36 Alice Street Newtown NSW 2042

I object to the latest DA adjustment proposal because it makes the development far too large for the area. The systematic incremental DA additions have seen the originally DA approved by the Sydney East joint regional planning increase by 15.81% for units and 11.89% for car spaces. At that time it was noted that the development was (25.9%) above Marrickville councils floor space ratio (FSR), these increases would now make it well over 30% above the councils FSR. The new DA adjustment will also see the height increased to 25 meters that is 3 meters above the LEP. This proposed DA adjustment is far too large and breaches major guidelines.

There is too much traffic on Alice, King sets and Edgeware road already. Local streets cannot cope with more residents

As a local resident I think this development is way too large and not at all in keeping with the surrounding residential area.
2 further stories is just too much. The over-shadowing, over crowding & traffic resulting from this DA update is unacceptable to local residents & should also be unacceptable to Council.

The guidelines are in place for a reason - and this development is already clearly in breach of them. Please don't let it get even more out of hand.

Please no to the extra storeys! It will overshadow more homes and public area. It will take away from visual amenity of the local area. It exceeds guidelines for height restrictions and there is a good reason for that. It will bring more cars to the area. The proposed parking strategy in the area does not include 2 hour parking in nearby street Hawken St which is where I live. All the cars will just be pushed to our street and where we will residents be able to park? Now this extra storey means even more cars. Please if you let this go through increase you area for timed parking (2 hour) based on the fact there will be even more cars in the local streets. It is hard enough trying to park the car here with the traffic from the local school and the teo ones that have been subdivided for rental. We have seen 8 extra permanent cars in this street just based on one subdivision. It's ludicrous to propose that Hawken St does not require any metered parking.

I don't have a problem with the two additional stories being added and extra apartments so long as the design of the building takes into account existing residents' privacy. Australia has a desperate housing shortage that we can only build our way out of and if our government is going to allow unchecked rapid population growth that will require greater housing density in all our cities.

The addition of some dedicated car spaces for car share companies in the building's car park would be an improvement. Allowing residents who do not own cars in the building the option of converting their allotted car park into a storage space would also reduce the number of vehicles coming and going from the building.

I object to the revision of this DA on the basis that it is not consistent with Council's FSR snd height guidelines. The addition will increase traffic congestion in the local area, including on Alice Street which is already extremely busy during peak hours. It will also place extra demand for street parking which is already at a premium for existing residents. The Land and Environment Court has previously rejected an application of this scale and Council should also reject this application.

I object to the revision. The develpment is too large for the area and contravenes Marrickville Council FSR guidelines. The Land and Environment Court previously rejected a development of this scale as did the local community.
There is already far too much traffic on Alice street especially in peak hours. Parking is also almost impossible for residents in the surrounding streets already.
I appreciate that there may be a shortage of housing available in the inner west however the building as currently approved is already too large and out of character with the surrounding area and under no circumstance should it be increased

I object to this revision unless a majority of these apartments or equivalent number of apartments elsewhere in the complex are made into Affordable Housing. These new stories will cause significant overshadowing of houses on Holmwood St and now even of Waldemore Ave, across the street, strongly affecting their amenity in winter months, so there must be significant benefit to the community in the form of affordable housing before this could go ahead.

Building more apartments will not solve any housing crisis unless they are specifically reserved for people affected the most by the crisis: low income earners.

I object to the latest DA adjustment proposal as it exceeds the FSR and the LEP and is not in keeping with the surrounding area.

The development is already too large - the original DA was for 196 units and they were lucky to get that given it already exceeded the Council’s FSR. Now they’re seeking an adjustment that further exceeds the FSR. Development standards are there for a reason! Please don’t ignore them and create ghettos for the future.

The DA also proposes a height adjustment that is above the LEP. It should also be noted that the construction of a 7 story building on the highest point of the property does not reflect the height/location of the previous industrial warehouse – the warehouse was not built all the way back to Alice Lane. Attempting to increase this building from 5 to 7 stories will create problems of overcrowding, parking and traffic management, a loss of privacy for neighbouring properties and significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties on Holmwood St and Walenore St.

I object to the latest DA adjustment proposal as it exceeds the FSR and the LEP and is not in keeping with the surrounding area.

Further, this development is close to the exits for the future WestConnex interchange at St Peters. If this motorway is to function properly, the exiting traffic coming into the area should not be hindered by extra resident cars clogging local roads. To ease the traffic flow, on the contrary, density in this area should be minimised. Otherwise the success of this $15 billion key Sydney infrastructure project could be compromised.