30 Firth Street, Arncliffe NSW 2205

Demolition of existing structures and construction of a five (5) storey mixed use building comprising ground floor retail and a boarding house containing 15 rooms including manager's room

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website about 2 months ago. It was received by them 3 days earlier.

(Source: Bayside Council (Rockdale), reference DA-2019/354)

8 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Daniel Findley commented

    So lets be clear. Is the Bayside Council plan for Arncliffe Village basically going to be to allow all of the old heritage shop fronts to be knocked down for boarding houses? How does this fit into the council's 2030 strategic plan which states that "Our heritage and history is valued and respected".

  2. James Norris commented

    Have to agree with Daniel. My understanding was always that the Arncliffe village shopfronts have heritage significance as advocated by residents & council! Therefore I don't understand why an application of this nature which entails demolishing of these shopfronts and the creation of a 5 storey monstrosity totally out of sync with the adjoining village character would even be considered. COUNCIL PLS EXPLAIN !

  3. Germana Eckert commented

    This development is not in keeping with the area in terms of height, style, and building type and purpose. In addition, Queen street, where the parking entry and exit is located, is a dead-end street which is not suitable infrastructure to support the extra traffic for this development. Also, the area services the local community mainly with retail, and the number of on-site parking spaces is inadequate. The boarders will take up public car spaces which are now used for customers, which means the businesses in the area will suffer. Finally, there has been no regard in the plans for the heritage facade of the current building to be kept.

  4. Anna Angelakis commented

    Why is there total disregard of the heritage facade? The local community have spoken time and again voicing their concerns in regard to losing our valuable local character buildings. Also, this development is not in keeping with the area in terms of height, style, and building type and purpose. How does this fit into the Council's 2030 strategic plan which states that "Our heritage and history is valued and respected". Facadism can be successful incorporated into new builds if it means retaining the valuable heritage architecture eg 400 George St Sydney, the old Darrell Lee shopfront was retained and incorporated into the now Telstra City Headquarters.

  5. Ann commented

    So the boarding house rule is max 12 rooms, this one is 14, with limited parking for any resident that may reside there. The local environment plan was to protect our historic buildings and facades, and our local history. Surely keeping the facade should be paramount, not a concrete jungle that is proposed. Its very concerning that a 5 story building be permitted, when will this stop, so what if it is across the rd from the railway? If approved the next developer will creep further and further to the residential streets and it will be high rise all the way from Wolli Creek to Rockdale. We need to protect our suburban streets, and not let developers rule. Bayside has built more than their fair share of new homes, its time to stop, we are full....

  6. Kirstin Benade commented

    There a several areas which this development proposal fails to convince me that it, in its current form, will be a positive development for current residents and business owners and for intended residents of the boarding house.
    1. Heritage/character
    There appears to be little acknowledgement of the historical significance of the street front of the site itself or the heritage listed sites in its direct vicinity.
    Arncliffe Post Office (Lot 1, DP 1000369) is listed as a heritage site of local significance. Arncliffe Railway Station Group (Part Lot 1, DP 1033288) is listed as a heritage site of state significance.
    The Rockdale Local Environmental Plan 2011 states that heritage concerns are to be listed in any proposal where development occurs on land that is located in the vicinity of heritage listed sites. There is nothing in the current application that considers the local heritage.
    More generally, as many other residents have commented, the Rockdale Local Environmental Plan 2011 lists 'to conserve the environmental heritage of Rockdale' as one of its main aims.
    One look at the document "Streetscape Elevation - 30 Firth Street Arncliffe - Zervos" in the application demonstrates how completely out of sync this boarding house will be with the character of the rest of Firth Street.
    2. Traffic
    The document "Traffic & Parking Report - 30 Firth Street Arncliffe - Zervos" is questionable.
    According to their calculations the boarding house will bring a 'reduction in traffic' to the area.
    I find this very hard to believe.
    The developer's application states: 'The proposal contains a total fourteen (14) boarding rooms all of which have been nominated as double rooms. Each boarding room is provided with an open plan kitchen, bathroom and laundry facilities'.
    If each room contained two residents, with Sydney rent prices as they are this is highly likely, we are looking at possibly 28 residents and a manager. That is a lot more significant than what most people would expect from a boarding house with 14 rooms.
    3. Parking
    The provision of parking spaces is also highly misleading.
    The document "Traffic & Parking Report - 30 Firth Street Arncliffe - Zervos" states:
    '14 boarding rooms @ 0.5 spaces per room 7 spaces
    1 x manager @ 1 space per manager 1 space
    Total requirement 8 spaces'.
    So that is for the residential dwellings only.
    It later states:
    '3.1m wide single stacker 2 x retail tenant spaces + 1 resident space
    5.4m wide double stacker 6 x resident spaces'.
    So the earlier calculation is 8 (for the residential portion alone including the boarding house manager).
    The later calculation is 9 (this is supposed to include the residents, the boarding house manager AND the 2 retail).
    If I add 7 spaces for residents, 1 for the manager and 2 for the retail I get 10 car spaces.
    Nowhere in the document does it indicate that 10 will be provided.

    Either way, whether there are 7 or 6 for residents, that's hardly any for possibly 28 residents.
    Yes, as the development states, the residents will be able to access the train station. But the reality for many people is that they require a car to get to and from work where their workplace is not serviced well by public transport.
    What is most likely to occur is that residents of the boarding house will be occupying the already scarce street parking utilised by people trying to access the small businesses in the area.

    This could be disastrous for those businesses with consumers likely to avoid the area altogether and go to larger shopping areas where parking is ample.
    Additionally, I don't think a stacker carpark is in keeping with the look of the local area and I doubt many residents are aware that this is the plan. I don't know of any stacker parking in the area.

    Development is part and parcel of living in an urban area. I don't deny this nor oppose development generally. But please consider local residents before creating another Wolli Creek style high-rise hell.

  7. Diana Barnes commented

    I have serious concerns about the lack of parking in the area currently and adding a boarding house with very few spaces is going to add to this. Need to add motorbike parking and more on site car spaces and while we're at it, a round about needs to be added to that intersection so people can turn around to park in the reversing only car spots.

  8. R Ramzan commented

    I object to this proposed development as it is not in keeping with the heritage character of the existing building façade nor considers the surrounding heritage buildings.

    The BAYSIDE WEST PRECINCTS 2036 plan published by NSW Department of Planning and Environment | August 2018 states that Design Excellence will be a consideration for new developments: "The rezoning of Arncliffe and Banksia Precincts will include a design excellence provision to ensure new buildings achieve the highest standard of architectural, urban and landscape design. All new buildings will be assessed against design excellence principles, buildings over 3 storeys will be subject to review by an independent design review panel, and all buildings over 12 storeys will undergo a design competition process. Council’s DCP will also include further design guidance"

    Can Council please advise if this proposed development will be assessed as stated?

    There is no consideration of the historical significance of the street front of the site itself or the heritage listed sites in its direct vicinity including:
    - Arncliffe Post Office (Lot 1, DP 1000369 is listed as a heritage site of local significance)
    -Arncliffe Railway Station Group (Part Lot 1, DP 1033288 is listed as a heritage site of state significance)

    The Rockdale Local Environmental Plan 2011 states that heritage concerns are to be listed in any proposal where development occurs on land that is located in the vicinity of heritage listed sites.

    There is nothing in the current application that considers the local heritage as required by Rockdale Local Environmental Plan 2011'to conserve the environmental heritage of Rockdale'.

  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