73 Kent Street, Epping NSW 2121

Demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey boarding house containing 12 boarding rooms with at grade car parking and associated landscaping works.

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Parramatta City Council, reference DA/180/2021)

29 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. margaret langgons commented

    We strongly oppose the development of boarding houses in our area which is zoned R2.
    At present the area has dwellings for families and and has a friendly community minded feeling. Allowing a boarding house into this area with mainly transient people living there will lessen this feeling and family safety. This could have a detrimental effect on the
    local community of feeling a sense of belonging, safety and community spirit Already there are high rise buildings on the opposite side of the street which increases traffic into the area and making parking a problem for all.
    We do not need this type of development

  2. Steve commented

    The proposed over-development is out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. The street/area/neighborhood is zoned as R2 Residential Low Density - the proposed boarding house is medium to high density not low density. Therefore we strongly object to it.

  3. Heyin commented

    There are retired and old people living in houses close to 73 Kent Street. They fear for their safety. Because the 19-bedroom boarding house may bring in unknown people with unpredictable risks. I oppose this DA strongly.

  4. Norman Jessup commented

    I understand that CoPC see comments posted here, but tend not to give them much weight in their consideration development applications. If you wish to have your objections heard properly it's best to submit these directly to the council.

  5. Emma Smith commented

    I object to this boarding house.

    It has many young families with children and there are daycares nearby, with no manager assigned to the building to manage the residents like most boarding houses have, I worry for the well being of both the boarding house and surrounding area.

    It is additionally unsuitably higher density compared to the surrounding area.

  6. Roger Leung commented

    The construction of a boarding house is completely out of place with the overall development regime in the area, which aims to provide low density permanent homes for people who call Epping home.

    The proposal is strongly objected.

  7. Shaun Wang commented

    We live in Edensor street strongly oppose the proposal. There are many families who have young kids living in the area. We thus want a safe neighborhood in which kids can roam around without fear.

  8. Steve commented

    Dear All,
    could you please
    LODGE YOUR OBJECTION TO DA/180/2021 BY 14TH APRIL
    http://www.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/
    GET MORE INFORMATION AT
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/259257462261321
    STOP Boarding House at 73 Kent St Epping NSW 2121
    Email: Jill_hugh@outlook.com
    and we will send you more info on how to lodge your submission.
    Thanks!

  9. Rex Chan commented

    Dear all,

    I strongly object the development of boarding homes as it’s totally out of the regime of the neighbouring dwellings. There are a lot of families and kids in the surrounding area and we have to take serious consideration into account around the safety of our neighbourhoods because of the potential transient living as a result the boarding home.

    Best Regards,
    Rex

  10. Ryland Jin commented

    I strongly oppose the plan as this area lives a lot of families with young kids. A lot of students are walking through the kent St during school days. For the safety of those kids, boarding house should not build near where they live.
    I have two school-age kids and we live nearby at 73 Kent St. I am really concerned if the application got approved.

  11. Name submitted to council commented

    I have experience living next door to a “new generation” boarding house. In my experience such boarding houses pose no problems to middle class neighbours as the high rent that will no doubt be charged will mean all the boarders are employed, middle-class people as well.

    The 2-storey building itself will be no bigger than the largest single-family house that could be built on the site for one family. The DA will give a home to numerous single people and help enliven & enrich Epping and other local businesses.

    It is understandable that there is fear about a housing type new to an area. Reasons for fear at this stage probably include fear of something new, the connotations of the term “boarding house”, wrong thinking that a new Epping boarding house will have the same type of tenant as cheap rent old boarding houses, plus of course nimbyism and possibly some xenophobia.

    The one true negative effect is potentially more pressure on street parking. But in this case street parking is already scarce - prospective tenants will know this so if they have a car the car will be a disincentive to them renting at 73 Kent as they don’t want the hassle of inadequate parking for themselves. So likely tenants will tend to not have a car especially with the proximity to trains and other good public transport. A minority will have cars eg tradies but it is likely the number will have a ceiling equal to the number of off street spaces inside the property.

    Cheers, G. - owner property in Epping end of Carlingford Road

  12. Steve commented

    To: G. - owner in Epping end of Carlingford Road,

    What is your name? Please provide your full name, at least your first name, like other people did.

    Why are you referring your address as: "in Epping end of Carlingford"? are you sure you are not from Epping?

    Your comments appear familiar.

    Have you provided such comments for other developer before?

    Are you connected to this developer?

  13. Steve commented

    To: G. - owner in Epping end of Carlingford Road,

    Why this G's says: "owner property in Epping end of Carlingford Road"? what is at Epping end of Carlingford Road? haven't they been rezone to R4 and are now apartment buildings?

    As far as we know, there is no Boarding House at "Epping end of Carlingford Road". Where is "which I have experience living next door to a “new generation” boarding house" come from?

    Why not provide the address of such "“new generation” boarding house"" in the comment?

    All in all, this G's comment appears a fake, thus should be removed.

  14. Glenn Mar commented

    Reply to Steve: Glenn first time commenter; definitely not a developer or any link - as I say just passing on real, personal experience; I didn't say I live in Epping now but am owner of a old Carlingford Rd house. A bit too shouty, Steve, don't you think?

  15. Steve commented

    Reply to Glenn, first, we welcome open, transparent, and genuine comments. We thank you for providing your first name. However we are confused by what you said: "I didn't say I live in Epping but am owner of a (sic) old Carlingford Rd house", Where is the "old Carlingford Rd house"? Are you planning to turn it into a boarding house too? Further, we appreciate if you provide the address of the boarding house you had "real, personal experience"? Thanks again.

  16. Glenn M. commented

    Interesting that I seem to be being interrogated by "we" for providing a comment that in my opinion is only adding a bit of reality into the debate. No, as I have already said I am not a developer and have no plans for the Carlingford Rd house. I do not even know a single person who is a developer, am an against poor development.
    For privacy reasons I shall not provide an address for the new gen boarding house I refer to - it is in Dundas near Rydalmere border.
    Rents in an Epping new gen boarding house will be about $350 for a single person, I understand, so unfortunately will not help housing affordability directly (but may do so marginally indirectly by increasing overall supply).
    A question in return is eg. what is the basis of the alleged threat raised by other commenters of a house of working citizens paying high rent pose to the safety of children in the neighbourhood?

  17. Florence Ma commented

    This proposal is Airbnb development in disguise. Epping is predominantly a residential suburb; having a boarding house in the midst of families and children would completely destroy the character of our neighbourhood. Will there be a manager on site? Who would police unruly behaviour of boarders? We already have a serious parking problem along Kent St and Cliff Road with drivers ignoring no parking signs and time limits. I do not support the proposal.

  18. Steve commented

    Reply to Glenn, 1st, why is a boarding house address secretive? 2nd, how did you know boarding house rent in Epping "will be $350 for a single person"? 3rd, you are the only person who uses the term "new generation" boarding house, why are you using and emphasizing "new generation"? what is your definition of "new generation"? 4th, in your 3rd comment, on the one hand you admit "new gen" boarding house in Epping at $350 will not help housing affordability", on the other hand, you nevertheless continue to advocate for a boarding house in Epping by adding: "(but may do so marginally indirectly by increasing overall supply)." what is your "overall supply" definition? are you equating Boarding House in R2 low density with Apartments in R4 zone and higher? Didn't you use the term "new generation" boarding house? what is the difference between Boarding house in R2 low density zone and Apartments in R4 and higher?

  19. Steve commented

    Dear All, we have been warned by our friends and other groups of fake submissions and fake comments. Please be on alert and watch out. Thanks!

  20. Craig Watson commented

    If you wish your objections to carry some weight you need to object directly to Parrammatta Council via their email address. council@cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au
    Every submission they received is treated as a stand alone comment and usually when the threshold is reached is is automatically referred to a Council committee and not approved by their planning department. Under delegated authority.

  21. Sva commented

    Please see article at
    http://www.parranews.com.au/news/boarding-house-blues-epping-developer-defends-plans/

    I reiterate a quote from the article:

    "If this developer was fair dinkum about providing affordable housing and not just taking advantage of the current loophole in the policy, he would be a registered community housing provider, but he’s not"

    The developer has claimed:
    "The proposed boarding house will be affordable to low and moderate income working people,” he said

    “There are almost 5,000 households made up of single people and couples in the LGA who are in moderate or severe housing stress; they already live and work in the local community, but are increasingly being forced out by the lack of suitable, affordable rental housing.

    Applaud the developer for having such altruistic tendancies; perhaps he can disclose how much rent he has forecasted in his due diligence documents or go even further and state that they will give rent-free accommodation to those under his perceived "moderate and severe housing stress" since he is genuinely concerned about them.

    Whether its called a boarding house or something else, residents are not worried about the terminology used. Lets call a spade a spade!!

    There are genuine concerns about the lack of parking, social and economic impacts of the proposal. Please don't belittle these concerns as "ignorance". It is patronising and uncalled for.

  22. Glenn M. commented

    Thanks Steve for your request to add more comments to this DA.
    Steve asks: "1st, why is a boarding house address secretive?":
    A.It is not a big deal to me, but as I am not the neighbour myself, it is not my address to publish. "Secretive' is a bit too tabloid Steve. Why is the address relevant to you Steve. Do you think it doesn't exist? Or perhaps hinting I am being untruthful?

    Q. "2nd, how did you know boarding house rent in Epping "will be $350 for a single person"?
    A. A House will advertise vacancies so the rents are public. The single rooms in Rydalmere/Dundas were $350pw pre-Covid, now the remaining one or two $300pw. An Epping House will have higher rents, with the station, Macquarie Uni & Macquarie Park so close, in my opinion, especially post-Covid (whenever that is). See the SMH article linked below, how if the planning intention was to provide low rent housing the reality is that Houses are not that.

    Q. "new gen" boarding house in Epping at $350 will not help housing affordability": A. You misquoted me, I said "will not help housing affordability directly", referring to that $350 for a single person is not that affordable. Granny flat rooms or share house rooms go for about $180 to $220 in eg Dundas/Rydalmere, I think.

    Q. "(but may do so marginally indirectly by increasing overall supply)." what is your "overall supply" definition?"
    A. Overall supply of housing in Sydney. Things like these Houses and granny flats increase housing supply in Sydney, meaning more of Sydney can remain low-rise, which I gather is actually what commenters to this DA probably want. In theory more supply means less pressure for rents to become even more unaffordable for the unlucky portion of us who do not own our homes.

    Q. "what is the difference between Boarding house in R2 low density zone and Apartments in R4 and higher" :
    A. Yes the House does mean more people get to have a home in your street. The House will be a low rise, medium density house but the overall density of the R2 street will still be quite low density. Whereas an R4 zone is medium or high rise and medium or high density and a clearly different streetscape.

    "are you equating Boarding House in R2 low density with Apartments in R4 zone and higher?". No I am not. It is totally different. The streetscape will remain low rise, the character of your street will be very same as now.

    "3rd, you are the only person who uses the term "new generation" boarding house, why are you using and emphasizing "new generation"?" "what is your definition of "new generation"?
    "Didn't you use the term "new generation" boarding house?": It is not my term, your state government's term in the planning laws, not the best name invented by some spin doctor, expect they will re-name them. I am not emphasizing the term, just using the official name, Steve.

    "you nevertheless continue to advocate for a boarding house in Epping,": Steve, I posted a comment sharing my personal experience. The intention was not to advocate, just to somewhat balance the previous negative comments, which imho indicated little or no experience. Your continued requests for me to add further comments is an interesting tactic to force me to put more pro comments, so I may sound like an advocate but am just answering or commenting on your direct questions.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/national/nsw/new-generation-boarding-houses-leave-traditional-tenants-out-in-the-cold-20141212-125zl9.html

  23. Steve commented

    Reply to Glen Mar - Thank you Glenn Mar for being such a prolific writer, for writing the most number of comments, and the most lengthy comments too. Further, thank you for sharing a new article which was "This was published 6 years ago".

    In your 4th and the most recent comments, (the longest among all of us), you admit "I am not the neighbour myself".

    On the other hand, have you forgot that in your 1st comment you said "I have experience living next door to a “new generation” boarding house", haven't you?

    Yet in your 4th comments, you said "just to somewhat balance the previous negative comments, which imho indicated little or no experience." Are you attacking all of us for lack of experience of living next to a boarding house? and are you upset that our comments are negative?

    Why are you still advocating for the developer by offering your theory to the council: "In theory more supply means less pressure for rents to become even more unaffordable for the unlucky portion of us who do not own our homes"? How did you come up with this theory?

  24. Steve commented

    Dear All,
    Please see the most recent new about boarding house:
    https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/developers-rush-to-beat-the-clock-on-affordable-housing-rule-changes-20210317-p57bnl.html

    and Parramatta Council's Local Housing Strategy:
    http://test.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/sites/council/files/2020-09/Local%20Housing%20Strategy%202020.pdf
    at page 22, it declares: "not including boarding house rooms or secondary dwellings as these are not guaranteed to be affordable".

    In this Developer's Social Impact Assessment (SIA) at page 10, it admits: “affordable” is based on a presumption, because of lower planning costs under boarding house policy. On the other hand, the developer made no promise at all to pass on the lower planning costs.

    Further, the SIA admits at page 48: “It is likely that the [renters] profile could be more similar to those living in studio and one-bedroom dwellings in Epping – North Epping Statistical Area Level 2 due to the rent levels proposed for this new generational boarding house”.

    In other words, the Developer is building a mini apartment and competing directly with studio and 1-bedroom apartments in R4 zone. This is purely a for-profit, commercial mini apartment, therefore not an "affordable housing".

    From the above and other admissions, it becomes clear what the developer’s true intent is, whatever it is, it is unlikely for an affordable housing.

    The question then becomes: whether the developer is taking advantage of planning concession under the Boarding House policy (ARH SEPP), to build a mini apartment with lower planning costs, to compete with studios and one-bedroom apartments already on the market from R4 and higher zones, and for a larger profit margin?

  25. Glenn M. commented

    Steve. My first comment would have been my last but as per my previous last you keep asking questions or making accusations that deserve replies. I have experience living next door... I visit someone weekly who lives next door, that person's shares his experience so I now have that experience and so shared it.
    Good to see in your last comment that since I shared an old link, you have suddenly gotten around to actually researching the type of house you have been objecting to. So if that is the case that would indicate all your previous comments were without experience or research.
    Steve please do not accuse me of attacking anyone, that is not nice and is
    slanderous, Steve, surname unknown. And I am not upset, except where you are wasting my time harassing me here for initially sharing a view you do not agree with. You have every right to post nay comments, but you do not seem to be able to accept that a citizen could possibly post an aye comment.
    And very hopefully finally Steve, I repeat I am not advocating, I am commenting, and the theory of supply and demand is not mine.
    My comments are as short as can be to respond to your points raised, Steve.

  26. Elizabeth commented

    Dear Planning Alerts Community,
    Whilst all your objections to a boarding house development at 73 Kent Street Epping are realistic, relevant and extremely important, if you want your voice to be heard by those that matter, you need to do a little more.

    Email Parramatta Council at council@cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au and lodge your objection to DA/180/2021 - 73 Kent Street Epping. Once 10 formal objections are received, the DA will go to a meeting for consideration. You have until APRIL 14TH.
    Also, email the councillors who represent the Epping Ward. Donna Davis, Bill Tyrell and Lorraine Wearne are your representatives who sit on the council. Their email addresses are on the council website.

    If you want to stop the development, this is the best way.

  27. Steve commented

    Reply to Glenn Mar -

    in your 1st comment: "I have experience living next door to a “new generation” boarding house. In my experience such boarding houses pose no problems..."

    in your 5th comment: "I visit someone weekly who lives next door, that person's shares his experience so I now have that experience and so shared it."

    So, your "I have experience living next door" is not yours, it is a person you visit, and "that person's".

    Thank you for finally admitting you actually do not have such "I have experience living next door", because you just admitted you do not.

    It is a hearsay.

  28. Amy Li commented

    We strongly oppose the development of boarding houses in our area which is zoned R2.
    At present the area has dwellings for families and and has a friendly community minded feeling. Allowing a boarding house into this area with mainly transient people living there will lessen this feeling and family safety. This could have a detrimental effect on the
    local community of feeling a sense of belonging, safety and community spirit Already there are high rise buildings on the opposite side of the street which increases traffic into the area and making parking a problem for all.
    We do not need this type of development

  29. Wendy commented

    Strongly oppose the plan as this area lives a lot of families with young kids. A lot of students are walking through the kent St during school days. For the safety of those kids, boarding house should not build near where they live.
    No more boarding House please. We prefer duplex, it is much much much better than boarding house! Duplex is residents, but boarding house, no more safety!

  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