15 Wolli Creek Road, Banksia NSW 2216

This building application is seeking approval as affordable housing.
The Statement of Environmental Effects declares “Neither Strata nor Community Title Subdivision have been sought as part of this application.” My questions is:
Can the developer apply for subdivision in the future?

The plan is to accommodate 16 people in 8 small double rooms ( Each room has a minimum area (excl. kitchen and ensuite) ranging from of 18m2 to 24m2) in the same space that is currently occupied by a single dwelling on a relatively small block of land (The site comprises of a site area of 455.8m2). Is Council upgrading the infrastructure needed to support more development in a flood zone area?

I object to DA 2021/69, an application to build a two story, 8 double room boarding house at 15 Wolli Creek Rd because it irresponsibly exploits the housing crisis while exacerbating local parking and amenity issues.
Parking:
The plans show 4 parking bays on site. This is not enough for a development catering for 16 adults. It is already a challenge to find a parking spot in the area, especially when there are soccer games or training at Gardiner Park.
Infrastructure
Under the Bayside Local Strategic Planning Statement Kogarah and Rockdale are areas identified as areas where existing infrastructure and resources are already in place to support tenants who would require extra social support that is not found in Banksia. The nearest hospital is in Kogarah, the nearest supermarket is in Rockdale, the nearest police station is in Kogarah and social services are also located in Rockdale and Kogarah.
Noise and traffic:
I am concerned that this development would increase traffic and street noise. With Gardiner Park being developed traffic is already at disturbing levels, and this would make it worse.
Exploitation of people on lower incomes:
Over the last few decades economic inequality has sharply risen, housing prices have increased and as a result many people are experiencing a crisis in housing affordability. To alleviate this crisis, the state government needs to fund social and affordable housing, and Bayside Council should work with community housing providers and the state government to facilitate this. Both an increase in social housing for people on low incomes and affordable housing for key workers is needed. Established Community Housing Providers have the resources and experience to manage tenants in both these categories.
Instead, the government has created planning laws that allow boarding houses to be built with self-contained rooms that are much smaller than the minimum size of an apartment. DA 2021/69 is for a two-story, 8 double room boarding house. If each room is rented for $250 per week, the landlord would make $2000/week. However, if the development was for two conventional flats, rented at $500 per week each, then the income is $1000/week. This hypothetical example shows that landlords can earn roughly twice as much by building boarding houses rather than conventional units. Developers should not be allowed to profiteer from people experiencing financial hardship.
I therefore object to DA 2021/69 and call on council not to allow any boarding house developments in the Bayside Council area unless the development is under the management and care of an experienced and not-for-profit community housing provider or Housing NSW. To address the housing affordability crisis, Bayside Council must include targets for social and affordable housing, and concrete mechanisms for achieving them. This should include provision of greater diversity in not-for-profit housing to meet the accessibility needs of changing demographics and disadvantaged groups.

I wholeheartedly object to the development of this boarding house on a number of grounds:

PARKING
Given that one of the biggest objections to the proposed works at Gardiner Park Synthetic field is that residents are at their wits ends already because there isn't enough parking, they now have to contend with a boarding house that has nowhere near enough parking.

Many of the houses in the surrounding streets are single fronted terraces with off street parking for residents. Parking is an issue at the best of times. Precious parking spaces are often taken up by shoppers using the local shops, out of area people using the streets for their commuter parking and then, added to that, the nightmare of trying to park simultaneously as weekend sport and soccer training nights that take place right across the road. Given that the park is about to undergo a multimillion dollar 'upgrade' to increase it's usage, parking is anticipated to become almost impossible for residents.

The lack of parking in this development contributes to an already significant traffic and parking problem.

LOCAL CHARACTER
Banksia has a very unique architectural character - it is predominantly low rise, small block, single fronted dwellings. Residents are quite proud of their houses and even new-builds are built to a scale and design that is sensitive to their surroundings and their small square meterage.

This building is completely out of scale and character in comparison. It is a standard developers 'modernist-style' architectural design which has no relation to the predominant architectural style and period which dominates the suburb on this side of the Princes Highway - namely early 20th century Australian Federation architecture.

Architecturally, spatially, and in regards to finishes, this development is not in keeping with the character of the area and surrounding residences and will have a major visual impact to a critical corner corner of the suburb.

HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
It is worth pointing out that this house, although it does not have heritage status, is one of the oldest houses in the district and is of unique character. The house is circa 1850's and the timber construction is a rare example of the architecture of homesteads in the area prior to the establishment of the sandstone quarry that was established by the Waltz family on the other side of the road at Gardiner Park . Once the quarry was established in the 1860's, houses in the vicinity had readily available stone which was a catalyst for changing the architectural style of the local area.

Very few timber houses of this period remain and its demolition will be a loss for the areas history.

MANAGEMENT PLAN
Where is it? The documents posted online seem to be missing a management plan for the boarding house. Given that council is currently facing issues with various boarding houses in the LGA being used as AirBNB, where is the written gurantee about how this boarding house would be managed?

CARETAKER
I also note that there are no clear plans on the interior layout published. That being the case, will there be a caretaker on site 24 hours? Given that this is a residential area, a caretaker should be mandatory to control noise and to manage day to day issues and problems. As it falls beneath the threshold for the requirements for a caretaker, how can council reassure residents that the 'management' of the boarding house (ie the developer) will undertake basic grounds upkeep, cleaning and minor maintenance, tenancy management and financial management?

Shoebox accomodation exploits the housing crisis for profit , we need decent affordable public housing

We have been had since 2017 a boarding house being constructed at 19 Gladstone Street Bexley. If you look at the posts I’ve made through the RRU group you will see what the residents have had to go through, we are surrounded by a large number of heritage homes. Not sure whether the current proposal has any heritage homes around the block. What I was advised to before this is approved was go direct to a Current Affair which we didn’t do.
It the same problem with the the lack of parking etc ,privacy which we desperately tried to get across.

I object to this application to build another boarding house in our area. With the desecration of the park for single use literally across the road, the continued scavenging of the area to insert boarding house accommodation is impacting our local area with over population. The degrading of the rare and beautiful low(ish) density housing in our area with many boarding houses is effectively the gateway drug to trashing it with apartment buildings. Unconcerned with any local history, are we to assume that the council is only interested in trashing the community and squeezing the space for $ with the pre-ghetto flavour?

We live in a wonderful suburb, filled with families both young and old. Banksia is a safe and friendly neighbourhood and I feel putting a boarding house next to Our community park would destroy the ambience and safety that this neighbourhood has built over the years.

Unfortunately boarding houses often house questionable personalities and with all the young children we have I personally wouldn’t feel safe having random ppl constantly coming and going, especially next to a park we take our children to.
We’ve heard numerous stories of police raids
In other local boarding houses, this is not something I want to risk by building a boarding house in banksia - it really isn’t the area to place a boarding house in and the residents would be greatly affected

I object this building plan. Firstly we already don’t have enough parking spaces and building won’t help as they only provide certain parking ma. Also the park sometimes is not safe now with youth and drugs as we have walked there and saw them. I don’t want more people like that. The road with all houses and now there is a building which is not good architecture. Thanks

I have just read about Jack Mundey who passed away recently, he was a stalwart for preserving the historic built environment. Without his protests our city of Sydney would not have kept many of its old buildings. Unfortunately we are in a period again where the Govt & bureaucrats have lost their way in preserving the past & allowing our suburbs to loose their character for the sake of progress. This Govt directed by the unelected Greater Sydney Commission to provide more affordable housing in the Sydney metropolitan area Is allowing for these boarding houses to be built, willi nilli, anywhere in residential areas. It’s time this Govt gave more incentive for decentralisation to allow our regional areas to expand & prosper!!! Again unfortunately if this development meets all the criteria in the zoning it’s very difficult to stop, it seems this Govt doesn’t want to listen to the protests of the people we need another band of Jack Mundey’s to take up the fight!!!!

I think one more boarding house is too much in this area, this a quiet low density housing street let's not lose what's left.

I absolutely and strongly object to this DA. There is simply no space to do it here and absolutely no parking. This area is already full as it is and adding this would be destructive to this community and not something that would be a positive for this community. Boarding houses do not have the best outcomes and with so many young families around would be a negative impact on this great community. This is not the right area to do this and I wholeheartedly object.

Dear Bayside Council
As a home owner in Broadford St Bexley, I am writing to object strongly to the demolishment of 15 Wolli Creek Banksia. It is a landmark house in an area where there are still a significant number of period houses. There is also some modern housing but it fits well. The fact that there are still NO precincts designated as worth preserving in the old Rockdale Council area means that the criterion of heritage listing is urgent. We have been waiting years and years for the Council to enact (its very modest) proposed plans regarding historical precincts, which were held up by the merger. We are also waiting for some leadership on the incredible, unique and renowned historic gift we have in our built environment.

I recently drove from Banksia to Arncliffe along Somerville St. I hadn’t done this for some time. The apartments built along the Princes Highway, including the old playing fields are so ugly and overwhelming from the Somerville side that it is hard to believe they involved any planning at all. Breathtaking. Is Banksia to be completely destroyed by overdevelopment?

The new ‘boarding house’ developments that have become popular with developers are Airbnb accommodation by another name. They are known to impinge seriously on surrounding residents. They do not build community. They destroy it. Why do we want this form of accommodation in this areas? The Rockdale residents Facebook page has recently covered another boarding house’ disaster in Bexley. Shocking.
The plans for 15 Wolli Creek are also inadequate in terms of architectural detail and ongoing site management.
There is nothing to gain for the community with this development. The developers will make money, sure, but everyone else will suffer.
Please reconsider this development. Please develop a sustainable vision for where we live.

Yours sincerely
Elizabeth McMahon

Dear Planning panel, please dont get this wrong again.
there are ar too many of these being approved in areas that dont want or need them. We dont need another boarding house, especially across the road from a park. The only people that do well out of these things is the developer that then walks away leaving a crap building with lots of problems for the community stuck with an ugly unnecessary building. The amount of these that are getting approved, then alterations granted to DA means that what was approved ends up getting bigger and uglier than what was first planned.
No No No more boarding slum houses are needed here.

This development does not suit the area, fails to meet local and state planning provisions and will have an adverse impact on the area and its residents.

Firstly, and my primary objectiion, is the fact that Bayside Council is once again destroying its lovely heritage homes in favour of ugly developments. When will they realise the beauty of our suburb and start to plan to preserve it? Banksia has a beautiful character but Council doesn’t seem to factor that in to any of its decision making.

Secondly, parking around that area is already at a premium with mostly timed metre parking around this development. The parking that will come from the ridiculous over development of Gardiner Park is also going to put incredible pressure on the area and surrounding streets. This is a quiet residential area that is not set up to cater for additional residential car spaces. The provision of only 4 car spaces for the amount of “double” apartments in this DA is inadequate.

And finally, it has become a well known practice for developers to lodge DAs for boarding houses in order to take advantage of their lower square footage and other less stringent building requirements, only for the final development to be offered on the market as luxury studios, with high prices to match. Here is a link to an article that describes this practice. 
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/new-generation-boarding-houses-leave-traditional-tenants-out-in-the-cold-20141212-125zl9.html

Is this a true boarding house being constructed to help people who are down on their luck and need affordable accommodation? Or is it the complete opposite? The DA offers double rooms (very unusual for boarding houses) and kitchenettes and bathrooms. A bathroom might be expected in a modern boarding house development but a kitchenette is an unusual feature for individual units in a boarding house. Is Council going to secure guarantees from the developer in terms of making sure that needy people are not priced out?

Please Bayside Council. Enough of this overdevelopment of our beautiful suburb. Start to preserve what little you have left before it's too late.

I just want to say I am in support of this.
Fellow architect here.
Its a rare to find boarding house design that is sensitive enough to break the mass into 2 smaller wings in response to the low rise design of the surrounding. Its also not over the height limit. Check out the West Elevation to see what its all about.
Everyone needs to understand that parking of 4 complies with the SEPP regulations. It is not a residential apartment. The development does not differ from any of the houses built up to 2 storeys.
I think its a very grounded approach by the architect, and well within the SEPP.
If anyone wants to attack, its not council, and definitely not the designer. Its the state regulations.
Sure, there are bad examples, but slugging everyone for utopian reasons they seem fail to achieve is not an answer. Designer here definitely tried hard to do a sensitive smaller scale planning, kudos to them for trying.
This plan looks very open, very low fence, not much to cover, not easy to hide funny business as well. I think this is a very good example which needs to be supported.

I understand why neighbours object boarding house.
However Sydney is growing and city need more homes.
someone likes neighbours, they are already established their wealth. so they wouldn't never consider to live in boarding house.
Unlikely them, most of young people can't afford house.
It's not we don't want live in fancy house. Just can't afford.
while city is growing, we will need more and more affordable house regardless of local objection.

I would like to oppose this development due to three key reasons: suburb profile/character, parking and purpose of the accommodation. However there are many reasons this development should not proceed.

1.Banksia’s character
The suburb has a unique profile – it is a mix of family and older residents, but the designs of the housing of all size is unique. It stands out and is why we are different the overdeveloped Wolli Creek and Rockdale. We are a quiet neighbourhood that doesn’t need / want high-density housing.
Recent ‘knock down/rebuilds’ have replaced older homes with similar designs, which keep with the character of the suburb and surrounding homes. These ‘improvements’ are welcome, as they look appealing and fit in with the existing neighbours. Residents are happy to support these developments.
Also, destroying such a unique and beautiful property is terrible. It could easily be renovated to maintain its charm and unique appeal. It has history even it isn’t historic. Architecturally these simple and beautiful designs are being removed with no regard. And its place on the corner means a lot of residents and drivers see it, so it is very recognisable. Lovely heritage homes and buildings add to the appeal of the suburb but the council seems intent on destroying it.

2. Parking
As other residents have pointed out, parking is already a problem in the area. Parking is an issue because of the commuters using the rail / bus, but the parking around the park/playground continues to be an issue. Local residents lose out on this – many houses don’t have a garage or driveway to park in, so they have no other option that parking on the street. 4 spots is not enough, and will add more traffic with visitors etc.

3. Purpose
Boarding houses don’t belong in Banksia. We don’t need it and we don’t have the services to support it. If there is no onsite manager, who is going to enforce rules like no smoking or alcohol?

The services and support the people in these dwellings need are 2 suburbs away – the police are in Kogarah. I don’t want to have to call the police for an emergency and find it takes them too long to attend. People living in these accommodation have specific requirements and Banksia can not provide that support. What about medical assistance? There are very few medical facilities that are close by (or open outside of business hours) so medical care is too far away. What about social services? Again, distance and accessibility is important for people in this development and Banksia is not fit to support these residents.

As a result, the surrounding neighbours will suffer. I have significant concerns about the elderly neighbours next door – how can their safety be guaranteed? It is well known there are problems at boarding houses and it doesn’t take long for something to escalate quickly to a dangerous situation.

Also, with the units being so small, the occupants will not want to spend 24 hours a day inside. Where will they go? Across the road to a park (which is family friendly) and the park when it is accessible again. This is more likely to result in people drinking alcohol in public, making noise and be disruptive. We already have problems with people letting off fireworks off in Gardiner Park. This will add to it and will turn people off using the playground.

There is nothing positive about this development – the council want more money and have no concern about the impact on residents and the environment. Boarding houses should be set up in suitable areas with the relevant infrastructure and support – not in Banksia. There is nothing positive about this development except for money for the council.

I note that amended DA plans have been submitted for this proposal. I also note that none of the concerns and objections of residents have been addressed with the new design. In fact, it appears that the amended plans are even more detrimental to the site and to residents.

HEIGHT
The height of the building has been increased from 33.98 to 34.146. The roof line ridge now exceeds the maximum height level for the site. This is unacceptable in an area with predominantly single storey residential.

ROOF LINE
The design has been amended from butterfly roof to a gable roof. Because of the height, this means that the east and west facades are visually overpowering on this building, on this site and in comparison to surrounding residences. This visual bulk is completely out of line with the streetscape.

ADDITIONAL WINDOWS
The new design has additional windows on the north and east sides of the property. These windows will directly impact the privacy of the neighbouring houses.

PRECEDENCE
This building design will be a (an unwelcome) first for this part of Banksia. The only other multiresidential development for the area are at 26a and 32 Wolli Creek Road. These are multilevel flats built in the 1970s and the 1990s which do not impose onto the street scape because they have been designed to follow the landscape and cliff faces. They are on multiple large lots, are heavily landscaped and have an appropriate amount of open space around them. As such they are not visually imposing. This proposal is attempting multiresidential on a single residential lot. It sets a precendent for the area that is not acceptable.

Aside from the above, there appear to be no other changes to the plans. As such, parking (as many residents have pointed out) is a major concern. Historical significance, loss of local character and streetscape consistency have not been considered. And a management plan and caretaker role has not been included as part of the proposal.

I object to this type of development in Banksia.

Dear Bayside Council,

I note that amended DA plans have been submitted for boarding house at 15 Wolli Creed Rd. I continue to object to this amended application because none of the concerns and objections of residents have been addressed with the new design.

As before:

Parking

The plans show 4 parking bays on site. This is not enough for a development catering for minimum 8 adults. It is already a challenge to find a parking spot in the area, especially when there are soccer games or training at Gardiner Park.

Infrastructure

Under the Bayside Local Strategic Planning Statement Kogarah and Rockdale are areas identified as areas where existing infrastructure and resources are already in place to support tenants who would require extra social support that is not found in Banksia. The nearest hospital in Kogarah, the nearest supermarket is in Rockdale, the nearest police station is in Kogarah and social services are also located in Rockdale and Kogarah.

Noise and traffic

I am concerned that this development would increase traffic and street noise. With Gardiner Park being developed traffic is already at disturbing levels, and this would make it worse.

Exploitation of people on lower incomes

Over the last few decades economic inequality has sharply risen, housing prices have increased and as a result many people are experiencing a crisis in housing affordability. To alleviate this crisis, the state government needs to fund social and affordable housing, and Bayside Council should work with community housing providers and the state government to facilitate this. Both an increase in social housing for people on low incomes and affordable housing for key workers in social housing for people on low incomes and affordable housing for key workers is needed. Established Community Housing Providers have the resources and experience to manage tenants in both these categories.

I therefore object to updated development application andd call on council not to allow any boarding house developments in the Bayside Council area unless the development is under the management and care of an experienced and no-for-profit community housing provider or Housing NSW.

Please do not publish my name or address online.

Dear bayside, I again, strongly object to the amended DA plans.

The amendment is now higher, the amount of windows added that would impact privacy of neighbouring homes, there are still no parking plans which will overcrowd an already overcrowded area that has little to no parking.

Economic loss to the existing and surrounding homes - let’s not kid ourselves here, having a boarding house on the street/in the neighbourhood reduces the appeal of the suburb and street, which will result in a decrease in valuation of properties as well.

I object on grounds, including but not limited to, the lack of parking and lack of suitable outdoor space. As the proposed residents would likely benefit from having access to both the above, the ongoing to development to Gardiner Park means less open space and a significant increases in parking restrictions. The Council seems to want to have their cake and eat it too. Local residents and those who need the proposed accommodations would benefit from a plan the is thought out with the wants and needs of both groups being considered holistically.

It’s not an appropriate location/suburb for such housing. The transient nature of such a place is a stark contrast to what Banksia is.

There is little street parking as it is and this would cause further congestion on our streets.

The boarding house is next door to neighbours who have resided in banksia for years and don’t deserve to live next door to a place that will without doubt cause disturbance to them in an otherwise peaceful neighbourhood. It would also cause privacy issues for neighbours.

Also the fact that the boarding house will impact the reputation of banksia and possibly drive down pricing and make it less desirable to live in. Long term residence of the area do not deserve to have this put in place and with so many objections it shouldn’t be approved.

It is not the place for a boarding house

This proposed building is so wrong on EVERY level. Let common sense prevail and reject this application!

Objection based on:

- Parking in the area already being an an issue and having a 16 person dwelling with only 4 car spaces would significantly contribute to the problem.

- The proposed building is very dominating and confronting in comparison with neighboring homes. It will be out of character with the suburb in general. With the surrounding suburbs of Rockdale, Wolli Creek, Arncliffe increasingly becoming high density, hopefully council can ensure Banksia is developed to retain its tranquil village-like character.

I object to the proposed building as it is completely out of character for the surrounding area, the architecture is in no shape or form sympathetic or sustainable. It will also not serve any purpose but to exploit those on lower incomes. There are better solutions to affordable housing than this cash grab.

As someone that has grown up around the corner from this proposed building site, I find the continuing greed displayed by bayside council in approvals of sub-par and defective housing to be criminal. Also better consultation of surrounding communities is needed when developments are proposed, especially for elderly long time residents that may not have access or not know how to access information online.

Stop destroying the local history and start looking at more transparent and effective forms of affordable housing.

I object to this plan. Banksia is a beautiful suburb with nice kids and families who have known eachother for years.
We have limited parking in the area, as there are not many shops and facilities, or the infrastructure to allow for it, and it's mostly a residential area with family groups and fairly quiet.
I believe this boarding house will bring questionable characters that may endanger the existing safety we already have and also bring up noise levels.
Also it overlooks a children's playground which as a parent I feel very uncomfortable with.
The transient nature of the residents that would be living here is also not congruent with the community history in Banksia where there are many long term residents and generations living here.
Finally if the residents were to come across characters that would not suit the community- it will be harder to remove them later on and residents would be put in a terrible position where they would have to give statements to authorities at the risk of posing a danger to themselves and their families.
Let's keep bayside safe please.

I object to this development. The site is far too small for the proposed development. This can be seen by the lack of parking, the lack of room for a turning circle for vehicles, and the small size of the disabled parking spot, as well as the height of the proposed building which exceeds allowable height limits. In addition, the water tank looks to be right on the boundary instead of being set back in line with the LEP code, and from the plans looks to be much higher than the maximum allowable height of a boundary fence. Also, the outdoor communal area is situated on the boundary of a neighbouring property, which would permanently and irrevocably negatively alter the current lifestyle of those neighbours, both in terms of access to sunlight, as well as in terms of excess noise pollution. In addition, the placement of the air conditioning unit is also of concern as it looks to be too close to the boundary fence and the noise it generates will negatively effect the neighbouring property. This DA is attempting to fit far too much onto this size block.
In addition, the proposed building is not in keeping with the character of the local area. It dominates over the predominantly single-storey, pitched roof houses in the area. The colours and materials used are on the whole not in keeping with the current housing in the area. In addition, the area is home to many young families and long-term residents. The transient nature of the prospective tenants of this development is thus not in keeping with the current profile of local residents.
I am also concerned about the increased parking and traffic which this development would generate. There is no provision for visitor car spaces, which will create increased parking issues for local streets where not all houses have off-street parking. In addition, the development is on a corner block and the proposed ingress and egress of resident vehicles is too close to this busy intersection. This will create additional strain on local vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
The management of waste generated by the residents is also not sufficiently clear. How and how often will the rubbish bin area be cleaned? What steps will be taken to reduce the likelihood of attracting vermin? On garbage and recycling nights is there sufficient space at the front of the building for all bins to be lined up out ready for collection?
Lastly, the management plan is also not sufficiently clear. There needs to be a clearer management plan put in place so that in the case of breaches the neighbouring residents can contact a responsible officer to deal with the situation and see that it does not reoccur.
In short, such a development on this size block for this number of tenants seems to not be clearly thought through or planned with the ongoing amenity of the current residents in mind. For the reasons outlined above I urge Council to recommend that this application be rejected.

I do not agree with this development. I object.

This is to close to neighbouring long time residents, and our neigbourhood has good reputation for being quiet and safe.
I don't think this plan will make our community safe or will allow our community to stay the same.
We need to think of people in my age gap who are elderly and will NOT do well with increased noise levels, strange characters, and/or increased crime levels.
In addition Banksia's elderly community there are also families with Children that use the park nearby.
This is incredibly poor planning, and the residents deserve a fair go.

Dear Bayside Council
To Whom it may concern

RE: Application Number:  DA-2021/69

Location: 15 Wolli Creek Rd, BANKSIA NSW 2216, LOT 221 DP 629701

I and my neighbour at 65 Judd Street, Banksia, Mr and Mrs Z V Kostovski are writing in objection to the construction of a boarding house at 15 Wolli Creek Road, Banksia.

The main reason for this is the safety concerns, as well as the mental and physical health impacts on the neighbourhood.

The future occupants of the boarder house will most likely be people who come from a lower income bracket or who are experiencing a difficult time in their life-with or without employment  (“Sydney’s Hidden Housing Problem” study by Sydney University in 2019). This will make them at a higher risk of substance abuse. According to https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/substance-abuse study, “About 1 in 6 unemployed workers are addicted to alcohol or drugs -- almost twice the rate for full-time workers”. Substance abuse is a major cause of mental health issues.

The location of the proposal is adjacent to the Gardiner Park Playground, where young children and their families will be spending a considerable amount of time. We believe this will impose risks on the safety and wellbeing of the young children and might deter some people from using the facilities altogether.

Bayside Council is currently updating the Playground and the Sport field to promote better physical and mental health for the surrounding residents and this would be a waste of resources, if you are to approve for a boarding house to be erected next to it.

We already have a few non-official boarding homes in the street with those next to the Banksia station and my other side neighbour at 61 Judd St, Banksia.

We understand the need to provide more affordable housing in the area, but the construction of a boarding house directly next to the children Playground and Sport field will only promote negative impacts on the surrounding residents of Banksia. We object to this construction.

We are urging that Bayside Council considers our argument and rejects the development of application number DA-2021/69. Thank you for your time.

Please do not public our names and addresses online.

Your sincerely

Seriously the amendments are worse, just say no, this plan is not right for the location.
go back tot he drawing board

I do not agree with this development. I object.

This is too close to many long time residents, and our neigbourhood has a good reputation for being quiet and safe.
I don't think this plan will make our community safe or will allow our community to stay the same.
We need to think about the community as a whole and if those who are elderly and will NOT do well with increased noise levels, strange characters, and/or increased crime levels.
There are already issues with parking when sports are on at the weekends. Obviously on hold while they try and fix the park!
This is incredibly poor planning, and the residents deserve a fair go.
Please don’t build it!

Unfortunately our Council don't listen to the concerns of the residents their only concerns are aproving another development. In this case it's another Boarding House with limited car parking. In December 2019 I wrote to the General Manager of Bayside Council congratulating her on allowing the first Boarding House in Gladstone Street Bexley to be built her response was that she hopes we get on well with the Builders. With all due respect to the GM, if you have time take a drive into Gladstone Street and look at the mess we have look at every day. Gladstone and Dunmore Street are surrounded by a number of beautiful Heritage homes. So don't let this happen to Banksia.

I have not made any donations or gifts to any Counciller or Counci employees

I am opposed to the development of this boarding house for the following reasons:

PARKING
The location of the proposed boarding house is directly opposite Gardiner Park. This park is heavily used by the community and as a result the surrounding streets are already oveewhelned with visitors parking in the local area. The area simply could not support increased parking demands when it cannot cope with the existing challenges.

HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
This house currently does not have heritage status however it is one of the oldest houses in the district and is well known by locals. As one of the few timber houses of this era, demolishing is an appalling step and should never be permitted.

In closing I urge Bayside Council to reject this application.

Having lived near this building and considered renting it, I have extensively studied it's construction and heritage value. This is a unique property unlike any other in Sydney and must be properly recorded on the public heritage database before it is demolished (or relocated). 
This property has combinations of Victorian, Edwardian and Federation features not found in any other property in the Inner West, and no existing heritage records explain its curious dimensions and decorative features. The lot that this building is on is much wider than any other residential lot in the subdivision and this suggests that it predates the subdivision. Research into the early ownership of this lot may produce valuable insights.

The width of this building is unlike other Federation or Victorian  weatherboard homes. The hallway is of such width, depth and height that it contradicts the conventional residential construction methods seen with these materials in this location.

A full analysis of this property's unique construction cannot fit in this text box, including the ceiling roses, skirting boards, wallpaper, front entranceway, window decorations, awnings, and fireplaces. 

Given the property's likely age, the sandstone blocks at the base are probably from the quarry across the road.

Given the orientation of the building, it likely predates many of the roads in the area. It is possible that this house was built on the site of an earlier public or commercial use, records of which should be recovered before it is not possible to do so.

Unfortunately previous owners have allowed the structure to become severely dilapidated. Previous subdivisions have prevented the house from having any driveway constructed. The front yard is not suitable for recreation due to exposure to noise and lack of privacy. The cost of gutting this and rebuilding it would never be recovered in a sale because the property lacks the standard of amenity expected of new dwellings.

The only way forward is to ensure the property is recorded in detail and for its heritage value to be established prior to demolition.

There has been no heritage assessment of this building. Although the structure is now dilapidated, it is remarkably well preserved. Most structures built using the same construction methods have long since disappeared. 
I truly hope that this submission is read and considered by the proper council officers and that a qualified professional with a suitable engagement letter is given an opportunity to uncover the true story behind this one of a kind, iconic dwelling that is the "Gateway to Banksia".
Beyond the potential heritage value, my personal opinion differs from most of the submissions I have read so far. I think this is a great location for a boarding house as it is close to a train station and a large park for recreation. In the next decade the density of this area will increase substantially. The character of the area is so varied that it would be difficult to imagine an architectural style that would be "out of character" in this area. 

I am sad that so many people have such selfish reasons to oppose this development. 

Before demolition occurs, an extensive and publicly funded heritage enquiry needs to be undertaken. After that, a proper assessment can be made into the merits of this development. 

I object to this application this is not a considered location. The area needs afordable social housing not boarding houses with limited facilities and resources available to tenants.

The house should be considered for listing as a heritage building. Parking will be an issue with its proximity to gardiner Park

No boarding home here - this house is heritage, and the boarding home DOES NOT suit the character of the area!

A publicly funded heritage inquiry needs to be conducted for this site. There are indications the site is of historical significance.

The lot address (15 Wolli Creek Rd) originally included not only the current corner block, but additionally the grounds of Gardiner Park -- they were on the same title. This suggests the residence on the corner was related to early industrial activity (e.g. quarry) at Gardiner Park.

If demolition occurs without any heritage investigation and documentation, a rich record of a unique piece of the area's history could be lost.

I object again to this application seeking approval as “affordable housing”. Eight dwellings is an over-development for this site, and the proposed parking space is inadequate. Planning to accommodate 16 people in 8 double rooms is excessive, not matter what DA is being used. There is not enough street parking and not enough open space in the area.

It's it obvious the Councilors who approved the demolition of this heritage property did not grow up in the Banksia and are limited in their information surrounding this landmark house. More education is required regarding this house for the Council. Also, isn't it time Councilors stopped pocketing money for their own agenda and started listening to the public? After all the Council is supposed to be working for the people not against them.

I object to this application of a boarding house seeking to accommodate 16 people in an 8 double bedroom is screaming chaos due to the insufficient amount of parking space on-site. It is already hard to find parking in the surrounding streets due its approximaty to the Gardiner Park and Banksia Station.

Also Leasing these rooms to people short term imposes some danger to our community and I simply will not feel safe anymore especially for our children because unfortunately we all know what boarding homes usually turns into.

I urge Bayside council to reject this application.