Affordable Housing Development - Botany Road, Mascot

Hi Lucinda,
Thank you for speaking with me yesterday.
I apologise once again for missing the exhibition deadline, as we only recently became owners of 16 Henry Kendall Crescent, Mascot 2020.
I am writing to formally express our significant concerns regarding SSD-72393459, the proposed affordable housing development on Botany Road, Mascot.
My name is Justin Hedayati of 16 Henry Kendall Crescent, Mascot 2020. I confirm that I have not made any political donations in the past two years and accept the Department's disclaimer and declaration.
Our primary concern relates to the proposed access arrangements outlined in Section 3.6 of the Environmental Impact Statement:
• Insufficient Parking: A total of 57 car parking spaces are proposed.
• Sole Access Point: Vehicular access to the car park is solely via Henry Kendall Crescent.
• Heavy Vehicle Access: A dedicated loading dock for Medium Rigid Vehicles (MRVs) is also accessed via Henry Kendall Crescent.
We strongly believe that Henry Kendall Crescent is inadequate to accommodate the increased traffic generated by this development. The road is narrow, often reduced to a single lane (due to parking on either side), and already experiences congestion and safety issues. The addition of 57 car parking spaces and a loading dock for heavy vehicles will exacerbate these problems, posing a serious risk to residents, pedestrians, and cyclists.
We urge the Department to reconsider the proposed access arrangements and explore alternative solutions (Access via Botany Road or Coward Street) that minimize the negative impacts on our community.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Justin Hedayati, Laura Hedayati, Erfan Hedayati

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. I object to the proposal in its current form with several design issues highlighted and provide alternatives to improve the design to address these issues in the attached document.

Dear Department of Planning, Housing & Infrastructure ,


I wish to REGISTER our OBJECTION to the proposed redevelopment of 792-794 BOTANY Road & 33-37 HENRY KENDALL CRESCENT Application SSD - 72393459

For the record we are residents & homeowners & RATEPAYERS for almost SIX DECADES & OBJECT to this redevelopment as it will negatively impact our quality of life - we chose to live & stay in Mascot BECAUSE IT WASNT A CONCRETE jungle which it will become if this proposal goes ahead !
I wish to bring to your attention the following :

- the impact of the SHEER GIGANTIC SIZE of the proposed redevelopment - from the existing 24 units to 126- WHICH IS MORE THAN 5 TIMES the what is in existence & 4 times the HEIGHT!

- the proposed 3-8 storey CONCRETE TOWERS are totally out of character to the existing environment of single storey & two storey private residences as well as the existing 2 storey buidings - currently 2 storeys to the proposed 8 storey highrise !


- How many "new residents " will be added to already existing population to the existing compact residential environment? 126? 256?

- the visual & physical impact of theshape, size, height & density of the proposed units to the existing environment & its resulting shadow it will cast on existing Henry Kendall residents & their homes

- The mere addition of a large number of new residents that will come with the proposed development will result in the increase in noise, traffic, pollution & potential for crime & anti social behaviour

- the proposed development says 57 carspaces will be provided in the new development – this does not even cater for 50 % of the proposed residents. What will the remaining 69 residents do if they have a vehicle & where will they park their vehicle? Was this even considered & was a traffic study even undertaken ?

- the impact of increasing residents as a result of this proposed new development brings added pressure of their vehicular traffic & parking requirements to the existing road infractracture of Henry Kendall Crescent & surrounding streets . The limited parking that presently exists on Coward & Henry Kendall & onto the surrounding neighbouring streets Aloha, Elphick & Forster Streets which are ALREADY under the pressure on a daily basis from not only existing residents; there is the volume of visitors to Memorial Park, Coronation Hall, workers, business personnel from or visiting the Mascot Station business & residential area & train commuters. They choose to choose to park on Coward, Henry Kendall, Aloha & Elphick Streets as there is NO PUBLIC PARKING AT MEMORIAL PARK OR MASCOT TRAIN STATION

I object to
the height of the buildings facing Botany Rd and the height of the buildings facing Coward st. I would like to see a pictorial height comparison between the project and of all buildings down Coward St to Kent Rd and Botany Rd to Gardeners Rd.
There are not enough car spaces for size of this project.
I object to the location of the substation. An eyesore and a humming transformer that may be heard of an evening. It would be better positioned between the project site and the Ambulance.
Also opposite no' 12, 14, 16 Henry Kendall Cr and adjacent to 25,27,29 and 31 there are a cluster of trees that have formed to create one canopy. These trees are highly important to the residents of Henry Kendall as they will soften the impact of the projects buildings. They must not be removed.

The Traffic Assessment report states that traffic volume has shown a decrease between 2017 and 2022. This is to be expected as the last 3 of the 6 years (50%) was a period of exceptional/unusual circumstances where we saw the start of COVID lockdowns in 2020 followed by many people working from home through to 2021, 2022 and even 2023. Therefore basing the traffic performance on 2022 data (as stated in the report) is not a true representation of the current situation in 2024. Most businesses started encouraging/requiring staff to return to the office towards the latter part of 2023 and as a result the traffic around Botany Rd, Coward St and even O'Riordan St has once again increased over the last year.

I am perplexed that this data was used in drawing assumptions/conclusions for current day traffic. In my opinion this assessment report should be revisited using recent data.

A similar point was raised by other community members in previous submissions but for some reason seems to have been ignored or dismissed.

Thank you

I am writing to urgently voice my strong opposition to the proposed development the apartments in our area, particularly in light of the inadequate Traffic Impact Assessment that has been presented. This development, as it stands, poses a severe threat to the local community and infrastructure, and I urge you to reject the proposal in its current form.
1. Outdated and Misleading Traffic Impact Assessment
The Traffic Impact Assessment, conducted in 2022, fails to reflect the current reality of our neighborhood. At the time of the survey, many residents in nearby large apartment complexes—particularly along Coward Street and near Mascot Station—were still working from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The assessment, therefore, does not account for the significant increase in traffic volumes since then, nor does it factor in the ongoing shift back to in-person work. The data from this survey is both outdated and skewed, resulting in an inaccurate representation of the traffic situation. This oversight casts serious doubt on the credibility of the entire assessment.
2. Severe Traffic Congestion
Attached, you will find photographic evidence of the daily traffic congestion on Coward Street. As shown in the photos, the traffic stretches for streets, causing access issues not only for residents of Coward Street but also for those living on surrounding streets—including Middlemiss Street, Rawson Street, Firster Avenue, Wellington Street, Rolph Street, Aloha Street, Oliver Street, and Elphick Avenue. The congestion regularly blocks driveways and makes simple tasks like pulling out of one’s driveway nearly impossible. The proposed development will only exacerbate these already intolerable conditions, effectively trapping residents in their own homes and making all the connected side streets a traffic jam of cars.
3. Infrastructure Inadequacies
The local infrastructure simply cannot support the additional burden of more than 100 new apartments, especially with no plans for adequate parking. The area is already struggling with limited parking availability, and this development will only worsen the situation. Local roads are congested and the necessary amenities to support a population increase of this scale are not in place. This proposal fails to account for the immediate impact on the daily lives of current residents and completely disregards the local community’s concerns.
I implore you to reject this development proposal. The strain on local infrastructure, the already overwhelming traffic congestion, and the lack of adequate planning make this project untenable. This is not just an inconvenience for residents—it is a serious safety issue and a significant deterioration of the quality of life in our community.

I trust you will take these concerns into account and prioritize the well-being of the existing residents over the unchecked expansion of developments that fail to meet basic infrastructure needs.


5. Inadequate Traffic Impact Assessment
The traffic impact study referenced in the development proposal, which was last conducted in 2022, assumes that traffic volumes at the Botany Road and Coward Street intersection have been decreasing and will continue to do so. This assumption is problematic for several reasons:
There is significant new development planned nearby, including the corner of Botany Road and Rawson Street, as well as additional housing further down Botany Road, near Forster Street. These developments will undoubtedly increase traffic volumes, contrary to the assumptions made in the study.
Based on personal observations, traffic congestion on Coward Street is already a serious issue, particularly during peak hours. The intersection frequently becomes gridlocked, and this development will only exacerbate congestion in the area. The current traffic volumes are already pushing the limits of the intersection’s capacity, and additional traffic from this development will create further bottlenecks.
Given these concerns, it is essential that a reduction in the number of appartments is essential.

I am writing to formally oppose the proposed development at Botany Road Affordable Housing for the following reasons:
1. Excessive Building Height and Impact on Privacy
The proposal suggests the development could range from 3 to 8 stories, which I believe is far too high for this area. The construction of an 8-story building would result in apartments overlooking many neighbouring backyards, severely compromising the privacy of local residents. Given the existing character of the area, with buildings typically no higher than 3 stories, this height is out of proportion and would significantly disrupt the established streetscape.
2. Overshadowing of Mascot Memorial Park
The proposed development contradicts the Bayside Council's recommendations as stated in the Council Response to SEARs, which outline the importance of preventing overshadowing on Mascot Memorial Park, particularly the ANZAC War Memorial. The documents and shadow diagrams provided by the developer indicate that the development, at 8 stories, will cast significant shadows onto the park in midwinter. This is in direct violation of the guidance to avoid overshadowing this public space, particularly of the War Memorial, which should remain in full sunlight.
3. Visual Impact and Incompatibility with Surrounding Area
The proposed 8-story building would be a significant eyesore, out of scale with the surrounding buildings, most of which are no higher than 3 stories. This height discrepancy would disrupt the area’s character and visual amenity, particularly when viewed from adjacent streets and properties. The proximity of the development to Sydney Airport also raises concerns about the noise impact on higher-level apartments, which would experience substantial aircraft noise.
4. Inadequate Parking Provision
The proposed development includes 126 apartments but only 57 car parking spaces. This is a clear failure to meet the minimum parking requirements outlined in the Housing SEPP and the Bayside Council guidelines. As noted in the Traffic, Parking and Access Technical Specification, a 2-bedroom apartment typically requires 2 car spaces, and a 1-bedroom apartment should have at least 1 car space. The proposed development provides less than a third of the required parking, which is unrealistic given the already high demand for parking in the area.
Current parking on Coward Street is already insufficient, with residents relying on off-street parking, and adding 126 units without providing adequate parking will only exacerbate the issue. I would like to know: where will the residents and visitors of this development park? With no available parking on Botany Road, the lack of parking provision is irresponsible and fails to consider the existing strain on the area’s infrastructure.
5. Inadequate Traffic Impact Assessment
The traffic impact study referenced in the development proposal, which was last conducted in 2022, assumes that traffic volumes at the Botany Road and Coward Street intersection have been decreasing and will continue to do so. This assumption is problematic for several reasons:
There is significant new development planned nearby, including the corner of Botany Road and Rawson Street, as well as additional housing further down Botany Road, near Forster Street. These developments will undoubtedly increase traffic volumes, contrary to the assumptions made in the study.
Based on personal observations, traffic congestion on Coward Street is already a serious issue, particularly during peak hours. The intersection frequently becomes gridlocked, and this development will only exacerbate congestion in the area. The current traffic volumes are already pushing the limits of the intersection’s capacity, and additional traffic from this development will create further bottlenecks.
Given these concerns, it is essential that a reduction in the number of appartments is essential.

Looks great, I support the development. We need more high density in Sydney to address housing affordability.

I fully support the construction of additional affordable houses in my local area and would also like to see more social housing as well. There is significant evidence that Sydney is in the middle of a housing crisis and this can not be addressed unless more affordable and social housing is constructed across the entire Greater Sydney Metropolitan area including Mascot.