55 Smith Street Summer Hill NSW 2130

While the developers have made an effort to downsize their project they are still targeting more rooms than most of the apartment in the surrounding area.

This development is significantly too large for the land size and will have a negative impact on:
(1) the look of the area - noting the surrounding buildings are beautiful historical houses; and
(2) vibe of the village - we already lack car parking spaces - adding 97 rooms in a small area will only add to the congestion (I.e. potentially 97 more cars looking for parking spot)

We have a really great community in Summer Hill but I don’t think squeezing people into tin size boxes is the right thing.

Let’s see another version where the plan is at least half of that being proposed!

Attention: This is now the third time this previously rejected DA for the 97 boarding rooms on 55-57 Smith St - it is up again for submission by the 3rd of may 2022!

The important reason that community of Summer Hills needs to be acutely aware of this DA is because of its prior submission date to the current SEPP reforms - it is not bound by the newer SEPP laws on housing affordability (Nov 2021).
In the last year the SEPP law was changed to ensure that boarding houses have provisions to ensure that when rented that are guaranteed affordable (like being rented at 80% below market value).

We ask that the developer is transparent and engages with the community in Summer Hill during this consultation period on what measures are in place to ensure affordability remains for this boarding house development.

The council previously rejected this DA because of multiple reasons including room sizes and the concern the remediation requirements of lead contamination at the site and other reasons which you can view at council for REV/2021/0024. This revision is seen to address these concerns for prior rejected Da's.

Residents should submit by logging into council looking for REV/2021/0024.
The applicant also submitted an alternative DA for this site for 35 apartments but it is the 97 boarding rooms DA that is back up again for submission.

You can also raise further questions about the SEPP with the acessing officer conor.wilson@innerwest.nsw.gov.au

Attention: This is now the third time this previously rejected DA for the 97 boarding rooms on 55-57 Smith St - it is up again for submission by the 3rd of may 2022!

The important reason that community of Summer Hills needs to be acutely aware of this DA is because of its prior submission date to the current SEPP reforms - it is not bound by the newer SEPP laws on housing affordability (Nov 2021).
In the last year the SEPP law was changed to ensure that boarding houses have provisions to ensure that when rented that are guaranteed affordable (like being rented at a quota limit of 80% of market value).

We ask that the developer is transparent and engages with the community in Summer Hill during this consultation period on what measures are in place to ensure affordability remains for this boarding house development.

The council previously rejected this DA because of multiple reasons including room sizes and the concern the remediation requirements of lead contamination at the site and other reasons which you can view at council for REV/2021/0024. This revision is seen to address these concerns for prior rejected Da's.

Residents should submit by logging into council looking for REV/2021/0024.
The applicant also submitted an alternative DA for this site for 35 apartments but it is the 97 boarding rooms DA that is back up again for submission.

You can also raise further questions about the SEPP with the acessing officer conor.wilson@innerwest.nsw.gov.au

Did the developer do any historical research on the site as required?
"This development is a reminder that industry played an important part of Summer Hill Society" .
Negating elements of this history of light industry as may neglect this important history which is foundational to the suburbs character..
"The property at 55-63 Smith Street is no ordinary property. Over its life it has played a significant role in the character development of Summer Hill."
See Pages 13-16 of below article - this is all publically available.
https://ashfieldhistory.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/FINAL-newsletter-17-July.pdf?fbclid=IwAR34dQpMGPGIUkPMBFR9O27eWN0a4fP4p_-RlPwfnnRpw1D5uVI8Wm2grng

What is going on here!!!
This is the third time the community of Summer Hill has been called to offer a response on this DA has been refused prior twice before.
The council suprisingly letter dropped the entire community for the second time now in April for this DA because of the ongoing confusion - Community needs to ask just what is going on here exactly??
The applicant has confused the community of Summer Hill with this process. The applicant submitted a new DA for 35 apartments which seemed much more feasible but since now gone back to this original DA for third time 97 rooms boarding house why? Since this time the new SEPP law has passed in 2021 requiring affordable housing to be so post market but this older revised DA is not bound to the newer affordability provisions for boarding houses. It raises suspicion with the developments intent.
If the applicant wishes to be transparent with the community of Summer Hill simply come forward and guarantee this is affordable housing based under the provisions or submit a new DA so it is bound to new affordable housing law.
There and multiple reasons for the rejection here, all the in the community in Summer Hill need to review the revised DA and submit a response within the next 2-3 weeks.

As a resident I oppose this development after looking into it further .There are things that seem not right when looking at the plans and listening to community discussions.
There are 97 rooms at or below 12m or 11m squared when the average unit size is 30m squared. This is incredibly small for a complete living space for a development of this size. What is confusing is that there is a second application for the same development at 35 units which is much larger in room size.
I feel the developer is taking an each way bet here and Summer Hill as a community should not be take advantage of this way. If they are going to be boarding houses post sale please be honest and let the community know, yes we do need these but make them reasonable for living .
It is also a question if all of this fits in with the character of the surrounding residential area, especially when I read the note about the importance of the history of the existing site which not be retained in anyway. This was an important commercial site for the suburb I heard.

Hi, I have heard we need to submit on this by the 17th which is next Tuesday.
I would like it recorded that as I resident I oppose this development as per my prior submissions. Same reason a development of this size of the location is out of character for the suburb - they are essentially 97 micro apartments and there is no guarantee from the developer that they will be affordable housing because this DA is prior to the 2021 law change on this issue.
Given the proposed development does not have any commitment for the units to be rented below market rates, there is a risk that proposed development will not in fact be affordable boarding house units.

I Oppose this development and just submitted on similar ground to the above submissions.
The development is out of character being that high density micro apartments are not in the character of the suburb. I also agree if the development is a boarding house it should not become sold or rented as micro apartments. An honest discussion on this is needed to clarify the stand here.