Council archive · source document
PM Submission - Paul Noonan - MCU25/0118
Ct. In such a circumstance LMD would be cut preventing access between Cooroy and Lake
Macdonald/Swift Drive (and to Wilgee Court and Dianella Court (inc C2B)).
There’s no retardation of hill stormwater by site vegetation any more. Flooding in the
environmental reserve below Dianella Court after this hill development remains a concern.
6) Car-Parking, Traffic and Safety
Not enough car parking
The DA only proposes 25 + 6 = 31 car parks. One visitor car per 4 units. This is inadequate
as parking needs could easily be exceeded and spill cars onto Dianella Court. This could be
dangerous if parking occurs near the proposed new road off Dianella Court into 64 LMD (of
more below). 15 x 1 bed + 10 x 2 bed units could alone mean 35 cars (15x1 + 10x2) before
visitors or tradesmen with large or long vehicles. Others using the common (tenant only
exclusive) area could easily bring more vehicles. C2B need more car parks on site.
Poor sight lines on Dianella Court
Council must plan to keep overflow parked cars out of Dianella Court. Overflow car parking
onto Dianella court will raise the ire of the locals as a safety concern. Cars coming out of the
new development intersection into Dianella Court will likely not have a clear view looking to
south (direction the existing residents come down Dianella Court) because they have to come
out past No 2 Dianella Court, and any parked vehicles, before they will be able to see if any
traffic is coming down the street. The RPS Town Planning Report just said there are clear
sight lines looking to the north east, and never mentioned looking south down Dianella Court,
so concluded no sight line problem. This is an error.
Unwanted cemetery through traffic: it appears the road reserve created under RAL25/0004 on
the C2B southern boundary will bring future cemetery traffic into Dianella Ct. This is
contrary to what residents were told by Council staff at various times. We do not want our
intersection becoming a passageway for so much residential traffic let alone cemetery
shortcut traffic This has not been modelled in Council’s (one-night mini) traffic study in Nov
24 ostensibly for the whole 64 LMD development but before the cemetery second access
road provision. This ‘road reserve’ on C2B’s southern boundary was sold to us as a green
space footway in face to face meetings with Council.
3.1.1 And Appendix C: Garbage service: This requires the truck to do a 3 point turn to
service the proposed 6 x 1100L bins. It appears the bins need to be manually handled (rolled)
by the truck driver before emptying. This sounds like a half thought out proposal, noisy and
cumbersome.
9
Document Set ID: 24329288
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalUsed in these records
PM Submission - Paul Noonan - MCU25/0118Related documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 739 KB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.