All recent comments on applications from Shellharbour City Council, NSW

I oppose the plans to build a Boarding House in Darley Street Shellharbour Village.

We are trying to display a village by the sea atmosphere to get tourist and holiday makers into the area which will improve the economy and create jobs for the locals.

This Boarding House will stop the tourist coming into the village with vulnerable people in our community. Also there is limited transport in Shellharbour Village.

The Boarding House could go into Albion Park Rail or Dapto which would make more sense as there is a good rail/bus service plus Dapto has a good shopping Mail.
All this has is beneficial to improving the homelessness situation in our area.

Shellharbour Council needs to revisit the Boarding House application.

I oppose the idea of Building a boarding house.

As a parent just the thought of the type of people that will be placed in these rooms/house this will bring to our region.

The area does not need it and in general the people in community do not want it.

Boarding houses usually board a variety of people it does not discriminate ie: ex-convicts ( no matter what the charge is)

Im sorry, but Please stop this process .

There are not enough services like medical, dental, mental health issues and hospital beds for the current population let alone transient people who will have a need for assistance. Build in a Liberal seat.
Parking and public transport services are almost non existent.
Safety of neighbouring children will be impeded.

South Shellharbour Beach is not a suitable site for parachute landing operations. It is located within the training area for YSHL, and this area has been a training area for over 30 years, not 20 years as mentioned elsewhere. The Danger Zone created around these areas essentially puts a 2 nautical mile diameter column of airspace up to the ATC step into Sydney at 7500' high, and in a training area this makes no sense at all. There has already been a parachute drop zone established in Stuart Park, adjacent to Northbeach, Wollongong at approximately 10 nm from the airfield, which works reasonably well, and can be accommodated as the area is far enough away from YSHL not to interfere with operations at the airfield, and it essentially deals with transitory aircraft, moving north and south along the coast while the Shellharbour/Bass Point area has transitory aircraft as well as high intensity advanced and ab initio training, aircraft endorsements, Biennial Flight Reviews and the like, which if compounded by an associated danger zone (apparently not mentioned in the DA submission) and possibly upto 8 canopies descending in that space on a regular basis creates an intolerable safety risk.

This development is needed to provide safe affordable housing to the most vulnerable people in our community. This would go some way to improving the homelessness situation in our area.

Bring it on. Not everyone can afford a roof over their head in the current climate.

I reject any proposal for high density living within the Shellharbour Council area. It’s unacceptable it’s poor planning there’s not enough room for people or their cars. How do you possibly get .02 of a car ??? and when you fine someone do you do you do you give them .02 of a fine. This is a money grabbing greedy development and should be totally rejected by the council. Cramping so many people into a tiny block of land is gonna lead to social problems.

I too, strongly oppose this proposed DA. Shellharbour South Beach and Pioneer Park are both areas that are regularly utilised by local schools, sporting clubs/teams and community members and would severely impact the accessibility of these spaces to the general public. Many local schools use this area to coordinate physical activity and play as do local sporting teams, for training and games. Removing or decreasing this space for public use will be detrimental to the Shellharbour community and the active areas it provides. Shellharbour is a growing community and providing sufficient spaces for people to be active is essential for the health and well-being of all. I am also concerned about the safety of the community, if this area was to become a “drop zone.” It is close to major roads and, in the case of Pioneer Park, a large intersection which is a source of distraction to drivers and pedestrians which may increase the number of road accidents. Furthermore, it’s proximity to the local skate park is not ideal.

Limiting beach use for the sake of a drop zone is not ideal, particularly when Shellharbour beaches during summer are already quite crowded and we already have an existing drop zone in Wollongong.

As a local community member, I strongly oppose the proposed DA.

This type of development is completely at odds with this, essentially low-density, residential area of Shellharbour Village. This proposal would not provide green space for the 22 residents, nor adequate parking spaces. This overdevelopment is not suited to the Shellharbour Village community.

To knock down this charming beach cottage and replace it with 11 room Boarding House is just heart breaking.

This proposed over-development is completely out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. I strongly oppose this development and urge council to keep Shellharbour Village - a village.

In the interests of safety I wish to submit my objections to the DA. As the operator of one of the local flight training organizations based out of Shellhabour aerodrome, who regularly utilises the designated flight training area of Shellhabour / Bass Point which is where the proposed DA is located. Not only does the DA proposal impede on the Pilot Training area it also imposes on the YSHL circuit area as well as infringing on the YSHL circling area and a number of the IFR approach / missed approach flight paths and does not comply with the minimum safe separation standards enforced by Airservices Australia.
The clear lack of communications with the appropriate authorities (APF / CASA / ASA etc.) and local aerodrome operators is deeply concerning.
Had a thorough safety analysis been conducted on this particular submission I am confident that the results would show the proposed location would not be a viable option based on the findings of the safety analysis alone.
I strongly oppose the proposed DA.

I agree with Andrew's comment of 3 days ago as there is a parachute Drop Zone which already exists in Wollongong which is sufficient. The new proposed Drop Zone is in the area which is used for three Shellharbour based flying training operations and has been so for at least 20 years. I have no problem with the existing DZ at Stewart Park as it’s 10 miles north of the airport and is a designated Danger Area.

As a student pilot I am horrified that someone might suddenly drop through the area I train in.

I too have serious concerns for aviation safety. The local airspace environment is already congested with flight training both from Shellharbour Airport and other nearby aerodromes. Further, there is already an established, high volume drop zone only 10nm (5min flight time) to the north and Nowra military restricted airspace to the south. If this was to go ahead we would have another significant risk factor right in the center of the busiest part of our flight training area. This would mean a student pilot could only reasonably expect to be able to fly in a straight line for at best 2min 30sec before coming into conflict with a airspace threat. There are a multitude of human performance and limitations, airspace structure and regulatory compliance factors that clearly demonstrate this not practical or smart planning by any stretch of the imagination. I am more than happy to elaborate further in the correct forum.

I have a serious concern about the placement of the Drop Zone for the proposed parachute operation. It is in the area which is used for three Shellharbour based flying training operations and has been so for at least 20 years. I have no problem with the existing DZ at Stewart Park as it’s 10 miles north of the airport and is a designated Danger Area.

I know that any proposed new parachuting operation needs the approval of the Australian Parachute Federation and my enquiries of APF have suggested they have not received any application to establish a new operation in the Shellharbour area. APF approval is conditional on having land owner permission so it requires both bodies to approve.

I believe this would be a detriment to the privacy and the building would obstruct the natural light entering into the dwellings beside and behind this property.

Hello,

is this application to confirm our Final Occ Certificate, which was recently issued?

Regards

Jim Rawlings

0407930278

I support this development application as both myself and mywife have started looking for a place like this for my parents . As they are getting older and need housing that is flat and close to services and acces to public transport and places for social getherings , clubs and eateries .I believe development like these are more personal and don't look and feel like a nursing home . Astetically the buildings look to fit in with the area and look modern .

FYI. Image displayed shows a Garage on Addison Lane, not Addison Ave.

As own the adjoining property, wish to obtain more details, plans on this development.

I have significant concerns regarding the increased traffic/ personal safety and lack of parking for cars linked to multi housing development, in Timbs Road as well as the lack of kerb and guttering for stormwater runoff.
The lakeside (Panorama/Shane Lee Oval side) of Timbs Road is constantly requiring gravel to be relaid as it is being washed into the stormwater system when reasonable falls of rain are experienced. The edge of the road way is then subject to erosion.
Since the construction of townhouses at 16, 14 and 12 Timbs Road and the multi dwelling construction at 2 Timbs Road and ?16 the Esplanade-there has been a significant increase in vehicular traffic to the street. This street provides a direct path for many students to both the primary school (Balarang) and Oak Flats High school.
I note that there have also been recent issues with sewerage infrastructure-is this correct? I respectfully ask that you consider these issues when looking at this submission.

Could you please ensure the build matches the plans, shading already covers us and we don’t want to lose the little sun we have. Also keep an eye on distance to fence line please.

This is very good news for residents of Addison Ave, the previous second hand furniture shop was an eyesore with 2nd hand furniture placed all over the footpaths every day. Hopefully the exterior and the back yard of the building will be improved. It currently has graffiti all over the brick walls and garbage amongst long grass at the back of the building.

May I ask when and where the plans may be viewed please?

Could you please advise where plans for this development can be viewed.