State Significant Development
301 and 305 Kent Street Concept Hotel Development
City of Sydney
Current Status: Determination
Interact with the stages for their names
- SEARs
- Prepare EIS
- Exhibition
- Collate Submissions
- Response to Submissions
- Assessment
- Recommendation
- Determination
A 26 Storey hotel development with ancillary uses
Attachments & Resources
Request for SEARs (1)
EIS (27)
Response to Submissions (8)
Agency Advice (6)
Additional Information (9)
Recommendation (3)
Determination (4)
Approved Documents
There are no post approval documents available
Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.
Complaints
Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?
Make a ComplaintEnforcements
There are no enforcements for this project.
Inspections
There are no inspections for this project.
Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.
Submissions
GIOVANNI CIRILLO
Comment
GIOVANNI CIRILLO
Message
I am the applicant for a current development application proposing commercial / residential development on the adjacent site at 82-84 Sussex Street Sydney (to the west of the subject site).
I note where the subject building envelope exceeds 45m in height, the proposal fails to comply with Sydney DCP 2012 Section 5.1.2.2 (5) which requires that "Above a height of 45m, a setback of 12m is required from the side or rear boundary for residential buildings, serviced apartments or hotels to ensure visual privacy is achieved between dwellings".
In this case, a setback of 6m is proposed which does not comply with SDCP2012 S 5.1.2.2(5). Accordingly, it is requested that any determination include conditions requiring privacy screening on the common boundary above 45m in height.
It is further requested that any determination require detailed geotechnical investigations into the extent and stability of sandstone beneath the subject site given the extent of boundary excavation proposed.
Dexus
Comment
Dexus
Message
Please see attached submission in relation to SSD9694.
Please note the co-owners are Dexus and AMP.
Regards,
Matt Dingwall