding area.

The subject site is 801 square metres.

It is a corner site whose eastern boundary addresses Banks Drive, whose secondary frontage (northern boundary) addresses Teak Street, and adjacent to its western boundary is a single story brick veneer home built on 12 Teak Street built across the northern area of that site, across the lot with private open space in the south of that site. Adjacent to its southern boundary at 214 Banks Drive is a single story detached home built across the central and northern area of that site. At the south east of the subject site is an electrical substation in the site's front yard, based on the primary frontage.

The site slopes from the primary frontage to its rear, and from its secondary frontage at a lesser gradient towards its southern boundary. Broadly the surrounding area topography follows a similar pattern when the context is observed in person and by viewing maps with elevation contours.

The homes upon the eastern side of Banks Drive could colloquially be described as being "on the high side of the street".

The surroundings consist very predominantly of single story detached homes, with a very small number of double story homes. It is apparent that some of the double story homes are homes originally constructed as single story with first floor additions. In those cases and upon the subject site, the upper level boundary setbacks are greater than the ground level boundary setbacks.

Despite there being a small number of double story homes existing, they are all substantially set back from their site's boundaries so that there would in their case no remarkable overshadowing, overlooking of private open spaces, nor would the be visually prominent in the surroundings and the streetscape.

Upon the subject site is a small single story home with a first floor addition subsequently erected later than the original construction. The private and secluded open spaces are predominantly permeable except for the driveway and crossover.

In the south western portion of the subject site and upon adjacent sites are mature broad canopy trees. The surrounding sites contain a number of mature canopy trees of both native and exotic origin.

Banks Drive is a collector road that intersects with a key arterial road (Mamre Road) and is close to those residents requiring access to or from the M4 Motorway. Fortunately due to the generally long setbacks from front boundaries, the residents do not experience substantial acoustic impact from the regular traffic and high peak time traffic volumes. St Clair has a limited number of access routes and from the western area of the suburb for the majority of its residents the most suitable access is via Banks Drive.

The subject site is upon the western side of Banks Drive. Along the eastern side of Banks Drive and predominantly along the western side, is a streetscape of older style detached homes with building lines very well set back from their front boundaries.

The context would be correctly described as one in which the homes are subservient to the streetscape.

Along Banks Drive the predominant landscaping context is a majority of the homes with extensive trees planted and many with mature canopy trees of mixed native or exotic origin.

The subject site has mature board canopy trees within, and a mature pine tree in its rear and front portions. The extent of vegetation buffers the visual impact of vegetation and spread of light and glare at night.

The predominant building material and facade material in the context is brick veneer with a very small number of double story homes featuring other cladding types upon their first floor.

The height, scale and massing of the proposal together with its setbacks will dominate the surroundings and fail to respond appropriately to the surrounding context.

Facades, materials, colours, finishes and structural elements lack articulation and rhythm that responds appropriately to context.

The proposal will unreasonably impact the amenity and privacy of the adjacent sites due to acoustic, light, overshadowing and overlooking.

A significant number of local homes now participate in using rooftop solar power generation, and a reduction in solar access will impact the equitable opportunities for participation and acceptable yields, of the sites located south, and west, of the subject site.

Due to the limited setbacks from road reserve boundary at Banks Drive, the proposal will provide unacceptable acoustic impacts upon its future occupants.

The private and secluded open spaces of 12 Teak Street will have severely reduced experience of morning sun. I note that the non-habitable portions of the 12 Teak Street home are located at the western end of the home (its garage and crossover) and that its eastern portion consists of habitable room usages.

The height and setbacks and building design associated with the proposal will create overlooking of the secluded open spaces of 12 Teak Street, 10 Alpine Circuit, and 214 Banks Drive.

The height and design of the proposal will also create overlooking by each of the homes of the other home's secluded open spaces.

The height and setbacks of the proposal will create losses of solar access and overshadowing at equinoxes and winter solstice of the private and secluded open spaces of 12 Teak Street, 10 Alpine Circuit, and 214 Banks Drive.

The site orientation, height and upper level setbacks of the proposal will create significant overshadowing and poor solar access to the Proposal's secluded open spaces at equinoxes and winter solstice.

The proposal fails to respond appropriately to the topography of the site and context, and will be visually prominent from the secluded open spaces of the adjacent sites and also sites that are adjacent to the adjacent sites.

The massing and finishes of the of the structures, together with reduced site permeability, in the proposal fail to respond appropriately to the Heat Island matters in the Penrith Local Environmental Plan.

The facades and finishes of the proposal addressing the road frontages, together with the lack of provision for broad canopy trees planted forward of the building lines in deep soil zones, create proposals disrupting the street rhythm and without buffering that will dominate the surroundings.

The facades addressing the primary and secondary frontages lack sufficient structural and articulation elements to buffer their domination of the streetscape and disruption of streetscape rhythm.

The reduced setbacks of the proposal, together with a lack of external lighting for its private and secluded open spaces that is "recessed, directed, shielded and of minimal intensity" will create unreasonable amenity impacts upon adjacent sites as well as the double story walls of the proposal propagating and reflecting glare of night time light. This is unlikely to be addressed satisfactorily without suitable consent conditions that external lighting must be shielded, recessed in acceptable fittings, baffled, directed (down only), of colour temperature below 3000K and of minimal intensity.

The structure heights and setbacks present the increased transmission of noise and acoustic impacts from their use, to the adjacent site's secluded open spaces and habitable windows.

The height and setback of the eastern facades addressing Banks Drive, together with lack of buffering by canopy trees and their colours, materials and finishes will create reflection and propagation of night light from street lamps and traffic and glare impacting unreasonably the homes upon the eastern side of Banks Drive that are opposite the subject site generally.

The reduced site permeability of the proposal will create increased stormwater discharge from the site and due to the natural fall of the land, discharge of stormwater and increased overland flow velocity to the adjacent sites.

The proposal lacks water sensitive urban design and measures to contain, delay and/or reduce the discharge of stormwater onto adjacent sites due to the natural fall of the land being in the south western direction.

The Proposal contains insufficient material to affirm that it responds appropriately to the surrounding context and the relevant matters in the Penrith Local Environmental Plan.

The Proposal fails to respond positively to the Objectives of the Zoning R2 Low Density Residential in the Penrith Local Environmental Plan.

The Proposal provides for insufficient meaningful landscaping, deep soil zones, and upon completion, plantings of suitable and sufficient broad canopy trees.

The Proposal fails to respond appropriately to the site constraints of a power substation in the site's southeastern corner, splayed area in its northeast, the site's dimensions, and due to being a corner site the limited opportunities to create acceptable sizes and quality of secluded open spaces with adequate solar access at winter solstice.

It is noted that the road frontage setbacks proposed will be substantially less than the average of surrounding front setbacks (building lines).

The Proposal is an overdevelopment of the site and fails to respond appropriately to the Penrith Local Environmental Plan, the site's constraints and context and it is urged that it be refused.

The lack of provision for canopy trees with heights upon maturity equalling or exceeding the structure heights, fails to respond appropriately to the Heat Island matters in the Penrith Local Environmental Plan.

I seek modification conditions because there will be unacceptable environmental and off site amenity impacts:

Seek that the drive through pathway be contained in an acoustically screened tunnel or in the alternative that electronic ordering devices with loudspeakers not be used after 2200 daily and before 0600 daily.

That suitable screening by fixed panels of dark colour be installed where vehicles may dwell in the drive through route to shield land outside the site from light glare from vehicles at night, especially where vegetation may be insufficient as a buffer of light and glare emanating outside the site;

That in the outdoor areas no loudspeakers or equipment to broadcast amplified sounds be operated at anytime.

That only native plantings be installed in the landscaped areas and that multiple broad canopy trees be provided throughout the site.

That screening by raised gardens, panels and landscaping of the boundaries be provided to prevent light spill.

That all external lighting be baffled, shielded, directed, sensor and timer controlled, fully recessed in suitable fittings, of minimal intensity, a colour temperature not exceeding 2700K.

That boundary fencing be panelled and dark in finishes with non reflective material to prevent propagation and spread of glare at night.

That the building facades be coloured dark in non reflective finishes to prevent propagation and spread of glare at night.

That the vehicle circulation pathways in the site be fitted with speed humps throughout as designated by a chartered traffic engineer.

That separate entries, wayfinding and routes including marked crossings be identified on a plan and constructed to separate persons who do not attend the site by motor vehicle.

That water sensitive urban design be implemented including on site detention and rainwater gardens, with design by an engineer in stormwater, and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

That an environmental consultants assessment be undertaken noting the local presence of the grey headed flying fox, a threatened species, and that it be given appropriate weight. I have obtained information of the surroundings being used for the travel, roosting and foraging of the grey headed flying fox.

I seek modification conditions because there will be unacceptable environmental and off site amenity impacts:

Seek that the drive through pathway be contained in an acoustically screened tunnel or in the alternative that electronic ordering devices with loudspeakers not be used after 2200 daily and before 0600 daily.

That suitable screening by fixed panels of dark colour be installed where vehicles may dwell in the drive through route to shield land outside the site from light glare from vehicles at night, especially where vegetation may be insufficient as a buffer of light and glare emanating outside the site;

That in the outdoor areas no loudspeakers or equipment to broadcast amplified sounds be operated at anytime.

That only native plantings be installed in the landscaped areas and that multiple broad canopy trees be provided throughout the site.

That screening by raised gardens, panels and landscaping of the boundaries be provided to prevent light spill.

That all external lighting be baffled, shielded, directed, sensor and timer controlled, fully recessed in suitable fittings, of minimal intensity, a colour temperature not exceeding 2700K.

That boundary fencing be panelled and dark in finishes with non reflective material to prevent propagation and spread of glare at night.

That the building facades be coloured dark in non reflective finishes to prevent propagation and spread of glare at night.

That the vehicle circulation pathways in the site be fitted with speed humps throughout as designated by a chartered traffic engineer.

That separate entries, wayfinding and routes including marked crossings be identified on a plan and constructed to separate persons who do not attend the site by motor vehicle.

That water sensitive urban design be implemented including on site detention and rainwater gardens, with design by an engineer in stormwater, and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

That an environmental consultants assessment be undertaken noting the local presence of the grey headed flying fox, a threatened species, and that it be given appropriate weight. I have obtained information of the surroundings being used for the travel, roosting and foraging of the grey headed flying fox.

This is a major change from original application for light industrial units at a cost of approx 1m construction to a religious site for $110k. Loss of tax revenue alone should be sufficient to deny this application. The area is not meant for residential/religious site and seems to be a back door way of establishing a new religious center without having to go through those planning requirements for a place of worship such as a church\mosque\temple.
We need businesses in Penrith to necessarily places of worship in industrial areas, they should be in residential areas where people are located.

Would seek consent conditions imposed for local amenity and environment:

That external lighting managed by the applicant be directed, shielded and of minimal intensity;

That beyond the hours of night the event area is open to the public that lighting operation be reduced to the minimal necessary for safety purposes of the operator's staff to safely move about the site;

That vehicles and trailers depicting the name, insignia, branding or images of the operator, that are visible from the public realm, not be illuminated for the purpose of business promotion beyond the hours of evening that the event site is open to the public;

That amplified sound and music not be audible beyond the event site;

That generators and other engine driven plant be oriented and suitably attenuated so they do not emit noise beyond the event site that is contrary to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and other legislation concerning the emission of noise;

The subject site is located on a corner with its principal entrance addressing St Clair Avenue to the south of the existing home, with the secondary road of Buckland Road located at the site's eastern boundary with road reserve for the same.

The subject site is described as Lot 5/-/DP250423

The subject site is a generally level form, with a detached garage located west of the original home, and adjacent to the site's western boundary.

The surroundings consist predominantly of detached style homes.

The site is accessed by a single width crossover at its southern boundary.

The site is an irregular block narrowing slightly in depth towards its eastern boundary, with a principal frontage of approx 26 metres, a length of 28.0 metres along its western boundary and 22.81 metres at its eastern boundary.

The proposal by decommissioning the original garage use and original crossover and driveway use, will remove off street parking for the occupants of the principal home and generate unacceptable neighbourhood traffic and amenity impacts. Alternative crossover locations if any alternative off street parking is proposed for the principal home will create unacceptable traffic, amenity, pedestrian and road user safety impacts. This is a reason for refusal.

The proposal is located less than 200 metres from the Corridor of the M4 Western Motorway and the applicant has not demonstrated acceptable design measures to protect occupants of the secondary dwelling from acoustic impacts of the motorway according to contemporary standards.

The proposal relies excessively upon mechanical cooling and heating, and is not substantially designed to be insulated from the elements and provide for passive cooling of the dwelling and the roof void space according to contemporary best practices.

The installation of mechanical cooling and heating devices by air conditioning in the boundary setback areas (western boundary) will create unreasonable amenity acoustic impacts upon the site adjacent to the west. Installation of mechanical cooling and heating devices on the eastern side of the secondary dwelling will create unacceptable acoustic impacts upon occupants of the principal (original) home.

The proposal provides for insufficient private and secluded open spaces for the secondary dwelling occupants.

The narrow size of the area set aside for the proposed secondary dwelling will allow insufficient solar access for the secondary dwelling area open spaces due to height of separating fences. Especially in winter and at equinox, the secondary dwelling rooms will have poor internal amenity due to insufficient direct sunlight and solar access unless the issue is addressed by the addition of skylights to those habitable rooms.

The size and location of secluded and private open spaces for the secondary dwelling will generate unreasonable amenity and acoustic impacts to surrounding sites.

The conversion of garage to secondary dwelling responds poorly to Council's Heat Island policy and this use rather than demolition and new structure construction will create unacceptable and poor internal amenity for the secondary dwelling occupants.

The proposal reduces overall site permeability below acceptable minimums and fails to demonstrate measures to detain and control the discharge of stormwater within the site by measures such as substantial rainwater tanks to both dwellings connected to suitable home fixtures, on site stormwater detention, rain garden, and provision of sufficient permeable private open spaces for both homes.

The proposal provides for insufficient deep soil zones and landscaped area together with insufficent plantings of suitable broad canopy trees whose height upon maturity are an appropriate response to local character as well as buffering the excessive visual bulk of the proposal and buffering the travel of night light from into and out of the subject site.

The proposal provides for insufficent environmental and energy sustainability due to poor efficiency of the stormwater detention/discharge, water use, water and space heating and air cooling choices of the applicant. If to be granted approval would seek conditions imposing mechanical ventilation of dwelling roof, 5 star showerheads, air sourced heat pump hot water system, an alternative water system whose tank stores >=2000 litres that is plumbed to lavatories and laundry, and high efficiency low noise inverter air conditioning units only.

The proposal does not demonstrate by a recognised hydraulic and stormwater engineer that there are no unacceptable impacts regarding inundation of surrounding lands, unacceptable rate of discharge of stormwater, etc.

The proposal is an overdevelopment of the site, noting site dimensions, locations of original home and garage/proposed secondary dwelling structure and setbacks.

The proposal represents an inappropriate response to the Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 matters and would be appropriately determined by way of refusal.

The proposal to use double story brick walls will dominate the surroundings and respond negatively to the surrounding context.

The surrounding context is a character where homes are predominantly articulated in facades and massing, and subservient to the streetscape.

The height, scale and massing of the proposal will dominate the surroundings and fail to respond appropriately to the surrounding context.

The limited and zero setbacks forming part of the proposal will also dominate the surroundings and fail to respond appropriately to the surrounding context.

The lack of articulation, rhythm and a variety of materials, textures, colours and finishes in the structures will create unacceptable visual bulk, dominate the surroundings and respond negatively to the surrounding context.

The applicant has not demonstrated external lighting pertinent to the proposal is suitably focused, baffled and shielded to prevent unreasonable amenity impacts upon surrounding sites.

Applicant has not demonstrated the use of low reflectivity external finishes and materials.

The proposal is an overdevelopment of the site.

The proposal fails to respond appropriately to the Penrith Heat Island policies.

The proposal fails to respond appropriately to the relevant Penrith Development Control Plan matters for the site.

The proposal will create overall unreasonable amenity impacts upon surrounding sites.

The proposal will create unacceptable overshadowing impacts at equinox upon surrounding sites.

The proposal provides for insufficient deep soil zones, permeable outdoor areas, landscaped areas, and an insufficient number of native broad canopy trees that are an appropriate response to character and context.

The proposal provides for insufficient information regarding vegetation proposed such as common and botanical names as well as time to maturity and height and canopy sizes.

Proposal on balance is an inappropriate planning outcome and refusal is urged.

This planning item keeps reappearing after being told it is closed.
My comment asking which of the many units in this large complex is under question still apply.
I note that the existing auto repair business in unit D2 has recently closed. Is this linked to the application?

As this is so close to residential I’m very concerned about noise and after hour activity.

I am generally supportive of the proposal being recommended for approval.

I would strongly request that various landscape conditions of consent be added for reasons contained within.

That ficus pumila is deleted from the plant palette in the landscape plan as it has a record of being environmentally invasive in Australia and its cuttings can readily strike and it may rapidly spread by cuttings and seed. Ficus pumila is also poisionous to humans and pets.

That Rhaphiolepis indica be deleted from the plant palette in the landscape plan as it has a record of being environmentally invasive in Australia and its cuttings can readily strike and it may rapidly spread by cuttings and seed.

That buxus sempervirens be deleted from the plant palette in the landscape plan as it has a record of being environmentally invasive in Australia and its currings can readily strike and it may rapidly spread by cuttings and seed. Buxus species are also poisionous to humans and pets.

That deleted plants are to be replaced only with species native to Australia, preferably of local provenance.

According to the Brisbane City Council, Indian hawthorn (Rhaphiolepis indica) is regarded as an environmental weed in New South Wales and Queensland and as a potential environmental weed or "sleeper weed" in other parts of Australia. Currently, it is mainly a problem in remnant bushland in the Brisbane and Sydney regions.This species is actively managed by community groups in New South Wales and appears on several local and regional environmental weed lists in the eastern parts of this state (e.g. in the North Coast region, in the wider Sydney and Blue Mountains region, in the Sydney North region, in Coffs Harbour City and in Byron, Warringah, Mosman, Manly and Ku-ring-gai Municipal Councils).

A slight fall across the site from the northern boundary to southern boundary is noted. I would object to consent being given unless a water sensitive urban design plan was advanced including kerb gaps to allow stormwater to enter landscaped areas in the north and east of the site, carpark suitably graded, onsite detention of stormwater as there is a concern that the extensive paved area will discharge excessive volumes of stormwater into the road reserve and stormwater network. Consent condition need to add entry hump or driveway grading in order to reduce excessive discharge of stormwater into the road reserve. Consent condition to be added to forbid lot occupiers or users from washing bins or vehicles upon any of the paved areas in order to protect local stormwater and riparian network from unacceptable effects of pollutants.

That the stairs to the upper level residential quarter provide very poor residential amenity due to the single flight containing an excessive number of risers, request condition of approval to amend architectural plans so that a minimum of one landing, and preferably two landings (if 2 provided then the first at one third height in flight and the second at two thirds height in flight) at approximately halfway up the flight, of 750mm deep and as wide as the risers is provided. To provide as many risers as contemplated in the design for a 4 bedroom residential use is a very poor amenity outcome based on contemporary best practice.

Request consent condition that lighting externally be fully shielded, correlated colour temperatures not exceeding 2700 Kelvin, and internal residential lighting be Tricolour (3CCT) LED downlights initially selected to a 2700 Kelvin CCT. Request condition that business identification signage which is illuminated, to not be illuminated beyond the hours of trade of the business premises, and that interior lighting in the business premises to be dimmed to half luminance level, or turned off, during closure of the business.

Regarding environment and sustainability, I submit that the proposal fails to contemplate climate change, contemporary best practices and request consent conditions be added as follows.

The applicant must, install showerheads with a minimum rating of 5 star (<= 6 L/min) in all showers in residential portion of the development, and in the event of any replacement by this or a subsequent owner that only 5 star fittings be installed.

That all hot water pipes within the development must be insulated to a minimum of 0.6 sq metres per kW using 25mm of foamed nitrile rubber or fibreglass.

The rainwater tank is not configured to collect rainwater from the whole roof, so request noting the low annual precipitation in the LGA that the applicant must install a rainwater tank/s of at least total capacity of 5000 litres on the site, connected to all lavatories, washing machine fixture/s and at least 2 outdoor tap fixtures.

Seek consent condition that the applicant must install a suitably sized air sourced heat pump, or gas boosted solar, hot water system, for the residential premises, in the development, and that in the event of failure or breakdown to replace only with same type.

Seek consent condition that air conditioning systems be inverter type only and that EER for cooling is to exceed 4.0 star as excessive air conditioning use and commercial air conditioning uses both generate unacceptable acoustic impacts especially at the night time when motor traffic volumes are significantly lowered.

Seek condition that the applicant, and any subsequent owner or occupant, must not install or connect any air conditioner that is connected to grid supplied electricity unless the product complies with the demand response capability requirements published in AS4755 as currently in force and that compliance is required with the three DRMs - DRM1, DRM2, DRM3.

Air conditioning proposed by the applicant has not been assessed, by an acoustic consultant, to not generate unacceptable acoustic and amenity impacts for occupants of the site and adjacent residential properties, especially at night.

The applicant must install a photovoltaic system as part of the development - I note that the applicant proposed a PV system but with an output of 1kW peak only which was to me remarkable. The applicant must connect this system to the development's electrical system and make the output of at least 50% of the panels available for use at any time by the residential premises.

The photovolatic system must consist of:
• photovolatic collectors with the capacity to generate at least 20 peak kilowatts of electricity, installed at an angle between 10 degrees and 20 degrees to the horizontal facing north, noting the site's latitude and distance from the equator and need to maintain adequate winter power yields.

That carpark lighting must be oriented downward and no floodlighting or fittings that may cause glare to be experienced withing the proposed residential premises nor adjacent residential premises at night.

That an EV charging outlet must be provided at the carpark to at least one residential parking bay for Electric Vehicle charging based on Single phase up to 7.4 kW / 32 A.

That no occupation certificate be granted by the responsible authority until the conditions requested in this submission been met by the applicant.

The Council should not give approval to remove 17 trees when it doesnt fall in line with Penrith Council’s Cooling Penrith strategy, Why have a strategy to plant more trees that will help create shade and make the city more enjoyable and user friendly.

There are multiple units at this address at least one of which are already a mechanical repair workshop. The late evening noise of cars being road tested at great speed is currently an issue without further expansion. Further comment is difficult without knowing which unit and over what hours.

Because this is so close to residential, noise is a big issue. From engine revving etc, there have to be some restrictions, especially after regular business hours.

I believe that the bulk of this land is zoned tourism and therefore only suitable for tourism type development. Who is making this application as the ownership appears to be a state government sponsored entity.

I urge Council to make appropriate orders under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requesting the owner cease use of the structure for any residential purpose immediately, and demolish the structure forthwith and restore the site to its pre-existing condition.