All recent comments on applications from Singleton Council, NSW

I am the owner of this property, this comment is in response to Mr Nilsson’s comments which are frivolous and without basis.
1. The water line of the pool is located 2m from boundary fence line, 1m greater that the lawful minimum distance.
2. This entire estate is zoned R5 with a requirement that all boundary fences are post and rail. Privacy is limited because of this. This did not stop Mr Nilsson installing a pool of his own in direct line of sight from our Loungeroom/back door/alfresco area. His privacy concerns are questionable on that basis. Regardless, he has failed to mention there have been privacy screens erected between the two properties for some time now which address that issue.
3. Yes, our children can climb as most can. That’s why laws exist regarding safety fencing around pools, which this pool will have. Ridiculous comment.
4. Mr Nilsson has Guinea fowl on his property, he is in no position to complain about noise. The children are in some form of school 4 to 5 days a week. They play in the backyard like most other children. We are not living in a retirement village. Another ridiculous comment given the constant noise generated from his property.
5. A sound proof high fence. No such fence exists for a residential area. We have already considered a solid safety fence on his side for purely for additional privacy so not to be subjected to seeing him in speedo’s around his pool. The pool fence on Mr Nilsson’s side will be 900mm from the boundary as per the plans. It will not impact him at all as his 2.4m high privacy screen extends well beyond either end of the proposed pool fence.
6. 1 metre from the boundary line - that’s just simply a false statement. Had he read the plans properly he would realise that.

This pool has been planned within all the regulations. His comments are simply without any basis and designed to harass due to a complaint we lodged with Singleton Council regarding the ongoing noise of his Guinea fowl.

We have great concerns, there is limited space between the back fence and we're they are locating the pool.
Fencing is post and rail, there is absolutely no privacy, they have 3 small children that climb which is a safety concern in itself and there are noise concerns. A sound proof high fence should be a consideration in this case for all parties concerned. The 1 mtr from the boundary line we feel is totally inappropriate in this case for the above reasons.

It would be appropriate, that someone from council come out and have a look and make an assessment.

Can you please supply more information regarding 4 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision, submission, 8.2022.92.1, the information via the portal is absent of detail ? Can you please supply detailed plans of proposal sub- vision ie lot sizing. & drainage..

Residents of Minimbah Drive, Whittingham in the past haven’t been personally & appropriately notified of Singleton council past subdivisional developments. I’m disappointed in lot sizing, being too small, for example planning surrounding Coachman’s Drive, Settlers & Rosemount. Past planning & the approvals by Singleton Council is poor and is impacting the Environment ie fauna & flora ie , Residents, Heritage and is degrading of the landscape.

Neighboring properties in the Minimbah area need to be personally consulted by mail & supplied with detailed information as it impacts OUR immediate environment & resident should have the right to a say as to how many homes will be added to our immediate area in the future...

Kind Regards

Michael Payne

To whom it may concern,
Having experience working on both egg and meat bird farms, I categorically disapprove of this development on the grounds of environment, noise, effluent, road safety, animal welfare and amenity of the area.
The area is used for grazing. It is undulating. The creek is home to various endangered wildlife, including platypus, species of fish and mussels. The creek is not a continuous flowing creek, having gone dry in the 2019 drought. If this development goes ahead, the creek will have large volumes of water drawn from it for both, drinking water and cooling of the birds. Their is simply not enough water in the creek to provide for a commercial poultry facility. Any increased useage by this development will detract from water availability and quality to those downstream.

The dead birds will pose a threat to the environment as well, unless properly disposed of. Any leakage of the decaying birds or their manure , will further endanger the creek, and it's downstream users.

The area is a quiet rural area. It does not have a lot of traffick. Goorangoola Creek Road is a narrow bitumen road which has not been constructed to a standard that will support the volume of heavy trucks delivering feed, chickens/pullets, collecting eggs or birds for slaughter. These noise and feathers from these trucks will disturb the rural amenity, and litter the roadside with feathers. There are a number of causeways on Goorangoola Creek Road, some of which are quite slippery from being submerged. These are highly likely to be sites of accidents and will further endanger the creek.

Road safety will be comprised to local residents from the increased volume of heavy trucks using the road. The road is narrow and winding and if this development us approved, there is a highly likelihood of death and injuries occuring.

Council should also consider the animal welfare factor in making a difference on this development. Do we need factory farming in this area ? I say not. Birds crammed in unnaturally in ventilated sheds which continuously blow dust and feather particles into the wind for distribution onto neighbours properties. The constant use of electricity to regulate the pattern of feeding/laying/growth will further contribute to the warming climate, as well as create noise and disturbance to neighbours. The lack of water to facilitate animal well being has been already mentioned. In the last drought, cattle graziers were forced to truck water in to support their cattle. Where will this extra water come from ?

The smell from these facilities will be abhorrent. I know what these places smell like. They can NOT be kept fresh due to the buildup of bird faeces. The removal of this matter at the end of a cycle of production will create further problems, either storing and distribution on site, or from more trucks being used to remove the waste. Again dust, noise and spillage will ruin the tranquility of the neighbours.

These big chicken farms have massive problems with controlling rats and mice as feed and water is available to the vermin 24 hours a day. They cannot be controlled by baits as they are not hungry. They can't be trapped either as they do want to take the bait. This vermin issue will also plague neighbours.

The Goorangoola Creek area is NOT suited to this type of development.

I will oppose this development, and any like it.

Please explain to our community why this DA rwquires notifcication,yet DA 22/2018 SES monstrosity is on record by your planning department DID NOT require notification ?

Please explain why this DA requires notification,when your planning department has legally stated on record DA 22/2018 DID NOT require notification ?

Why does a carport require notification,when DA 22/2018 sub division does not require notification as recorded by your department ?

We have no problem with this application for food & drink premises going ahead. We can only see it as a bonus for the Hunter community to enjoy High Tea.

No DA notification was sent out to affected neighbours.This building is not permitted on a R1 residential lot.This building proposed development is a direct contravention of Policy 4.19. It does not respect local
context and street pattern or, in particular, the scale and proportions of surrounding buildings, and would be
entirely out of the character of the area, to the detriment of the local environment.”

No DA notification was sent out to affected neighbours.This building is not permitted on a R1 residential lot.This building proposed development is a direct contravention of Policy 4.19. It does not respect local
context and street pattern or, in particular, the scale and proportions of surrounding buildings, and would be
entirely out of the character of the area, to the detriment of the local environment.”

Permissible,sensible,compliant, and compatible development. Approval supported.

I have studied the site and read the proposal including the Statement of Environmental Effects. I believe this proposal is based on sound planning principles; is practical; and economically sound.It also complies with the principles of the Hermitage Road Planning Study.

Dennis C. Eldridge M.Bus. HDA FAPI F.Fin.

Registered Valuer and Rural Finance Consultant
Registration No. 274
Certified Practising Valuer
Certified Practising Valuer (Bus)
Certified Property Practitioner (Fin)