Harbourside Shopping Centre Redevelopment - Public Domain and Bridges

We have owned and lived in the apartment for 15 years. We are in our 70s now. We are supposed to begin to enjoy our senior lives after retirement finally. However, for this new development of Harbourside shopping centre, we feel that every single minute we want to escape from there. I feel this development was not carefully planned and also takes no respect for people who are living around here.

Even with our double window doors inside the apartment, there is constant disturbing noise.

The noise has greatly impacted all of us, our rest time, working from home, and daily life for my stay-at-home parents. We seriously feel it has greatly impacted our mental health.


What is more, our apartment view will depend on how Mirvac plans to do??!!! This is not fair. They keep asking for a rise up the height and plan for vegetation on top of the northern podium. This proposed action will block our view. I do not see any points for this. They should grow trees along the harbourside shopping centre so that they can be shared with darling harbour for the public.

We recently embraced our newborn baby into our world. However, we feel our baby is deeply disturbed by daily noise, even from Saturday morning to afternoon. We could not get the baby out on the balcony for a sun bath. The only day we feel peaceful is Sunday…. But we are living here every day!

What is worse, this situation is getting worse along the process of redevelopment.
One Darling Harbour no longer feels like a home to us, because of this redevelopment, which has no noise management.

We felt Miravc has ZERO noise mitigation plan. This redevelopment will go on for another four years! We strongly urge Mirvac to pay attention to this without any delay and act as soon as possible.

Even after development is done, the new waterfront garden and retail outlets on the northern podium in front of us, will open 24/7 to the public. This will create more noise in our apartment. This kind of irresponsible development has ruined our lives. Please take action to protect us.

Please see attached Objection Submission.

Dear Annika,

As a resident at One Darling Harbour, I object to proposed Public Domain Development Application.

Proposed changes are contradicting to Independent Planning Commission recommendations.

As a resident at level 3, increase in RL due to hard landscaping will have significant impact, including blocked views and increased noise from commercial outlets.

Further reduction of public waterfront from 20m to 6m will have impact on enjoyment of waterfront.

Kind regards,

Dear Annika,

I hope this email finds you well.

As a resident of One Darling Harbour (ODH), I write to you with deep concern regarding the recent development application (DA) submitted by Mirvac for the Harbourside site. My aim in writing this message is to express my apprehensions and opposition to specific aspects of this proposal that could adversely affect our cherished community.

As residents of ODH, we have received information about several pressing issues associated with Mirvac's latest DA, and we firmly believe it is our responsibility to bring these concerns to your attention in the hope of a thorough and balanced review.

**1. Noise**
I am deeply concerned about the noise impact that will inevitably accompany the proposed development. The expected duration of construction until mid-2027, with the anticipated increase in noise levels as the project advances, is a significant worry for our community. We urge Mirvac to provide comprehensive plans to mitigate the noise burden on ODH.

Through my research, I have discovered that acoustic treatment, specifically upgrading windows, is a viable means of effectively reducing construction noise. Mirvac's own expert has recommended the installation of acoustic attenuation measures, such as glazing upgrades, in their proposed residential tower.

Furthermore, we are concerned about the potential for noise generated by the 24/7 public park, the "Waterfront Garden," and the retail outlets planned for the area in front of ODH.

Mirvac's acoustic assessment acknowledges the likelihood of upper east-facing apartments being disproportionately affected by this noise. The proposed bridge/entry from Bunn Street, directing pedestrian traffic towards our building instead of the Waterfront Garden or the Pyrmont Bridge, poses not only noise but also security concerns for ODH residents. Additionally, access to Mirvac's loading dock and car park beneath Darling Drive raises concerns about potential disruptions, particularly regarding the lighting of the Waterfront Garden and pedestrian bridges.

**2. Views**
Our breathtaking views from ODH could be significantly compromised by Mirvac's current development application. The height of the Waterfront Garden and the nature and location of proposed vegetation are primary determinants of this issue. The DA requests that hard landscaping exceed the 12.5m RL height limit, potentially reaching 13.3m RL across much of the site.

Moreover, depending on the growth patterns and height of the vegetation, it could create a hedge screen, obstructing water views for apartments at various levels.

Inconsistencies between architectural plans and development photomontages only add to our concerns.

**3. Loss of Public Space**
One of the most concerning aspects of Mirvac's DA is the proposal to reduce the originally approved 20-METRE-wide public waterfront space in front of its building to just 6 METRES. This reduction is intended to accommodate a garden and a "Licensed Seating Area" with fixed awnings and seating for waterfront retail. Such a reduction would severely hamper our ability to host larger public events and could detrimentally impact the operation of the Ferris wheel, an iconic attraction in our community.

In light of the significant concerns raised by the residents of One Darling Harbour, I kindly request that the relevant authorities undertake a thorough review of Mirvac's development application.

My aim is not to hinder progress but to ensure that any development aligns with the best interests of our vibrant community. I appreciate your attention to these matters and hope that, together, we can work towards a solution that benefits both the residents of ODH and the broader community.

Thank you for considering my objections.

Sincerely,

Dear Ms Sargeant and Ms Hather

Please find attached submission made on behalf of the owners of Strata Plan 49259 (One Darling Harbour located at 50 Murray St, Sydney).

I was unable to upload it via the portal.

Can you please confirm receipt.

Thank you

Kind regards
Ballanda Sack
Special Counsel

To whom it may concern,


Person making the submission: Tony & Gemma Chiefari
Owners of 513/50 Murray Street Pyrmont
Known as One Darling Harbour

We consider that the latest Development Application lodged by Mirvac will cause many issues including height, scale and bulk which is an inappropriate, unsympathetic and unacceptable response to this iconic site and to the heritage Pyrmont Bridge.

In prioritizing our concerns, issues such as noise are a constant, also the dirt and dust that hits our apartment is causing undue stress. We clean our balcony every 2 days and we waste our time as it just keeps coming back. We can’t open our windows as the dust constantly comes into our apartment. Our living conditions are seriously affected by noise and dust.

The creation and use of the 24/7 public park (the “Waterfront Garden”) on the northern podium (in front of ODH) and the retail outlets that will open out onto the Waterfront Garden have the potential to create noise that will affect my apartment and lifestyle.

We believe that the proposed new DA will not result in a high-quality building of iconic and landmark qualities. It will not improve the astatic of the Darling Harbour prescient.

We also find no justification for how the proposal will strengthen the role of Darling Harbour as a tourist attraction.



Tony & Gemma Chiefari

Emailed submission attached

Dear Annika

I have been advised to e-mail you directly having unsuccessfully attempting to lodge my objection via the planning portal and respectfully request an acknowledgement of receipt.

I am the owner / occupier of Darling One apartment 504/50 Murray Street, Sydney NSW 2000.
My apartment is situated on level 5 at the southern end of the building facing east and directly looking over the former ‘Harbourside Shopping Centre’ and now subject to redevelopment by Mirvac.
The impact of the approved Mirvac re-development has already caused a substantial loss of views to my apartment in particular to the south with the residential tower.

I now wish to record my objection to the application to raise the hard landscaping from the approved 12.5m RL to 13.3m RL which if approved with further restrict the remaining little water views from my apartment.

I object to the concept of the ‘Waterfront Garden’ being approved for use 24/7 due to the impact of potential noise coming from this area and suggest the area be closed off each day between the hours of 01:00hr – 06:00hr to mitigate the impact of noise.

I object to a further ‘land grab’ by Mirvac of ‘public space’ that the original approved 20 metre wide strip of public waterfront space in front of its buildings be reduced by 14 metres to 6 metres so it can put in a garden “Licensed seating Area”

My contact phone number if required is

Regards

Christopher Stiles

Dear Annika,

My name is (redacted) and I am a resident in One Darling Harbour at 50 Murray Street.

I attempted to use a link supplied to me for the NSW Planning site but couldn't make it work.

After reading about the new plans that Mirvac have put in I am not happy about the changes they want to make and would like my objections noted please.

It has been very noisy in my apartment since work started in January ( also very dusty ) and I know that this will continue for another four years minimum.
From what I understand the noise will be very bad once the development is finished as the new plan will direct people right past the front on my unit to access the bridge and rooftop garden from Bunn St.
Won't this mean noise from people 24/7, plus I am worried about my security as we have a concierge at the front of our building but nothing on the front?

Also I read that Mirvac want to increase the height of the trees etc on the rooftop garden. Why? It already will block more than 70% of my water view, this will mean even more loss, plus how do we know if the will trim them properly?

Last I read that they want to decrease the promenade area from 20M to a very small 6 M only? Forgive me but isn't that meant to be a public place for families and tourists to walk in the sun around the entire harbour? This will just cause a foot-traffic jam and will also create a load more noise from the bars etc. I strongly object to this proposal.

I have not made any political donations and don't wish for my name to be used please

Best regards,

OBJECTION to Mirvac recent application.

Also strongly object to Mirvac’s false claims of “previously approved envelope”

Dear Annika,

The portal for viewing and responding to the Harbourside Plaza - Mirvac - Development has been playing up and very difficult to negotiate, therefore, I write directly to you.
Please confirm that Objections via this method will be properly transposed onto the official platform.

When the planning consent was granted and drawings were stamped, I contacted David Glasgow and asked why the drawings were old and still showed RL’s for the Northern podium of higher than 12.5m.
David’s response was that the written planning restriction of 12.5m maximum height was the governing factor.
Now I see yellow lines on the Northern Podium apparently indicating previously approved envelope. This is inaccurate, misleading and even blatantly false.
Would you please clarify the current approved height of the Northern Podium and Garden?

Annika, we are all busy and the ongoing scope creep and building envelope creep will make everyone disgruntled.
How long will we (the people) and the planning department have to reiterate the acceptable height levels and stand up against over development, loss of amenity and light, and loss of views?

I have written several Objections and find that I can only repeat myself so many times… Therefore I am attaching some of the material from previous submissions that is pertinent.
Please ensure the below submissions (even though they are old) are heard in direct response to SSD 496553211

Thank you and regards,
Kevin Crosland



It would be very bad if we end up with tall structures adjacent to the historical Pyrmont bridge again:

I am the co-owner of Apartments 1608 and 1607, One Darling Harbour. 50 Murray Street. Sydney 2000.

I wish to formally object to Mirvacs latest DA.

1.    Noise. I note Mirvac has recommended acoustic measures be installed on its proposed residential tower. They obviously have a concern with noise for its owners/tenants but offer no solution to another 4years of construction for ODH residents. I feel consideration to this situation should be included in their DA.
Ongoing noise from a public park and retail outlets will directly impact the owners and tenants of ODH. Mirvacs own assessment states that the noise will affect apartments which overlook this project.

2.    Views The views from some apartments will be directly impacted by the placement of trees proposed for the garden. Mirvac wish to add height to the landscaping (planter boxes etc) which will then raise the height of the vegetation they plant around it. This will potentially form a sight barrier for the apartments. Is there a restriction on vegetation height around the harbour?

3.    Loss of space along the waterfront. Originally Mirvac asked for a 20 metre walkway but now want to reduce that to 6metres. Obviously they are wanting to maximise their revenue collection at the expense of the public who enjoy time around our harbour with their young families who will not want to partake in a licensed area, preferring a space for families to enjoy their time in the city together. We used to watch families enjoying the Ferris wheel, pop-up shows, and entertainment. With only 6 metres, they will not be able to do so again.

Many thanks for your time.

I am the co-owner of Apartment 1608 and 1607,
One Darling Harbour.
50 Murray Street
Sydney
NSW 2000.

I would like to add my objection to the proposed changes to the DA submitted by Mirvac regarding Harbourside development.

We are advised that there will be another 4 years of noise while the rebuild is going on. This, in addition to the dust generated. The quality of life previously enjoyed has been eroded during the demolition of the harbourside shopping centre. Mirvac itself has recommended that the windows in its own building be further insulated to cut down the noise for its tenants but absolutely no consideration for the 4 years we at ODH must endure.
Mirvac again, has assessed that the noise from the garden on the roof will affect east facing apartments of ODH. Now they are asking to raise the garden on the roof above the 12.5 limit. This will directly affect the lower apartments.
( While we are on the 16th floor, The noise from The Hotel diagonally across from us, The Pyrmont Bridge Hotel, is quite loud and we can hear clearly the voices of guests, Thus we have experience of how noise rises)

Lighting from the open air garden area will also affect the east facing apartments.

The loss of space for the public to enjoy along the waterfront is also a concern. The loss of space will directly affect families and tourists who come into the area to enjoy the beauty of our harbour. Not everyone wants to partake of licensed premises.

Once again, my main concerns are noise, height of the garden blocking views and narrowing the public space in front of the proposed building.

To whom it may concern,

1. The development application must abide the plans previously approved by Independent Planning Commission. The effect on view from ODH to the East and North East are determined by the height of the Waterfront Garden (on the northern podium) and the nature and location of proposed vegetation.
The impact on perspectives from ODH towards the East and North East is contingent upon the elevation of the Waterfront Garden (situated on the northern podium) and the characteristics and positioning of the proposed flora. Furthermore, contingent upon how the vegetation grows and its altitude, the park's vegetation might potentially create a hedging barrier that limits the sight of water for residences on levels 1-5, as well as, because of ODH's vantage point, for residences on level 6 and higher.

2. The new development proposal results in the reduction of available public space along the waterfront. Mirvac's development application (DA) currently seeks to diminish its initially sanctioned plan for a 20-METER-wide portion of public waterfront area in front of its structure to a mere 6 METERS. This alteration is intended to accommodate the installation of a garden and a designated "Licensed Seating Area" equipped with permanent awnings and seating for waterfront retail. Consequently, this modification would pose challenges when it comes to hosting sizable public gatherings and operating the Ferris wheel.
Based on the factors mentioned above, I strongly oppose Mirvac's new development application (DA).

i am very concerned that Mirvac will continue to amend their requests to increase building heights more and more as each stage is approved. THIS HAS ALREADY OCCURRED WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING TO BE INCREASED FURTHER. THEY now are asking to exceed the 12.5m RL height limit on the landscaping TO BE approved to 13.3mRL
That is quite unfair as iMirvac are ALWAYS greedy asking for a bit more

The Waterfront Garden should have small plants not huge trees to block existing views
Noise will be an extremely important worry for everyone with the Waterfront Garden being allowed to stay open 24hours
The garden should be closed at 11pm on weekdays to allow close residents some respite from the continuing noise and unsavory behavior which will be likely to occur'!!!!

The proposed Mirvac Residential Tower is considering Glazing Upgrades be included .
Mirvac should consider installing Glazing Upgrades for One Darling Harbour to be included as we are their near neighbours and are experiencing an enormous amount of dust dirt and pollution making it very hard to breathe. Dust is continually all over our furniture and carpets every day with the extensive demolition of the Harbourside Building

I am extremely disgusted that Mirvac are requesting 14metres extra of public waterfront fol their benefit
WE ALL NEED PUBLIC SPACE TO MORE AROUND ON THE WATERFRONT NOT JUST FOR MIRVACS BENEFIT!
If this PUBLIC SPACE IS ALLOWED TO BE COMPROMISED IT WILL ENCROACH ON THE COCKLE BAY VISTA OUTLOOK
MAKING IT LOOK A LOT SMALLER. WE ALL NEED MORE FRESH AIR TO SURVIVE.

PLEASE CONSIDER THESE OBJECTIONS WHEN MAKING THESE IMPORTANT DECISIONS
ON ALL OUR BEHALF IN THE COMMUNITY

Objection from *
Trevor W. Dean
Permanent Resident
Apartment 1502 (East Facing)
ONE DARLING HARBOUR

List of concerns :

1. By far the greatest concern is the ongoing noise by the incredibly loud destruction/construction of the Harbourside Shopping Centre, which has caused disruption to my apartment from January, and continues to do so for 6 days a week, not forgetting the odd arrival of heavy equipment in early mornings.

Once enjoying being able to entertain friends in our apartment on a regular basis, my wife and I have had to cease entertaining all together, due to the incredible and incessant noise of Jackhammers, Drills, Cranes, Heavy Vehicles coming and going at all hours. At times, even with all doors closed, it is impossible to hold a normal conversation or watch television.

2. My balcony is continually covered in Black Dust, which has to be swept and hosed down on a regular basis, despite assurances that efforts were being made to minimise this happening. As a result, some members of my family who suffer from breathing complaints such as Asthma and Bronchitis, can no longer visit my apartment !

3. This leads to the proposed Residential Tower. It is noted that Mirvac experts have recommended Special Glazing for the Tower’s windows. In my opinion, due to the excessive, health threatening noise levels to be faced by East Facing ONE DARLING HARBOUR Residents until the year 2027, Mirvac should, at their expense, provide Double Glazing to all affected apartments, effective immediately !

4. The location of the Residential Tower will adverseley affect my views of Cockle Bay and the weekly Fireworks Display. Views will also be impeded by the proposed Waterfront Garden and Landscaping, including Trees, on top of the Shopping Centre. This may also be a source of daily and nightly continuous noise.

Mirvac’s own Acoustic Assessment confirms that this noise will be at it’s greatest level on the higher apartment levels, including my own on the 15th floor !

5. Looking at Mirvac’s proposed alterations to a great number of the construction items formally approved, it seems the prediction from experts in then construction field that once approval is granted, application for a number of alterations is immediately sought, few of which show any consideration for the residents of ONE DARLING HARBOUR, a disappointing outcome.

One can only wonder how those Mirvac Employees responsible for the design and construction of the new Shopping Centre would feel if a Centre of similar size and layout were to be constructed immediately next to their family homes, which is EXACTLY what is happening to the permanent residents of ONE DARLING HARBOUR !

Please give these important and justified concerns the consideration they deserve.

We are residents of One Darling Harbour, #1502 - facing east overlooking Darling Harbour.
We have attended Mirvac meetings, read the literature provided and inspected the ‘city model’ of current/planned/and happening constructions particularly in our area of Darling Harbour and Pyrmont.
What we’ve been told and what I can see is actually happening on the construction site at Harbourside is quite conflicting.

The Noise, jackhammers, drills and hammering 6 days a week (since early in the new year) absolutely ‘grates big-time’ on nerves. There is no way we are able to have any balcony doors open during the day, even closed, the noise is relentless.
We have not been able to entertain (since the beginning of the year) at all during the day, as even with the doors closed, it is difficult to hear normal conversations.
We have a very big balcony with a large 8 seater table that was used regularly by us. But now, because of dust & noise, no longer able to use for entertaining. It has all now become a very expensive balcony decoration for the present & future as all current privacy will be lost because of the north and west sides of the Mirvac tower looking straight onto us.
The dust is abundant, causing sneezing and runny eyes very often (even when the doors are closed !)

When the building is completed, there will be continual excessive noise from the (24/7) usage of the Harbourside garden roof area, as noise does rise !!! AND then there is the tower 40+ floors, (which will block views) where we are going to have no privacy on our balcony area at all...our personal space taken from us by Mirvac.
Whilst you can’t own a view, it’s very interesting that you ALWAYS PAY MORE FOR ONE when purchasing a property, should you be lucky enough to obtain one, so this construction will now devalue our property, as we are definitely going to lose all our current southern city and beyond, views.
You, Mirvac, are constructing a tower in front of the ONLY RESIDENTIAL building backing onto Darling Drive - a totally thoughtless, uncaring and dismissive act. Initially we were told the TOWER would be placed closer to the Sofitel as demonstrated on model and artists impression drawings - but this does not seem to be the case according to the deep foundations I can see being currently drilled in the centre of your complex, which will have the placement of the tower obstructing our current views + the vision of all fireworks which we so much enjoy.

It has been brought to my attention that the waterfront promenade has also been reduced from 20 metres to a 6 metre width !?...unbelievable.....clearly you (Mirvac) have no idea the volume of people, families, strollers, runners, folk walking dogs, motorised chairs, wheelchairs, bicycles and scooters all use the area frequently, especially on the weekends.

Whilst city growth is always ongoing, more thought for existing residents would be beneficial and very much appreciated.

Please find attached Letter.

I am here to submit an OBJECTION to the planning development. I object the additional licensed seating area which is the outside the development boundary as a result of narrowing the waterfront narrower as a result of lesser public space;

Please find my objection attached.