30-32 Glebe Street Randwick NSW 2031

Demolition of existing structure, construction of proposed new 6 dwelling residential flat building over three storeys with basement parking for 12 vehicles

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website over 1 year ago. It was received by them 1 day earlier.

(Source: Randwick City Council, reference DA/855/2018)


Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Tania Craven commented

    I object to the demolition of this beautiful large freestanding Federation house in excellent condition with surrounding gardens. This will detract from the character of the area. The cumulative impact of multiple developments in the area will increase traffic congestion, place increasing pressure on schools and hospitals. The heritage report by Urbis, a company that specialises in "heritage" reports for demolition states that there are multiple intact features in the house with a largely intact and beautifully preserved facade. They then recommend demolition because there are have been some additions, despite the fact that very few houses will not have minor changes.

    Residents should be aware that current Randwick Council planning laws allow three story development throughout most of Randwick which will eventually transform an area characterised by charming heritage houses and semis into one characterised by 3 story apartment buildings for developer profit.

  2. Matt Delfendahl commented

    Don't forget the profit made by the owner of the house who sold for $4.5m plus. The owner made a more by selling to developers. But I agree that this house is stunning and worth preserving. Some unusual decicisions were made in 2012 when the new zoning was put in place across the council area. I can't see why this house wouldn't have had a preservation order placed over it. I live in a R3 zoned house. My house was built in 1898. It has beautiful internal features and some additions. But is not in preservation category. I see we need to allow a mix of density of housing and can't complain about flats being built next door. We do live in an inner circle of a major city. But we also need to preserve heritage and beauty. 30 Glebe St is both. Just a walk down Macquarie St show you how heritage buildings sit alongside skyscrapers.

  3. Patrice Panagopoulos commented

    Randwick Council is very lax when it comes to protecting beautiful heritage homes. So many federation houses in their area have been demolished for ugly box style developments devoid of any architectural merit. This beautiful example of a Federation house exemplifies the period with its sandstone foundations, dark face brick facade and gabled windows, superbly preserved in well landscaped gardens with mature trees. It is also located in a street filled with similarly historical houses, creating a streetscape that should be safeguarded not destroyed. All these houses need Heritage listings placed on them now to protect them from future development. This house especially should be issued an interim Heritage protection order. This house has only a minor tasteful extension and Urbis, as supposedly respected heritage consultants, should be ashamed of themselves to support its demolition and refute that there are any aspects of character that are worth keeping. I hope Randwick Council's own heritage expert rightfully disagrees and this DA is refused.

  4. Glyn Craven commented

    This is the first time I have ever made a submission about a DA. However I was shocked when I walked past this original freestanding Federation house in obviously excellent condition on a quiet back street away from traffic corridors to find a Development Application for demolition and construction of apartments posted with only a few days to made a submission.

    There have been several developments in our area and it is obvious that over the last 5 years the traffic congestion in the area has significantly worsened, yet Council has no overarching plan of traffic management.

    I object to this development due to loss of amenity, inappropriate nature of the development in Glebe St, the loss of yet another freestanding Federation House in excellent condition, and the cumulative impact of this and other developments on traffic and general amenity in the area.

    The developer has paid for a heritage statement which has obvious conflicts of interest. The Heritage Statement indicates that the house is in excellent condition with mostly original features then talks up some minor additions as an excuse for demolition. The council should place an interim heritage order on this

    The council should place an interim Heritage order to allow independent heritage assessment.

  5. Bill Green commented

    This stunning house is in excellent condition and is a reminder of what a grand suburb Randwick once was with many such houses.
    Council seems to regard any building as a contender for demolition if the price is right.
    Besides what a crime it would be to demolish such a building we only have to look at the mess that the current planning laws are causing.
    Any block of six with underground parking will often have residents with two cars not one, parking is already a nightmare around here and when the huge development in Alison Road off Carrington Road has sold or rented it will be impossible for residents without a parking space to park.
    This building should be preserves.

  6. Judy eriksson commented

    The Glebe St development is the perfect example of how totally out of touch this planning committee and this council are with its community(rate payers) and will hopefully feel the full impact of these very poor planning decisions and for allowing the over development of our suburb come election time. Enough is enough

  7. L Goodman commented

    What a bizarre heritage report - it seems to suggest that because it has a modern kitchen and bathroom it's not worthy of preservation. It's very disappointing if the council relies on reports prepared on behalf of a developer which is clearly biased in favour of the developer wishing to demolish a beautiful federation house.

    I object to this development.

  8. Katrina D commented

    I object to the demolition of this beautiful large freestanding Federation house in excellent condition with surrounding gardens. With so many medium density in the area we need homes such as that for air and light. Just because the owners did not have the foresight to make it heritage does not mean that it is not and not worth preserving.

    In addition you are adding to traffic stresses in the area as well as visual and noise pollution. At what point do you listen to the ratepayers and people over the developers? With all these developments going ahead with private certifiers and Council not monitoring builders how long before we have our own Opal Towers disaster? We have already had the issue when the apartment block on frenchmans road fell onto Barrett Place Cottage. How long before the next major issue for an unsuspecting homeowner? Enough!

  9. Marianne Kander commented

    I recall very well granting my vote to the currently elected planning committee which held strong views on preserving Randwick landscape and therefore, I look forward to seeing the committee working very hard on this matter and in favour of good and healthy living. Glebe Street is already very congested and becoming too risky for people and children, walking, crossing, playing, biking and simply enjoying the outdoors. Don’t make this mistake by supporting this application. Listen carefully to these comments and assess your decision accordingly. Allowing to replace this federation house with a block of units would be hugely detrimental to what we believe to be a ‘sense of community’.

  10. Annie De Merindol commented

    Randwick Council, please, do not let this development go ahead. How are we to grow our identity as a modern Australia if we continue to allow developers to destroy significant, foundation properties like this? These homes are our modern history. Once they’re gone, they’re gone forever. It’s heart breaking. Forward motion for the sake of forward motion and commercial interests. I grew up in Paddington and have lived in Randwick Council area for 15yrs and am feeling despondent. I am sure you’ve been made aware by other objectors of all of the home’s historically significant features, architects, occupants, etc so I won’t list them here. I beg you, please, to just STOP and consider what kind of messages you would be sending to developers, to residents, to our children, and theirs, if you allow this development to proceed. It’s a matter of national importance. Have the courage to say ‘Enough is enough’.

  11. Danielle Holden commented

    Beautiful old house should be kept. We do not need any more apartments in the area. End of story. I do not want to live in Hong Kong style apartment land. Put it back on the market, I'm sure someone would buy it and keep it as is.

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts