Akuna St, Kiama, NSW 2533

Demolition, New shop top housing, New food and drink premise, New retail premise, and New shop - Retention of heritage item (proposed item), demolition of other structures and construction of a mixed use development comprising of: 344 basement car parking spaces; 24 retail premises including 2 supermarkets; and 82 shop top housing units.

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Kiama Municipal Council, reference 010.2023.00000220.001)

11 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Phillip Balding commented

    This is a great proposal, looks good, and relative to alternative places for development, this is an attractive and sensible location in terms of proximity, amenity and infrastructure. 82 units are much needed due to our shortage, it will ease prices according to the research - even if these are expensive, the buyers vacate their old home for someone less wealthy, this is the Filtering Effect. We need to permit local employees and young people to exist here with more developments like this. I went to school hear and moved away a decade ago, and currently have no hope of coming back. Best place to put more people to avoid traffic, environmental harm, and infrastructure costs is right here in town rather than out in some paddocks where people are isolated and have nothing.

  2. Paul Petrykowycz commented

    This application needs to be sent back to the consultants. It is non-compliant with the special DCP for Akuna Street. The height of building C on the plan cannot exceed 5 stories. The drawing suggests it is the same height as building D.

    Where have all the trees that are currently on Akuna Street gone. Is council going to allow the destruction of these trees that have been there of a great many years. How does this fit with council’s environmental policy.

    Council’s vision for central Kiama must be to turn it into a Sydney suburban street. Not what Kiama is known for. The 82 residential units being developed here will not fix the social housing in Kiama. When completed they will out of the price range the majority of people can afford.

  3. Darius Gear commented

    Demolition, New shop top housing, New food and drink premise provide greater choice of retail and food places for locals and inbound visitors. A great prospect for those wanting to move from supermarket driven rentals spaces. Enlarges CBD.
    This is a great proposal, looks good, and relative to alternative places for development, this is an attractive and sensible location in terms of proximity, amenity and infrastructure. Priority should be on growing the CBD. 82 units are much needed due to Kiama LGA shortage of living space. it will ease prices according to the research - even if these are expensive, the buyers vacate their old home for someone less wealthy, this is the Filtering Effect. We need to permit local employees and young people to exist here with more developments like this. Best place to put more people to avoid traffic, environmental harm, and infrastructure costs is right here in town rather than out in some paddocks where people are isolated and have nothing.
    The extra 300 parking spaces will be greatly appreciated by all comers.
    I dream of Aldi one day to be a part of our community.
    Great news to know that 6 storeys is now allowed in Kiama.
    Demand will always outstrip supply in Kiama, so any addition to supply should be welcomed by the community.

  4. Gabriella Nyikos commented

    I have no objection to development I believe the number of proposed apartments is however excessive. The height is too high and will ruin the feel of a village. It will look more like a mini Bondi. Sydney siders who come to Kiama to get away from concrete jungles will think twice about visiting Kiama.
    In addition I am concerned about the loss of trees that are currently home to hundreds of native birds. As for the parking Kiama will not be gaining additional 300 car parks. The 82 units will require at least 82 parking spots. The supermarkets and retail stores I image will use the majority of the remaining parking spots. The other car park on Akuna st has also been sold off and I image more apartments will be built So in actual fact there will be a parking deficit.
    As I said developing the area is welcomed but overdevelopment will negatively impact the parking situation and of course our environment.

  5. Peter Worth commented

    When the developers are finished on the North Akuna site, I will have to look at a massive wall of concrete and glass instead of a stand of gum trees backed by the ocean. And I'm the lucky one, because I'm further up the hill than the poor souls who live close to street level on Akuna St.
    My turn to be cheek to jowl with a block of units will come when the south Akuna Carpark gets the same treatment.
    I really don't see how building a great slab of units in the middle of town will bring down property prices in Kiama, or provide more accommodation in the town. On the opposite side of my street, 3 large houses have been built over a couple of years and there doesn't appear to be anyone living there. At Christmas there was some family type noises from the house diagonally opposite our place, but silence since then.
    I would anticipate that the Akuna developments will result in a block of Airbnbs and occasionally occupied holiday uints, owned by well heeled Sydney types, who don't need the rent and can pay any price.
    I do agree that property prices in Kiama will come down. But, only in Akuna St and the South side of Bong Bong St.
    Where these developments will be taking place, is in the "Harbourside Precinct". The DCP has the usual buzzwords regarding the precinct, like maintaining character, and amenity with sympathetic development.
    I'll be interested to see if the developers have to respect the current trees on the block, as I am required to (about 2 years ago, I was denied permission to remove 2 gum trees in the back yard, and informed that all I could do is remove dead branches. This is legislation I was told, to preserve the amenity of the area for the community). I have emailed council twice over 6 months ago to see if the trees at the top of the South Akuna car park will have to be respected for future development, but I'm still waiting for an answer.
    I'm thinking, when all this is done, maybe we should change the name of Kiama to "South Cronulla". I am certainly guilty of being a NIMBY, but I think that's understandable as I have considerable "skin in the game".

    I declare I have made no donations or gifts to Council.

  6. Peter Worth commented

    Correction to my last post ref house price drops: I meant to say NORTH side of Bong Bong St (south side of south Akuna St carpark)
    Also, I forgot to mention the old chestnut: Car parking.
    I haven't noticed any interim measures being started for when this massive construction project starts. I can just imagine the traffic chaos when an army of stop / go people start swinging their signs on Collins, Shoalhaven and Akuna St for a couple of years. All that so a developer can make a pile of money.

  7. Kerrie Lakeman commented

    I am saddened, angered and shocked by this proposal. It makes a mockery of planning documents.

    The council’s D.C.P. states under Views and Visual Impacts:

    Objectives O:3.2.3 To maintain view sharing principles though the development and redevelopment of areas.
    O:3.2.4 To ensure that where practical new development is designed and sited not to significantly alter views (including water and/or escarpment views).
    O:3.2.5 To ensure that primary private views are maintained through the addition of new development.
    O:3.2.6 To retain views to and from the water.
    O:3.2.7 To protect conserve and maintain the landform of the municipality.
    O:3.2.8 To limit potential for large bulky housing and development.
    O:3.2.9 To encourage sensitive siting of housing.
    O:3.2.10 To maintain or enhance significant public view corridors and other opportunistic views available from the public domain.
    Under Controls in the same section:

    3.2.13 No one dwelling should be sited to maximise the views for its occupants to the exclusion of nearby resident or neighbours.
    3.2.14 Building design should have regard to the topography of the site and avoid unnecessary bulk or alteration of natural ground levels.
    3.2.15 Where there is a potential for view loss Council may require a maximum building height of less than the
    allowable for part of the proposed building to ensure view sharing.

    When the sale was flagged the description stated that the development was to have the 6 storey height to be approved to only 20% of the site. The plans actually show 7 storeys with the acoustic screening and lift overrun increasing that height even more. There is no need for the overrun. It can be designed without it. Paul Petrykowycz has previously identified discrepancies in relation to the height of building C. Doesn’t the L.E.P. show that Akuna Street had only one lot at a maximum of 17.4m and some others at 14.3m - have I missed an amendment? I may have.

    Yes, extra shopping facilities and apartments have a place in Kiama; however, 6 (7+) storeys is outrageous and serves only to benefit the developer’s pockets and council’s revenue. Yes, council needs revenue but to do so to the detrimental, everlasting affect that will be had on the charm and beauty of our town is a failing of its responsibility to protect this patch of paradise and the people living here. The approval of this will show contempt toward the current residents, some who will suffer greatly by way of SIGNIFICANTLY devaluing their property’s value and affect their enjoyment of their home and neighbourhood. I’m guessing these residents will not be receiving a reduction in their rates to align with the reduction of their land value.

    This is not the appropriate location for this type of development. The infrastructure does not support it. The sewerage issue is well known and the roads will not cope with extra traffic. Bong Bong street is already becoming a full time car park and Terralong is often choked. Such an engulfing, dominant structure, as seen on the Terralong St elevation document, erodes the allure for tourists/visitors and residents.

    The argument regarding this development easing the housing issue is flawed. Only the people who are not affected by this will be the ones buying into the development. It certainly couldn’t be classed as “affordable housing”. The sale of current properties being “freed up” to purchase units, either locally or not, will most likely also be unaffordable to the younger demographic (plus most others). I think it’s safe to say that there will a “fair share” of these units being used for weekenders and or holiday lets.

    Do not set a damaging precedent with this delevopment!

    Let’s have sensible development that is sympathetic and maintains the fabulous character that we are lucky to have in our part of the world.

    I declare I have made no donations or gifts to Council.

  8. Jay Young commented

    The proposed mixed-use development in Kiama is a well-conceived project that will deliver substantial benefits to our community. It promises to revitalize our local economy by introducing a variety of retail options and shop top housing, which are vital for a thriving town center. The design retains a heritage item, showing a commitment to preserving our town's unique character while making room for necessary growth.

    NIMBYs may have concerns, but it is essential to approach such transformative projects with a community-wide perspective. The development is not just about altering a landscape but about enriching it. The provision of 344 car parking spaces directly tackles one of the most pressing issues faced by residents and visitors alike, alleviating current parking woes.

    In terms of housing, the introduction of 82 units directly goes towards addressing the local shortage, potentially easing housing prices through the well-documented filtering effect. This development enables us to cater to a growing population and ensures that local employees and young families can find a place in our community. NIMBYism is a shortsighted stance that overlooks the greater good these developments bring. Medium density mixed use development is the way forward. We must look beyond our backyards to the future we wish to build for Kiama — a future that is prosperous, inclusive, and vibrant.

  9. Christie Lewis commented

    Opposition to Development Application
    I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development application referenced above. The application appears to deviate significantly from the established objectives and controls outlined in the Kiama Municipal Council’s planning documents, particularly Objectives O:3.2.3 through O:3.2.10 and Controls 3.2.13 through 3.2.15.
    The proposed development not only fails to align with the vision outlined in the council's Community Strategic Plan but also disregards fundamental principles aimed at preserving the character, views, and landform of our municipality. Allow me to outline specific points of concern regarding this proposal:
    1. Height and Views: The proposed increase in building height, from the initially approved six stories to seven, is unjustified and contradicts the objectives aimed at maintaining view sharing principles. Furthermore, it significantly alters the skyline and will have detrimental impacts on the views enjoyed by neighbouring properties, violating Objective O:3.2.4 and Control 3.2.15.
    2. Community Character: The proposed development does not fit within the established character of the area and contradicts the desires of the local community, as evidenced by the results of the Community Satisfaction Survey. It is out of scale, imposing, and does not contribute to the fine-grained, comfortable-scaled built form characteristic of our town.
    3. Privacy and Overshadowing: The substantial increase in height will result in overshadowing of neighbouring properties, invasion of privacy, and elimination of iconic views. Residents on Akuna Street will suffer significant negative impacts, both financially and emotionally, as their properties will be overshadowed by an oversized concrete structure.
    4. Infrastructure and Environmental Concerns: The proposed development fails to consider the capacity of local infrastructure, such as sewerage and roads, to support increased density. Additionally, there are concerns about the impact on local flora and fauna, particularly a strip of native trees that house thousands of native birds, which are not adequately addressed in the current plans.
    5. Lack of Affordable Housing: Contrary to claims that the development will address housing affordability issues, it is more likely to serve as luxury weekend getaways or Airbnb rentals, further exacerbating the housing crisis without providing tangible benefits to the local community.
    6. The proposed deviation from the approved height limit of six stories to seven is particularly concerning. This increase not only violates view sharing principles but also alters the established skyline, infringing upon the scenic vistas enjoyed by neighbouring properties. Objective O:3.2.4 and Control 3.2.15 are thus disregarded, undermining the essence of our community.
    7. The lack of parking availability for local employees, school parents, residents, and visitors are a critical issue, especially in light of the proposed development. This concern is complex and has far-reaching effects on multiple facets of daily life and community functionality.
    8. The proposed development raises significant concerns regarding increased congestion in our town and the surrounding streets. Adding further density without adequate infrastructure to support it is a recipe for exacerbating existing traffic issues.
    9. It's important to note that the traffic survey conducted during the COVID lockdown doesn't accurately reflect the true parking and traffic dynamics during normal times.

    Some of the residential homes situated on Akuna Street have been built some 50 years ago and will now be exposed and impacted by a development that is out of scale, these properties will be overshadowed, and negativity impacted, have their privacy invaded, their iconic and nostalgic views of town and water corridors eliminated (which the properties where priced significantly when purchased for this reason), and will now be replaced with an oversized concrete monstrosity eyesore. Not to mention the millions of dollars that will be stripped from the value of these properties in this street as they will no longer have views except of the 22m development building of raw concrete. This will cause a detrimental effect both financially and emotionally to these property owners.
    Previous development applications for Akuna Street have been declined for height issues yet this development is being proposed at am extravagant height, giving the height was and always has been a contentious community issue. Overwhelming community feedback and support to not increase the height has not been taken on board.
    Given these concerns, I urge the council to reject the proposed development application in its current form. It does not align with the strategic vision for our municipality, fails to respect the views and concerns of the local community, and will have significant adverse impacts on the character, views, and liveability of our town.
    I trust that the council will carefully consider these points and prioritise the best interests of "current residents" and the long-term sustainability of our community and not the profits of the developer.

  10. AARON LEWIS commented

    I am writing to express my strong opposition to the development submission for Akuna Street, which proposes a 6-storey building contrary to the overwhelming feedback from the community consultations requesting a maximum of 3 Storeys.

    It is deeply concerning that the council advertised the land for sale at 6 Storeys prior to formal approval and then approved the 6-storey development for the developers after selling the property. This decision not only disregards the wishes of the community but also raises questions about the transparency and integrity of the approval process.

    The parking survey conducted during the COVID lockdown, when there was minimal traffic, does not accurately reflect the parking needs of the area under normal circumstances. Additionally, the proposed development exceeds the capacity of the sewerage system and will exacerbate existing issues with parking congestion, loss of primary views, loss of privacy, and overshadowing of neighboring properties.

    Furthermore, the development breaches the council's own strategic planning rules and exceeds the height limit that was previously rejected for financial reasons. The removal of trees on Akuna Street, which are home to thousands of birds and contribute to the natural beauty of our town, is unacceptable and will result in irreversible harm to our environment.

    I am also troubled by the lack of transparency and accountability demonstrated by certain council members, including the Deputy Mayor, who failed to disclose her position held with the state planning minister and did not follow through on her commitment to advocate for a site-specific 4-storey maximum.

    In light of these concerns, I urge the council to reconsider its decision and impose a 3-storey maximum on the Akuna Street site in line with the wishes of the community and the council's own guidelines. It is essential to prioritize the well-being and interests of residents over the interests of developers and to uphold the principles of responsible and sustainable development.

    1. Height and Views: The proposed increase in building height, from the initially approved six stories to seven, is unjustified and contradicts the objectives aimed at maintaining view sharing principles. Furthermore, it significantly alters the skyline and will have detrimental impacts on the views enjoyed by neighbouring properties, violating Objective O:3.2.4 and Control 3.2.15.
    2. Community Character: The proposed development does not fit within the established character of the area and contradicts the desires of the local community, as evidenced by the results of the Community Satisfaction Survey. It is out of scale, imposing, and does not contribute to the fine-grained, comfortable-scaled built form characteristic of our town.
    3. Privacy and Overshadowing: The substantial increase in height will result in overshadowing of neighbouring properties, invasion of privacy, and elimination of iconic views. Residents on Akuna Street will suffer significant negative impacts, both financially and emotionally, as their properties will be overshadowed by an oversized concrete structure.
    4. Infrastructure and Environmental Concerns: The proposed development fails to consider the capacity of local infrastructure, such as sewerage and roads, to support increased density. Additionally, there are concerns about the impact on local flora and fauna, particularly a strip of native trees that house thousands of native birds, which are not adequately addressed in the current plans.
    5. Lack of Affordable Housing: Contrary to claims that the development will address housing affordability issues, it is more likely to serve as luxury weekend getaways or Airbnb rentals, further exacerbating the housing crisis without providing tangible benefits to the local community.
    6. The proposed deviation from the approved height limit of six stories to seven is particularly concerning. This increase not only violates view sharing principles but also alters the established skyline, infringing upon the scenic vistas enjoyed by neighbouring properties. Objective O:3.2.4 and Control 3.2.15 are thus disregarded, undermining the essence of our community.
    7. The lack of parking availability for local employees, school parents, residents, and visitors are a critical issue, especially in light of the proposed development. This concern is complex and has far-reaching effects on multiple facets of daily life and community functionality.
    8. The proposed development raises significant concerns regarding increased congestion in our town and the surrounding streets. Adding further density without adequate infrastructure to support it is a recipe for exacerbating existing traffic issues.
    9. It's important to note that the traffic survey conducted during the COVID lockdown doesn't accurately reflect the true parking and traffic dynamics during normal times.

    Thank you for considering my views on this matter. I trust that you will take appropriate action to address these issues and ensure that the development of Akuna Street aligns with the best interests of the community.

  11. FA RID commented

    Opposition to the Development Application (10.2023.220.1) for Akuna street.

    We are horrified, angered and disturbed that KMC is considering the monstrosity planned for the site.

    We strongly oppose this DA.

    The 3 architect “Notifications Drawings Elevations” released in the planning portal are abhorrent to say the least.

    The most abhorrent is the drawing showing the Terralong Street Elevation that shall permanently deface the area and destroy the country-coastal atmosphere of Kiama.

    The “Notifications Drawings Elevations” released are not even compliant with the Kiama Local Environmental Plan 2011, height requirements which council has increased above 11 meters despite community objections, and most alarming do not even comply with sections in the legislation that state in Part 4 Principal development standards
    4 4.3 Height of buildings
    (1) 1. The objectives of this clause are as follows—
    (a) to ensure future development is in keeping with the desired scale and character of the street and local area,
    https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/epi-2011-0680#statusinformation

    Reviewing the full details of the DA shall not alter our objections to this proposed monstrosity as the architect drawings are very clear of the developers plans & intentions.

    Referencing the Kiama Town Centre DCP Review, Summary Report July 2021 Prepared by Studio GL for Kiama Municipal Council; Whatever happened to the community & stakeholder consultation process that resulted in a report with sensible suggestions and plans for the development of Akuna St, where such comments were noted “ It is recognised that an increase in building height may not be possible as the consultation process identified that height is a highly sensitive issue for the local community.”

    And on Akuna St site specifically (pages 42 – 53) it noted amongst several prudent points “ Explore options to retain existing trees along Akuna St if possible.” And “Opportunity to capitalize on views from development to Black Beach. Also consider impacts on existing views from Bong Bong and Akuna St.”.
    Also refer, the Kiama Town centre study (integrated reports) which was prepared for council in 2019; the Kiama Town Centre Study Part 1; pages 23,37,& 75 and in Part 2 pages 44,

    No one is opposing the development of the Akuna site, per se.

    However, the monstrosity that is being proposed by the new owners for the site is not at all acceptable & must be rejected.

    Kiama council would be best advised to reject this plan & not waste any ratepayers funds in reviewing, and adhere to the council’s strategic planning rules to ensure that any development of the site aligns with the best interests of the community, not just that of the developers and investors for short term rentals.

    There is a lot to say in opposition to this development plans, but so far most was well said already on the planning alerts portal, and we agree wholeheartedly with the published comments of Paul Petrykowycz, Gabriella Nyikos, Peter Worth, Kerrie Lakeman, Christie Lewis and Aaron Lewis.

    Please do not allow the destruction of the country-coastal atmosphere of Kiama with such a monstrosity.

    We, the ratepayers, declare that we have made no donations or gifts to Council.

    Thank you for your consideration,

    Kind regards;

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Kiama Municipal Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is part of the digital library from the local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small 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