PlanningAlerts

3 Comments

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

1. The NSW Boarding House Register (http://parkspr.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/BoardingHouse.aspx) clearly shows that the Petersham area (postcode 2049) is already over-serviced with 39 boarding houses registered.

   This compares with the postcodes surrounding 2049:
   • Postcode 2048 (Stanmore) – 13 registered boarding houses
   • Postcode 2038 (Annandale) - 8 registered boarding houses
   • Postcode 2040 (Leichhardt) - 6 registered boarding houses
   • Postcode 2204 (Marrickville) - 25 registered boarding houses

   This means that Petersham already has 56% more boarding houses registered than the next highest in the surrounding suburbs (ie 39 in Petersham vs 25 for Marrickville) and many more than Stanmore, Annandale and Leichhardt combined.

   We believe that the proposed development in what is already an overly concentrated boarding house area in Petersham will dramatically and negatively affect the amenity and tone of the area even further.

2. The fact that Petersham has more boarding houses than adjacent suburbs does not mean that is over-serviced. It may mean that surrounding suburbs are under-serviced

   Current definitions of boarding houses include many blocks of small "unserviced" apartments, which are visually indistinguishable from other apartment blocks. It is only the nature of the lease which makes them differ from a strata block or a single-owner block of serviced apartments. In this particular case, it appears that a single building is being subdivided by lease-type: commercial, serviced residential, and non-serviced residential.

   The uptake of houses formerly rented as share-houses by single families means that there is less general availability of rentable multi-tenant housing throughout the inner west and beyond. If anything, addition of well-run boarding houses increases the amenity of an area by making more low-cost housing available to people who work in the area.

   Adding low-rise residential units above commercial blocks along an arterial public transport transport route would seem to be an excellent way of providing mixed usage buildings in good locations. At a recent public workshop for the Greater Sydney Commission that I attended, this was AFAICT unanimously seen as a good thing by all participants.

3. I object to the proposed boarding house proposal as Petersham has far too many already,far more than any of the surrounding suburbs. Please take a look at the amount of boarding houses in this area and you will see that there are 39 in Petersham - which is absolutely out of control. Why can't these buildings become proposals for apartments that people can buy instead of boarding houses? The community needs to come first instead of the landlords whi sit back and count how much money they are making off their 5 storey over developed houses. There must be a limit of boarding houses per suburb one would think?
   Enough is enough - when will it stop!

Have your say on this application

You're too late! The period for officially commenting on this application finished almost 7 years ago. 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 Inner West Council (Marrickville). Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment