1 Stansell St, Gladesville, NSW Australia

To construct a 6-storey Residential Apartment building containing 23 units (5xstudios, 7x1BR, 11x2BR) over a basement carpark containing 14 carspaces (2 accessible spaces) & 5 bicycle spaces

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website almost 4 years ago. It was received by them 1 day earlier.

(Source: City of Ryde, reference LDA2016/0151)

15 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Cameron commented

    So 23 Units to be built but only enough space for 14 car spaces. Where will the other units park their cars? On the streets? Leaving less parking spaces for the Ryde community.

  2. Andrew Franz commented

    Another high-rise, more traffic, no school capacity, insufficient road planning and zero community consultation.

  3. Ray Dowsett commented

    This DA fails on a number of issues.
    A six storey residential building is totally out of place with the other 3 storey residential buildings. To have such a tall building on such a small footprint would simply look wrong; as though it were a mini skyscraper in a residential setting

    The building’s proximity to, and the shadow cast on, the neighbouring properties would create a claustrophobic and gloomy existence for the people living nearby. And for the people living in the lower levels of the proposed building.

    Car parking is already a problem in Stansell St & Concord Pl. Overflow parking from the existing units in Stansell St & Concord Pl already impacts on Harvard St. For any building not provide for adequate parking is plainly wrong. Even if parking was provided for each unit plus visitor parking (23 resident + 6 visitor) there would be a significant impact on street parking for often there is more than one car per unit. If the DA were to be approved, expect to see at least another 12 cars on the already overcrowded streets. Those extra cars would have an impact on parking though to Harvard & Cambridge Streets.

  4. Chris Razmovski commented

    I am in favour of this development as it provides more housing opportunities in our area.

  5. Andrew Franz commented

    The oversupply of units in Sydney is about to implode.
    Please ensure that the developers provide a deposit upfront, to clean up the mess in case they run out of money when the project is only halfway.

    Previous commentator is an Estate Agen and not resident in this area.

  6. Kevin Johnson commented

    Disappointing that a real estate agent would make such a comment in support of a large development without disclosing his trade. Like 230 Victoria Road this development Is excessive for the area and there appears to be no consideration given to its impact on local residents and traffic. What is the traffic and transport plan to cope with the many grossly oversized developments being constructed in Gladesville? I would like to hear of Council plans to use the large DA contributions they have collected from the many recently approved large developments to improve community services to cope with the thousands of new residents that will soon be joining our neighbourhood.

  7. Kirsten commented

    I also support that this DA fails on a number of issues and should not proceed.
    A six storey residential building is totally out of place with the other 3 storey residential buildings. The tall building on such a small footprint will implode on the light of surrounding buildings, and not in alignment with the heritage style of Gladesville. As such yes I agree, a mini skyscraper in a residential setting. The building’s proximity to, and the shadow cast on, the neighbouring properties would create a claustrophobic and ghetto like area for the people living nearby, as has happened near the Dominos pizza and KFC driveways.Graffiti and Rubbush everywhere creating a ghetto like feel. The lack of car parking is already a problem in Stansell St & Concord Pl. Overflow parking from the existing units in Stansell St & Concord Pl already impacts on Harvard St. For any building not provide for adequate parking is plainly wrong and should be be approved. Even if parking was provided for each unit plus visitor parking (23 resident + 6 visitor) there would be a significant impact on street parking for often there is more than one car per unit. If the DA were to be approved, expect to see at least another 12 cars on the already overcrowded streets. Those extra cars would have an impact on parking though to Harvard & Cambridge Streets.I do not support this development.

  8. Steven Franz commented

    This application complies with the current LEP and all planning controls and is desperately needed in the area to help ease the problems we are experiencing with the under supply of apartments.
    Some of the comments above are ill informed and people with their own agendas.

  9. Richard commented

    This is a ridiculous application. A block this size should have less units.
    I could understand the parking allowance if it was located on a train line in the inner city but it is in the suburbs without a reliable transport network.

  10. Kellie commented

    How can council approve so many apartments with such lack of car parking? Fully support Richard's comments. This is outrageous.

  11. Kevin Johnson commented

    Steven Franz can you please confirm whether you are a local resident of Gladesville? The issues are being raised by local residents who are aware of the massive build of apartments underway in Gladesville and their impact on residents in particular on traffic, parking, public transport and community services. Everyone is entitled to opinion though my understanding is that this forum is for local residents to provide feedback. If you are not a local resident please disclose whether you have an interest in this development or another development in Gladesville. If you are a Gladesville resident I would be keen to know why you believe that the massive build of apartments already underway in Gladesville is not sufficient.

  12. Jeff Hayes commented

    I agree that we desperately need 'to help ease the problems we are experiencing' in the Gladesville area, however these are mostly due to the increasing oversupply of large scale residential developments and lack of suitable social infrastructure to match.

    If there was a significant amount of investment by Government in transport and local schools I could possibly understand how there was a 'desperately needed.....under supply of apartments'. But this is yet another oversized development in an area that has no public transport investment and an existing oversupply of children for local schools.

  13. Stephen Franz commented

    Kevin Johnson I am a long term resident in Gladesville and I am entitled to my opinion just like you and everybody else here.
    I have no vested interest in this project or any other project in our area.
    I have carefully examined the DA application in 1 Stansell St Gladesville and the facts are that this application complies under the current LEP.
    I understand that there is some genuine concerns with parking that may need to be looked at but apart from that I am in favour of this development as it helps ease the shortage of affordable housing in the form of apartments in our area.
    House prices have gone through the roof and apartments give first home buyers an opportunity to get a foothold in the housing market.
    I think it's disgraceful that people like yourself and other individuals have the audacity to question the residential and employment status of every person who disagrees with yours or their opinion.

  14. Kevin Johnson commented

    Steven Franz as a resident in the suburb of Gladesville, I would prefer our suburb to remain a community residential suburb and not be flooded by an oversupply of units and create an investment pool. Replacing a house with a 6-storey apartment building in this location is excessive - just because it complies with the LEP does not mean that the development is appropriate and sensible! If a Gladesville resident were to walk along Victoria Road and view the huge build of apartments in progress, it would be apparent to them that there will be no shortage of apartments in our suburb before considering this development. The strain on transport and community services as a result of recent developments is already very apparent to myself and other Gladesville residents and this is before some very large developments in progress or approved have been completed.

    I do believe that it is important that those providing feedback appropriately identify themselves and if they do not live in the suburb of Gladesville and are not directly impacted by the development, or if they have an interest in the development, that this be disclosed.

  15. Danny Horstead commented

    This is so excessive. None of these units will reduce property prices. The developer builds them for maximum profit not as a community service to help people with more affordable housing.
    Also. I live in Harvard St where the parking is already past maximum. My unit block has 15 units and 15 spots. We own two cars so one is always parked on the street. If I get home from work after 6pm I quite often have to park 2-3 blocks away or up Pittwater road. These streets can't handle the parking as it is.

  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