Waverley Bowling Club 163 Birrell Street Waverley NSW 2024

Demolition of existing structures, construction of new bowling greens, seniors living developement and childcare centre associated basement carparking and landscaping

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Waverley Council, reference DA-483/2018)


Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Stephen Burns commented

    At it again Easts ?

    This development was voted against 2:1 by members of the club last year at a specially convened meeting.

    Easts promised upgrade of club facilities when the merger of the bowling club and Easts occurred but none have been done apart from safety responsibilities.

    This development is against member wishes and should be rejected outright until members have agreed as to what facilities will be delivered for its members and not just for Easts Leagues club profit.

  2. Catharine Munro commented

    I hope Waverley council does the right thing and ensures a proper consultation period after the holiday period. Not a good look to put it through now.

  3. Clinton Reilly commented

    This should be put through a proper consultation process after the holidays and not put through during the period around Christmas when few people are available to give it proper consultation.

    There is almost nothing on the Waverley Council page detailing the proposal, so residents cannot comment effectively. This is not how it should be.

    This development was voted against 2:1 by members of the club last year at a specially convened meeting.

    This development is against member wishes and should be rejected outright until members have agreed as to what facilities will be delivered for its members and not just for Easts Leagues club profit.


  4. M Gray commented

    I trust that the deciding bodies will give people adequate time to respond. Trying to sneak it through over Christmas is rather disrespectful.

  5. Marc Schregardus commented

    This is typical of the underhanded techniques that Easts have already shown themselves to be more than capable of using. They are hell bent on destroying a community asset, that the community - despite the best efforts of Easts - has clearly said they don't want destroyed. Sickened - although not surprised - to see them trying sneak this through over Christmas. Hopefully Waverley Council are not as corrupt as Easts clearly are, and will delay this so that it can be given proper consideration - and rejected again.

  6. Bernadette Hayes commented

    Very disappointing to see this DA lodged just before Christmas. The sensitive issue of the development of this much-loved community asset should be given adequate time for consideration outside of the holiday period.

  7. AM Taylor commented

    I agree with the sentiments here. Very disappointing that this DA would be lodged just before the holiday period. It fractures the community further if the opportunity for due process and consideration isn’t provided and will only strengthen the resolve of objectors.

  8. Lisa Griffiths commented

    Very disappointing that East's are trying to underhand the residents. The development has clearly been voted NO by a poll last year 2:1 and would be voted NO again. This application is a a misrepresentation of what they really want to do as we have seen previously. I would be disappointed if Waverley Council agree to it.

  9. Tamera Lang commented

    No documents, no notification to neighbouring properties, just a $83 million estimated cost and lodged at a time of year designed to minimise public comment.
    It's disgraceful.

  10. M. Paskal commented

    I have no confidence in Waverley Council’s ability/desire to support residents. There must be consultation and all pertinent details laid out for public to see. Developers will not listen or go away. This is a community resource and must be protected.

  11. Jen commented

    Very underhanded to do this over the Xmas period and when there is a negative sentiment and people are away.
    Leave the assets alone developers and let people of Waverley enjoy more of a community feel in this overdeveloped area

  12. Fred Johanssen commented

    East's poses as an NRL-based community organisation but the Property management are in it for maximum profit. The token "public benefits" in this untimely DA are distractions. Locals have fought long & hard against this site's redevelopment, and will oppose this DA to the hilt. No, no and NO!

  13. Alexander Sharp commented

    The comments all indicate
    1. that there has been no community consultation
    2. that there has been no notification of neighbours, including club members
    3. that this application and the way it has been made - timed for a holiday period - is not open, or fair.
    The fact that on the Council website it is stated that there are:
    1. "No Documents Currently Available"
    2. "No properties notified at this stage." and
    3. "No responses at this stage." Despite a list of 12 objections/comments which is slowly growing from disappointed and angry Waverley Residents, hopefully only demonstrating that the Council is on holidays and not that objectors are being ignored and this application is being rushed through without the necessary considerations.
    It is clear that there are strong objections to this proposal which will affect the amenity of this public resource for the future.
    As Fred Johanssen says " The token "public benefits" in this untimely DA are distractions. Locals have fought long & hard against this site's redevelopment, and will oppose this DA to the hilt."

  14. Jimbo H commented

    Just before Christmas? What a joke! Mean, nasty and un-Australian. It's absurd that Waverley Council have facilitated this underhanded, sneaky DA application that has blighted the peaceful enjoyment of Christmas and hopes for the New Year for so many people! If this very low blow is an example of how these particular developers operate, Waverley residents might wish to question the equity and equality of the DA application & objection process. The original DA was refused by members - what's changed? Nothing!
    I call on Waverley Council to close DA submissions in mid December and re-open in mid January to stop this situation occurring in future! It's the same as the old lawyers trick - email the opposing party at 5pm on a Friday afternoon!
    If I wanted to see low-down underarm bowling I'd watch a replay of Chappell's last bowl against NZ in the 1981 cricket match!

  15. Heather Payne commented

    Dear Waverly council, I have good faith that you are better than this and that you will listen , for a second time, the concerns of the residents and the members and represent them and not the Easts corporation. Thank you in advance for doing this.

  16. Rachel Daly commented

    Ref Number: DA-483/2018

    Why has it been submitted a few days before Xmas when there is no one around to object / comment
    There are no documents available to peruse on the website either.....
    Not very helpful...
    It looks like they are trying very hard to hide something....

  17. Kendall Strachan commented

    This consultation process should be after the holidays and not put through during the period around Christmas when majority of people are away.

    The Waverley Council page detailing the proposal is limited at best. Residents cannot comment effectively / correctly. Poor form.

    This development was voted against 2:1 by members of the club last year at a specially convened meeting.

    This development is against member wishes and should be rejected outright until members have agreed as to what facilities will be delivered for its members and not just for Easts Leagues club profit.

  18. Natalie F commented

    Dear Waverley Council,

    The proposal's timing of submission creates the perception of intending to avoid scrutiny by local residents. I trust that Waverley Council will rerun the submission/commence a consultation period with local residents commencing mid to end of January and running as per standard practise.

    Given the history of the location and the Waverley Councillors and committees ongoing commitment to transparent governance this is not optional but mandatory.


  19. Christina Erskine commented

    Dear Waverley Council,

    This proposal being submitted 20 Dec last year and being available to residents for review over the Christmas period is not reflective of adequate community consultation. The submission should have the period of review notably extended.

    As an East Leagues Club member I rejected this proposal along with many other fellow members as it would take away a valuable community asset. As was suggested, upgrades to the facilities should be made and it be kept as totally publically accessible.

    Finally, there are no documents published on the Waverley Council website that allow us to review what is being proposed. Surely this is a requirement?

    Thank you

  20. Bridget Elliot commented

    Re DA-438/2018: Dear Waverley Council, we presume we will very soon be able to formally lodge our concerns as per due process? We note that on a visit to Waverley Council’s customer service centre today (January 2) there is a model of the proposed redevelopment for the Waverley Bowling site. It is a very concerning model: a multi-storey development on the corner of Henrietta and Bitrell Streets. Please urgently advise when the appropriate documents will be available to residents and club members. Thank you.

  21. Gael Stewart commented

    Dear Waverley Council
    As per above very concerned about the timing of this DA and impact of such a massive development in an already highly congested area. The roads surrounding this development are chocked to capacity. I look forward to a stringent examination of the impact of extra traffic for this high density development done not on a quiet day in a holiday period but during peck traffic hours particularly once schools are back in February! Also shadowing from top down and visa versa please. Thanking you.

  22. Steven McDonald commented

    I think these developments are looking great, the council have thought of everything in regards to the surrounding community, change is inevitable, and this looks great.

  23. Mia commented

    Very concerned about the timing of this application and the removal of an important community asset. So many bowling clubs have been demolished to make way for residential properties in the Eastern suburbs. If the club is to be removed then an asset that the community can use should take it's place. Look at the Acre in the Inner West or the Greens in North Sydney. If community asset are being taken then new developments should only be green spaces or for the benefit of the community. They are already an over population in Bondi with traffic jams, insufficient parks for our kids to plsy, and here we go again more people without consideration of the impact on infrastructure. I vote no

  24. Jennifer commented

    I am very concerned about this project. There are way too many apartments and projects around, the traffic and parking will be worst and it is already bad.

    This club should be replace for something that bring benefit to the community.

    I totally disagree with this proposal and I would like to know what the community can do to avoid its approval.

  25. Margaret McGreal commented

    Easts are a business with a clever idea for getting their application through while potential opponents are distracted. However it is up to the council, that should represent the whole community, (and not the vested interests of one organisation) to manage this and ensure that community expectations are met. It’s Waverley Council’s opportunity to stand up and truly listen to the community.

  26. Philip and Janet Bell commented

    Both the 'process' and the actual development proposed are appalling. The prospect of another 180 residents and their vehicles next to Waverley College is too dire to think about: Traffic is already gridlocked from Council Street to Murray Street along Birrell Street for several hours each day. There is little or no parking for Waverley residents using the excellent facilities of Waverley oval. The College already causes considerable congestion, and access to Bondi Junction is very slow most of the time, even for the much loved bus service (used by commuters and retirees especially).

    This proposal is designed only to enrich Easts Leagues club.

    It should be opposed by every Waverley councillor.

  27. T Craven commented

    The Heritage Report indicates that the Waverley Bowling club demolished some beautiful and historic buildings (Preston, St Gabriel's school) in the 1960s to build the club and bowling green which was disappointing to find out. However the current DA plans show a massive 6 story building completely out of character with the area. Estimated cost of work $83,042,442. The developer's own traffic report shows a NETT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC GENERATION POTENTIAL: 88 vph(AM) 154 vph (PM). The cumulative impact of this development along with other developments will increase the already unacceptable traffic congestion in the area. It is zoned RE2 so how is it that a high density aged care development can be built on the site? (RE2 Private Recreation provides a wide range of recreational activities on land that is privately owned. Other uses however are substantially limited.)

  28. Mike commented

    Additional traffic and roads clogged already.
    Using open space and community facilities for more development and housing/care facilities..
    Not in the communities best interest and should not be allowed.

  29. Stephen Walker commented

    Yet again we see that Easts do not respect the decision of it own members in regard to any development of this site. Yet again we see Easts try to overturn the wishes the local community and its own members.

    Issues such as traffic congestion are a major concern with the area being inundated with traffic during school days. The traffic along Birrell Street is bad enough throughout the week without the added stress that this development will bring. Parking will be another issue around the area with little or no parking available at the moment for residents and their visitors.
    The height of the buildings will cause shadows to the nearby neighbours and the whole area will change from a lovely open space to yet another high rise in an area that has already enough large developments.
    I strenuously object to this development application and trust that the council will vote this application down and respect the wishes of the local community.

  30. Paul barton commented

    As attendees of St Mary’s and local residents we vehemently object to a such a development that serves some to the detriment of an entire suburb. What studies don’t show are the butterfly effects of these developments. Employee parking, visitor parking etc etc at the centre causes immediate congestion, parking issues in the surrounding streets with ripple effects for many streets around the area. You have children at St Mary’s and youths at the college - let’s add twice the traffic and see what happens to the safety profile within a 500m radius of the development. Listen to the people Waverley.

  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