134-144 Pitt Street, Redfern, NSW

Former Rachel Forster Hospital - Modify the approved Concept Plan (MP 07_0029) to: • increase the total maximum floor space ratio from 2:1 to 2.31:1; • increase the total maximum gross floor area from 13,846m2 to 15,972.4m2, which includes 4,790m² to be affordable rental housing; • increase the number of units from 158 to 218; • introduce non-residential uses to the Pitt Street frontage; • increase the height of Buildings B and C from 4 storeys to 6 storeys; • modify the building appearance and façade design; and • increase car parking from 138 to 171 spaces.

External link Read more information

3 Comments

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

  1. I Fernandez commented

    Redfern is currently undergoing other large scale developments (at least two that I know of - one of them: 134-144 Pitt St) and we haven’t seen infrastructure developments in line with the population increase they will generate such as parking, transport, waste removal, etc. This is not the idea I had of a Green administration that should be privileging quality of living and sustainable growth over short-term gains. The way thing are going, Redfern will look more and more like Zetland and loose it’s historical charm as a residential area more akin to Surrey Hills. I strongly object to this development.
    This development is not suitable for this location in Pitt St. A 6 level building is not in keeping with the height of other buildings (note it is located both adjacent to and opposite rows of 2 storey terraces). The proposed height will impact sunlight and current roof top views enjoyed by residents. The lack car parking will be an issue as car parking has been increasingly challenging for residents with permits as development in the area increases. My experience with other similar developments is that, despite the developers claims, residents (never low income as the rents charged are market rate) do have cars and without sufficient car parking on site, will use the surrounding streets for cars and motorbikes. The scale of this development needs to be reconsidered - it is too big for a quiet, predominantly residential enclave (despite zoning for mixed development).

  2. C Murray commented

    I agree and object to any increase in FSR or size ovrall. The legislation doesnt support ongoing use for low cost accomodation and it doesnt work and is never susutained. Redfern is being over developed. The way thing are going, Redfern will look more and more like Zetland and loose it’s historical charm as a residential area more akin to Surrey Hills. I strongly object to this development.
    I agree with previous - This development is not suitable for this location in Pitt St. A 6 level building is not in keeping with the height of other buildings (note it is located both adjacent to and opposite rows of 2 storey terraces). The proposed height will impact sunlight and current roof top views enjoyed by residents. The lack car parking will be an issue as car parking has been increasingly challenging for residents with permits as development in the area increases. My experience with other similar developments is that, despite the developers claims, residents (never low income as the rents charged are market rate) do have cars and without sufficient car parking on site, will use the surrounding streets for cars and motorbikes. The scale of this development needs to be reconsidered - it is too big for a quiet, predominantly residential enclave (despite zoning for mixed development).

  3. Clement Grech commented

    A 6 storeys building is much too high in this area.
    It would forever damage the village atmosphere of this part of Redfern.
    I stand against this development. High rise building are for CBD and even there, they are disputed. The local Redfern community will suffer from this development.

Have your say on this application

You're too late! The period for officially commenting on this application finished about 7 years ago. It lasted for about 2 months. If you chose to comment now, your comment will still be displayed here and be sent to the planning authority but it will not be officially considered by the planning authority.

Your comment and details will be sent to NSW Department of Planning Major Project Assessments. 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