Report comment

In Sydney NSW on “Harbourside - Staged...” at Darling Drive, Sydney, NSW:

donald denoon commented

203/40 Refinery Drive,
Pyrmont, NSW 2009.
Tel 95188681
12 February 2017

Ms Michele Nettlefold,
Department of Planning & Environment,
Level 22, 320 Pitt Street,

Dear Ms Nettlefold,

Thank you for encouraging the community to comment on:
Concept Proposal – Cockle Bay Wharf Redevelopment.

Like many residents in Pyrmont and Ultimo, I have engaged in many “community consultations” and discussions of development and redevelopment projects over recent decades. So far, there is no sign that community views have any impact, since projects are far advanced before the community is consulted. You may think of this as consultation: we experience it as information sessions.

But I state these views in case anyone reads these submissions, and for the benefit of social historians of the future who wonder what happened to Sydney in the 21st Century.

First, while this proposal makes good sense to the developer, and to State revenue, it ignores social needs, the social infrastructure deficit, and parallel development proposals by other agencies in the Inner West (not to mention The Star). I hoped that the Greater Sydney Commission’s emphasis on inter-agency coordination, town planning, and community consultation might have had some influence on this and similar proposals, but apparently this has not yet occurred. Is it too much to ask that – even though you ignore the people - you consult the Departments of Education, Health and Transport before imposing this ill-considered proposal on the communities affected?

Second, even without such consultation, it is clear that the proposal involves gross overdevelopment in terms of bulk and height, transforming Darling Harbour into a series of cliffs which overshadow neighbouring buildings, obscure such social facilities as survive, and transform the Harbour into a pond which is often covered by plastic boats.

In brief, this proposal assumes either than nobody lives in Pyrmont or Ultimo, or that we have no social needs, or that we do not mind the new barriers between us and the CBD.

Yours more in sorrow than in anger,

Donald Denoon

delivered to the planning authority

This form is for reporting comments that should be removed. Reasons can include that the comment is spam, abusive, unlawful or harassing — in other words, where people are going out of their way to cause harm. Please explain clearly why you think the comment should be removed.

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