2B West Street Lewisham NSW 2049

***secpp***

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Inner West Council (Marrickville), reference DA201800505)

8 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Jo Hobson commented

    My objections to proposed development DA201800505 at 2B West St, Lewisham:
    1) The development heights from 5 to 12 storeys are too high;
    2) Traffic on West and surrounding local streets are already slow-moving because of recent residential developments on the other side of Parramatta Road in Leichhardt AND proposed Petersham RSL providing 356 apartments with 150 car spaces AND the huge Lewisham West residential complex at Summer Hill.
    3) Local infrastructure, eg health services and public transport are already not coping;
    4) Parking problems along West Street and other local streets are already not coping;
    5) Impact on Petersham Park with increase pressure on amenities.

  2. Robert Davidson commented

    The development is inappropriate in scale to the site and available facilities and infrastructure.

    When Lewisham Hospital was closed it was clear that, while there was a clear need for expanded community facilities across Sydney, the temptation to use a large site to concentrate all manner of services and expand them to serve a Sydney-wide catchment needed to be tempered by sensible limits. Those limits need to be maintained for the amenity of the users of the complex as well as Lewisham residents.

  3. N Wheeler commented

    I second Jo Hobson's submission and emphasise the lack of infrastructure, facilities, amenities and increased traffic and congestion in the area.

  4. anne mcdougall commented

    I object to the proposed redevelopment due to its size and height. It is out of keeping with all low rise development in and around Petersham Park. The redevelopment will cause overshadowing to the single stores properties that surround the site as well as to the park. The increase in traffic will overwhelm already congested streets and impact greatly on already congested light rail and heavy rail services.

  5. Soren-Dane Homme commented

    My objection to the proposal, as already stated, lewisham & petersham stations are not being upgraded with lifts, making access to trains some what problematic for elderly,mobility restricted or disabled persons, it’s higher by two storeys than what exists at lewisham west, and on a rise in topography, the shadow of the 12 & 9 storey towers I’ll impact on sunlight to Marist school behind sight with vitamin d levels already an issue for kids. One bus route that’s not that regular. No nearby shopping, there’s market place, but doubt those living in development will opt to walk it.

    No social housing aspect to proposal.
    No upgrade to intersection at west street & overhead railway bridge. And from the artist impression given, just plain ugly.

  6. Scott MacArthur commented

    The Society is generally supportive of this proposal, but has concerns that the height and density of the proposed buildings could be used by private residential developers as a justification for high density development in the area. The Society acknowledges that the applicant has retained the most heritage significant buildings on the site. These buildings should be retained in perpetuity and a sinking fund established for their ongoing maintenance and enhancement. The provision of aged care and retirement options in the Inner West is vitally important for local residents. The prospect of having to leave the area one has lived in as one ages and become less independent is distressing, and all too common. This development promises to provide an opportunity for local people to transition from independent living to supported care within the neighbourhoods that are familiar and supportive of them.
    However the special conditions of aged independent and supported care, will mean that the impact on surrounding areas are minimal. Comparable private residential developments would have considerably greater parking requirements and traffic generation effects and should not be permitted to use this development as a precinct exemplar or justification.
    Marrickville Heritage Society

  7. Helen Barnes commented

    I object to proposed development DA201800505 at 2B West St, Lewisham.
    The proposed building heights are too high for the area and will overshadow the neighbourhood.
    Petersham Park is an historic low rise area. This will dominate and crowd the area, reducing amenity for other residents and park users. It will add to noise, traffic, crowding and pollution.
    It is also an ugly building that will detract from the current Federation era streetscape.

  8. Joshua Broderick commented

    I object to proposed development DA201800505 at 2B West St, Lewisham. Particularly I am concerned about the height of the building and the impact on the aesthetic of the area and negatively impact on the wonderful, beautiful, community binding park that is Petersham Park. One of the best things about the park is you can be in it and forget where you are. With a massive 12 storey building overbearing onto it, that would be ruined, forever.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Inner West Council (Marrickville). They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is part of the digital library from the local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small 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