Recent comments on applications from Randwick City Council, NSW

  1. In Coogee NSW on “6 units, 3 Storey apartment...” at 30 Beach Street Coogee NSW 2034:

    William Campbell commented

    Dear Sir/Madam
    I have just noticed another knock down/rebuild has commenced at what was 30 Beach Street Coogee.
    At the moment, which is 1.45 PM on Saturday afternoon 8/8/20, they have been demolishing since 7 AM this morning.
    I was under the impression that demolition noise was supposed to finish at 1 PM.
    Also, I have no recollection of receiving a notification from council over what is now yet another knockdown/rebuild in our area.
    The last one took nearly 2 years from start to finish and the noise was intolerable.

  2. In Maroubra NSW on “Section 4.55(2)...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Alicia L commented

    Agree with previous comments.

    It’s just so soul destroying to see these proposals approved. Local residents will now have to live with it’s ramifications or leave.

    It’s just so so sad. South Maroubra going back to the basket case it used to be... community regression unfolding infront of our very eyes.

    Randwick Council and local planning authorities should be ashamed...it’s another kick in the teeth for local residents and local law enforcement who will have to put up with the inevitable mess.

    Residents need to band together...we deserve better than this.

  3. In Maroubra NSW on “Section 4.55(2)...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    stephen johnson commented

    That the developer can use a loophole in DCP because boarding houses are not listed in the DCP or defined by the RLEP, but these Medium Density Residential are:
    • Attached Dwellings
    • Multi Dwelling Housing
    • Residential Flat Buildings.
    and somehow say that there is a difference between his boarding house development and other multi dwelling housing is a complete joke. Boarding house developments should be added to that list! Do we really want people to be forced to reside in low ceiling height shoe boxes in a suburban residential environment? A 2.7m ceiling height should be respected in this development and not redacted to improve a developers bottom line in what is an already dubious development approval.

  4. In Maroubra NSW on “Section 4.55(2)...” at 1038 Anzac Parade Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Sean, Hayley commented

    Who is council representing when approving these obscene ‘development’ applications?

    Are they representing the developers or local residents?

    South Maroubra has enough social economic issues ...dumping a 40 bed boarding house in the middle of a depressed area of Maroubra is plain MADNESS!

    What hope do local residents have to improve the area when Council continue to support these ‘ghetto’ creating developments.

    South Maroubra has no hope of council continue approving these boarding house applications. No hope.

  5. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    guiovany commented

    the rental prices combined with tenant income profiles means that many are being delivered at a price point that is not affordable to low-income households. Once completed, room rents could be $425-$450 a week, compared with perhaps an apartment for $ 650.This will provide less parking spaces for people living close boarding houses as well as increase the demand for and impact on street parking in Kingsford

  6. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    Joyce Li commented

    Given the cutrrent COVID situation, I don't think a huge shared boarding facility is good for the future from the public health point of view. Look at the Melbourne public housing problem. 399 rooms in one building with shared facilities could be a hazard for sure if any health crisis like this happen in the future!

  7. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    Lisa Walpole commented

    Randwick Council.
    Please oppose this DA. The 35 room boarding house at Corner of Meeks and Willis st has remained half empty since it opened 18mths ago. Even less occupants since COVID .The area does not need more over priced tiny boarding house rooms. Students don"t want to live in them. The light rail is empty and the residents are only just recovering from the massive disruption, noise and dirt we have had to endure for the last 2 years for that unnecessary infrastructure that was forced on us.
    I'd imagine there will be more road closures at the nineways for this to be built and there is already huge delays from around peak hrs at that intersection.
    There are no other 18 story buildings in the area and it should stay that way. These huge high-rise developments across mascot and Zetland are all only half full. It's blatant over development and needs to stop.

  8. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    Judy Eriksson commented

    There are so many boarding houses being build from Kensington through to Randwick. Developers are allowed a lot of leeway when building this type of accommodation under the so called social housing. We all know that the only way affordable social house can happen in these areas are if Gov. build them. 399 rooms total disgrace. Getto’s of tomorrow are come to your neighbour hood. My fellow rate payers start taking an interest in your local area and make some noise to show we the community have a say in how we want our suburbs to look like into the future. It’s time for a change when we next go to VOTE Enough is Enough

  9. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    Darryl commented

    I am also objecting to the construction of this 399 room development. Three hundred and ninety nine ???? Insane.. this government has totally lost it.. Shame on you.

  10. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    Lorna Whitwam commented

    I also object to 18 stories, it's way too high and will look out of place in the area.

  11. In Coogee NSW on “Demolition of two existing...” at 3 Berwick Street Coogee NSW 2034:

    Karen Nicholson commented

    This development should not go ahead, due to the impact this will have on our residences in Mount Street. This proposed apartment building is going to block out sun light especially in the winter and reduce the liveability and enjoyment of our garden. Our apartment on the ground floor is already dark and cold in the winter. This new proposed development is going to worsen the situation. We already have a monstrous 1970’s multi storey apartment building which looks directly into our garden, in addition to the multi storey apartment buildings already in existence in Berwick Street. The one bit of respite (with the existence of the small one storey dwelling at 5 Berwick Street) from the invasion of our privacy and being surrounded by multi storey apartment buildings is now being taken from us. It’s an invasion of our privacy and it is pure greed. This developer is trying to fit too much into an extremely limited space, not to mention all the noise and dust we are going to have to put up with.

  12. In Kingsford NSW on “Construction of an eighteen...” at 391-393 Anzac Parade Kingsford NSW 2032:

    Michael Wright commented

    This looks to be the first wave of the K2K Kensington and Kingsford Town Centres Planning Proposal implemented. A 399 room boarding house is not ground breaking urban renewal & not the creation of a "ideas hub with new community centres, exhibition spaces and an Innovation Centre designed to encourage creative start-up businesses".
    It is a dramatic expansion of the decades long creep of boarding houses and student accommodation into all areas of Kingsford.
    Is a 399 room boarding house even required in these times with COVID-19 restricting students at the uni?
    I object to this development one the follow grounds:
    * height at 18 stories is way too much
    * number of rooms is way to much - at 399
    * congestion caused by volume of people in this small area
    * need for 399 boarding house?
    * lack of developers levy to assist with impacts.
    * unsightly extreme development not in fitting with character of Kingsford
    Please reject this application

  13. In Randwick NSW on “Proposed use on an existing...” at 37 Perouse Road Randwick NSW 2031:

    Robert Citizen commented

    There is now an application for this property to be a Liquor Store. There are 2 already existing in this street. When does it stop, do we require a Liquor Store on every corner!

  14. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Neigbour Next Door commented

    The "anonymous" comment above is probably from the owner. Why would you build TWO houses in one block of land? How greedy can you get?

    1) Noise and Privacy Concerns
    This is a family area with very young children and infants. The construction of the 3-4 stories houses with 31+ rooms create a very undesirable living area in this low density residential suburb. If the property was on Anzac Parade, it would have been different but this is right in the middle of a residential suburb with 7 adjacent properties. With multiple rooms on the top floor, I'm concerned about the privacy of my children and the blocking of the sunlight for the garden / backyard. Partying with large amounts of people in the communal/outdoor areas will cause headaches for everyone in an otherwise safe and quiet area.

    2) Fail to Fit the Character of the Inner Residential Street
    The existing apartments are build on Anzac Parade and corner/intersections. Building a 31-room high-density boarding house adjacent to singles/two storey houses, averaging 3-5 person per block, is in complete contrast to the existing low density building scheme. With that many boarding rooms, low income occupants can come and go with no responsibilities to keep the area safe and clean.

    3) Safety Concerns
    The narrow strip of land is unsuitable for two densely populated building forms with car lifts and can cause people to be trapped in the middle of a fire. With boarding houses, visitors can come and go and there is a lack of safety emphasis to existing families in the area. Traffic from Anzac parade and Maroubra road are already keeping Robey / Ferguson streets very busy, with parked cars on sides.

    4) Lack of Parking
    Robey / Ferguson are small streets with limited parking. The parking in front of my house is already heavily occupied. With the increase of 31 rooms plus visitors on the weekend, there are only 2+7 on premise parking space. The rest of rooms with potentially 20-40+ cars have no where to park but fight for existing parking in the area. Furthermore, occupants will take up street parking before going through car lifts and underground parking.

    5) Other Communities are Rejecting High Density Boarding Houses
    There are no reasons for such a high density boarding house in the middle of single/two storey houses. Other communities have rejected 10-30 rooms boarding houses on even bigger sized land.
    Engadine [10 rooms]
    https://www.theleader.com.au/story/5754312/residents-rise-up-a-second-time-against-boarding-house/

    Ettalong [30 rooms]
    https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/central-coast/land-and-environment-court-reject-plans-for-a-boarding-house-in-ferry-rd-ettalong/news-story/69fbd7da387a118463a6b5cc1ab159bd

  15. In Maroubra NSW on “Modification of approved...” at 28 New Orleans Crescent Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Kirrilly Brown commented

    Demolition and current works now on this property have not been planned taking into account the impact on surrounding residents in terms of parking and access to their own property. Nor has there been any communication with residents. It's a very narrow, congested street already. Especially on garbage collection day.

    A number of times I tried to park close to my home (I have small children to manage, bags, work equipment etc) only to have a worker from the site bang on my car window, aggressively telling me to move further down the street. Threatening if I didn't my car would be hit by their truck. Meanwhile, all staff from the site monopolise resident parking in close proximity to the worksite.
    Trucks are also left over night and over the weekend, again reducing residents ability to find parking.
    On Friday 6th December my car was parked directly opposite the driveway to the construction site. When I left for work at 8am I noticed my drivers door had been damaged. The damage is high up on my car door, pushed in and scratched. The damage is at the same height as one of their work trucks and looks like they have reversed into my car. The site Supervisor advised if I can prove it was them, they'd happily pay for it to be fixed knowing that I can't. Since then I have discovered 3 other cars have also been damaged. Another vehicle parked a few days earlier in the same place as mine received similar damage to the drivers side door. Another has had their drivers side rear taillight smashed and a neighbor at number 30 New Orleans Cres Maroubra has had wet cement sprayed on their car with site workers wiping it off and leaving scratches in the process.
    The latter vehicle will be fixed as they acknowledged fault however for the rest of us it's an out of pocket expense and a lot of hassle. Not impressed.

  16. In Randwick NSW on “Sec 96(AA)- Changes to unit...” at 4 Higgs Street Randwick NSW 2031:

    Rob Stevens commented

    What a fiasco and for how long, the footpath has been akin to an army assault course, with crap everywhere and now completely shut off to pedestrians. If I was a betting man I'd put money down that the developer has a special relationship with council because if it was any one else in the community they'd have been slapped with fines.

    Just an observation but was this built by trades on their day off? The project started well, even had a 'project office caravan outside' but then turned into the shambles it is. The bankers must be broke its taken so long!

    I fear for the new owners, if the amount of rubbish and general appearance of the site has anything to go by then one can only wonder about the build quality.

  17. In Randwick NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 105 Wentworth Street Randwick NSW 2031:

    Jane Role commented

    Having seen this time and time again in Randwick what are the plans for:
    - dust control - council never enforces
    - traffic management plans - this needs to be detailed and enforced in such a small area
    - asbestos management - writing a plan does not mean they follow - again will council enforce
    - acoustic management - houses so close together you need to enforce especially when builders onsite playing music, yelling, talking on phones on speaker
    - no doubt they will exceed FSR, have setbacks that are too small for apartment design guideslines or even Randwicks own code - what will be done to protect residents rights
    - sewerage needs to be included in DA as its often an afterthought and in this old area causes a huge headache
    - has the watertable been addressed - we are sucking the water and life out of the ground to build carparks - its destroying the ecosystem
    Do NOT say this the certifiers role and keep fixing it after the issue arises - be proactive Randwick Couuncil - ensure this is addressed in the DA conditions AND then enforce them - you do have the power to do so.

  18. In Randwick NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 105 Wentworth Street Randwick NSW 2031:

    jennifer tuckwell commented

    I have to say that the development in Randwick and its negating of residents needs is becoming obscene in this corner and no doubt in all corners of Randwick
    I have no idea how the Council ascertain what is sustainable and I am sure Council has no idea - if there are 3 storey's nearby then all must be ok
    Parking is a major issue and regardless of the current infantile thinking that anther 30% of people won't need their cars in the "future" - we are light years away from that future if it exists at all.
    With the re-development of POW hospital and the doubling in capacity of its Accident and Emergency Dept Randwick with no extra parking available is a sleep walking disaster that Council lack the energy and foresight to tackle.
    There is certainly no formula that they have to explain away their reasoning, the "new approach" is to moot combine parking areas - i.e. spot combined with perhaps the centre of Randwick - that is their proposed solution at present - extraordinary stuff.

  19. In Randwick NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 105 Wentworth Street Randwick NSW 2031:

    Hugo Wilcken commented

    Objection in terms of designated car spaces. Seven spaces for six apartments, three of which are two-bedroom apartments, is insufficient in a road that is consistently parked up and in an area where there are many houses, including my own, that have no off-road parking.

    As I presume it is too late to change the plans now, I propose that the Council now consider designating this section of Wentworth Road as P1 parking with residential permits.

  20. In Randwick NSW on “Demolition of the existing...” at 105 Wentworth Street Randwick NSW 2031:

    Kellie Maree Wright commented

    Objection- the area is so packed already. Parking is a major issue. The third storey will be able to see directly into my bedroom. This is the most upsetting as I purchased my unit years ago due to the privacy.

  21. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Anonymous commented

    From where I see things, residents opposing these developments are short sighted. Boarding Houses are a great form of housing, even great to make money. Maroubra needs more of these. Less complaining is what is needed here. Just like 3 Chester Ave Boarding House, maybe a couple of rooms could be removed to lessen any perceived disruption to traffic...so reduce no more than 2 boarding rooms....that’s it!

    Let’s make money people!

  22. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    N Dawson commented

    Re: DA 382/2019 - 41 Robey Street, Maroubra

    In your own Vision 2040 Consultation you ask local residents what they loved about where they live. Randwick City Council also states on its website that it's "the people who are best placed to identify the unique qualities and character of a place..." I ask that you listen to these same people, (particularly those who live in Wise Street) when making a serious decision about any potential overdevelopment at 41 Robey Street, Maroubra. Imagine what it would feel like to suddenly have hordes of people staring down into your backyard into once private space. Imagine having to drag shopping bags for miles with parking already heavily congested in this area. Please consider the lives of these long serving residents and how they might be irrevocably transformed by such an inappropriate development.

  23. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 27 Banks Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Ed commented

    Looks like a nice house BUT I don’t agree with the roof terrace at all. It’s basically another full Storey for the house. It’s a 4 storey application, not 3 storey. Yet again people are pushing the envelope with their planning applications trying to get taller and taller buildings. It’s a race to the 5th storey. There should be no “minor structure” on the roof. Apart from the apartment buildings in the area, no one else has been permitted a built up roof terrace like this. Please council turn this down. Show us that the planning regulations actually mean something.

  24. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    unhappy resident commented

    The scale of the building is not suitable to the surrounding streets of wise and robey, issues for parking as no parking close to this development on robey street and to state they only 7 car places, there is too much drugs and bad behaviour now in maroubra so people coming and going to a boarding house attract the wrong people in a small street
    this area is suitable for single storey house with some garden space
    Boarding house should be built close to main road as it suitable to public transport bus or tram there is too much greed with the developers and no consideration to the area and local people who live here for long time

  25. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Kathy commented

    I visit friends in two residences often in Wise st and live locally and I oppose the proposed “ development “ in Robey st for numerous reasons. The size and number of occupants is totally out of character for the surrounding heritage listed family homes. The inadequate number of car spaces for the possible number of occupants is totally out of proportion and will put increased pressure on the highly competitive daily ritual of finding a carpark anywhere near your residence. Privacy would be lost as this building would tower over neighbouring family homes most of them single storey. I fear these types of dwellings if allowed to proceed could lead to an influx of greedy developers buying up properties to turn a profit on overcrowded boarding houses frequently exploiting low income people/students. A smaller scale dwelling with larger room size and less overcrowding of the area would possibly be more appealing to the current long term rate payers that live in surrounding homes.

  26. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Simon Taylor commented

    Living in Wise Street I can attest that a development of this nature is completely out of character when compared to its immediate neighbours, raising a number of concerns for me.

    Parking in the surrounding area (Wise, Robey and Ferguson Street) is already quite limited and it can be stressful for residents and visitors to find parking. My worry is that with only 7 proposed car spaces for the 31 residents, any extra vehicle requirements will fall on-street parking - further exacerbating the difficulty in finding parking. I am not convinced that serious investigation into parking availability has been conducted - the only reference to traffic impact in the PDC Traffic Report was that the development would have “...no material impact on the performance of the external road network” however it makes no mention of the already congested residential streets. The proposed ‘car sharing’ solution only helps to address the issue if the residents do not have a desire to own their own vehicles which seems difficult to predict.

    The current development proposes that while “The subject site is not a heritage-listed item, but is located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the following heritage listed item: Semi-detached pair, 11 - 11A Wise Street … The heritage item has local heritage significance.” This semi is a modest single-level dwelling. The proposed development will tower over these properties, allowing for direct line of sight into backyards and rear living quarters. Additionally, being heritage items, there is little that can be developed on these adjacent properties to safeguard them from this invasion of privacy.

    In recent times there has been a worryingly high number of reports of international students being exploited by Sydney’s under-regulated informal housing market. Reports are already particularly prevalent in the nearby areas of Kingsford and Kensington. I am worried that the proposed development is a perfect fit for facilitating the financial exploitation of international students who aren’t familiar with standard housing practices in Sydney or don’t know their legal rights.

    I am opposed to the proposed development and I implore the Planning Committee to reject the development application.

  27. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Angela Dive commented

    I think there are already too many of this sort of accommodation- there is not enough infrastructure to cope with another large building with many residents - the building is out is out of character for the street - it's already a difficult to visit that area wirh minimal street parking

  28. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Jim Tau commented

    I thoroughly object to the implementation of this boarding house. It will greatly impact the residents health and wellbeing, as well as being a nuisance and an eyesore. This boarding house will affect the day to day life of every resident in severly negative ways, and has no positive impact for the locals. Randwick City Council need to consider the detrimental effects that this boarding house will implement on the surrounding locals, before blindly going ahead with construction.

  29. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    Local Resident commented

    How can this possibly be approved when we already have parking issues? Maroubra is already becoming overdeveloped. This is clearly a residential area, with mostly single level housing. I feel for the people who live right there and how much this will effect them.

  30. In Maroubra NSW on “Demolition of existing...” at 41 Robey Street Maroubra NSW 2035:

    ANDREW commented

    RE DA 382 2019

    I must say that I was utterley stunned when I received this planning alert . As far as I knew , the only area around here that would be approved for dwellings of 3 or more stories would be Anzac Parade . This development would be completely out of character in the proposed location on Robey Street . In the winter months an enormous shadow is going to be cast on properties to the south of 41 Robey Street . As well as that , as many others have already referred to , if this development goes ahead street parking will become an utter nightmare for those without off street parking allocation . Then there is the privacy issue . There will be three properties ; and two in particular where all sense of privacy is going to be completely lost . Where previously there was only a single story property behind a 2 metre fence , there may now be as many as 31 units having a free view into these properties . This is outrageous to say the least ; whereby you have privacy then suddenly it is all lost . I cannot beleive that the council is even considering approving this development as it is completely wrong . Thank you .

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