Harbourside Shopping Centre Redevelopment

- Sydney Trains requests that construction and operational activities associated with the proposed development do not impact on the existing ‘in service’ 33kV High Voltage cable located west of the subject site. It is requested that ongoing consultation is required between the Applicant and Sydney Trains during the life of the project to ensure the continued protection of the subject cable at each stage of the development.
- This submission is in addition to the comments and conditions provided as part of the Transport for NSW response for SSD 7874 in letter dated 27 April 2020.

Refer to attachment

I restate my objection to the redevelopment of the Harbourside Shopping Centre.
I bought my property in One Darling Harbour because of strong personal historic ties to Cockle Bay.
More important are the strong ties of the indigenous Gadigal clan of the Eora Nation, under-represented in a place of huge cultural significance.
This landscape of ‘Long Bay’, almost lost by over development, should be enough ‘burden of proof’ to inspire a building that tells the story of these people to the world.

In the previous concept plan my apartment in ODH is identified among the most adversely affected.
In this new proposal I will suffer a huge loss in my amenity.
Currently I have an open180 degree view leading from my front door and expanding throughout all the living and bedroom areas.
This would be replaced by a solid intrusive, 9 storey wall, just across the road, severing my current connection to Darling Harbour, Pyrmont Bridge, Cockle Bay and beyond.
The proposed loss of connection to the activity in Cockle Bay, lack of view, privacy and ‘natural’ light, change of airflow and increase in ‘unnatural’ light from above at night is ill-considered.

This amended project remains a massive and unacceptable increase in bulk and scale compared to the existing distant, low rise , light-weight, flowing structure.
The tall tower would dominate and create shadowing in winter along the waterfront and public domain.
The proposed northern podium is excessive and inconsistent with the values of the site as a tourist hub.
It’s form lacks style and is a misfit for this space.
Finally, the proposed increase in car spaces and resultant traffic is inappropriate because the entrance and egress to the site is on a road system that was not designed for a development of this size in this space.
Good design principles should alleviate and simplify concurrent problems not exacerbate and magnify them.

The site is used for cultural and entertainment purposes and due to its restraints should continue to be limited to this in scope and extent.
This Significant State Project continues to include adverse impacts on public and private amenity.
We have a beautiful Chinese Garden and many other cultural assets in the area but where are representations for Indigenous Heritage.
The current proposal should be rejected.

Refer to attached submission

My submission is attached as a PDF file

Please not difficulties in locating the referral on the major projects portal caused a delay in issuing this correspondence. Correspondence was issued to the DPIE Officer directly via email by the required date.

Please see attached City of Sydney submission

Please see attached TfNSW response.

A copy of the TfNSW response is attached.

The proposal for the Harbourside Shopping Centre Redevelopment involves 295 new car parking spaces. And on completion later this year, the SICEEP development will provide parking for approximately 1,226 cars.

Please stop approving major projects with onsite parking which generates more traffic.

The Greater Sydney Region Plan 2018 and District Plans aim for development to be aligned with high-capacity transport use and the Future Transport Strategy 2056 talks about encouraging more people out of their cars with “plans that shift the focus away from individual modes of transport, toward integrated solutions”.

This site is served directly by nearby parking stations and light rail, and it’s an easy pleasant walk from heavy rail in Sydney CBD. On-demand ferry services could serve also this area as it develops. Access by car needs to be restricted to taxis / ride-share for people who rely on cars such as people with disabilities, the very elderly and people who are “special” (or think they are) like the filthy rich and super-celebrities.

Please stop making Sydney so car dependent. Your strategic documents are clear and your determinations need to reflect your strategic intentions.

I support this development and the increase of public outdoor areas. Hopefully they maintain the landscaping well.

My apartment in 50 Murray St, Pyrmont (Darling One) is unit number 404, which is positioned at the southernmost portion of the building.

Referring to figures 23 and 24, my apartment will COMPLETELY lose all its water views, taking away any opportunity to enjoy views of boating activities, the fireworks barge, etc, which we currently enjoy. We bought the apartment to settle down into retired life.

The proposed podium is much higher than the existing shopping centre roof line.

I accept that the proposed development will impact my apartment’s views to the right hand side of the apartment. However I appeal to the developers to reduce the height of the podium, which will severely affect the water views from my apartment which I currently enjoy.

Thank you
E.S.Seelan - Unit 404

While I think that the whole proposal looks quite acceptable, my objection is related to the height of the tower.
I believe it is quite out of the character with the area that has been created and if the tower was to be lower, maybe back to RL 155m , it would have less impact in many ways, eg: visual & shadows.

The building should be restricted to a height of neighbouring Sofitel Hotel that is 132metres and should be for commercial use not residential. This is a commercial precinct and there is ample residential accommodation within the city limits. Also the height will most certainly create overshadowing issues within Darling Harbour ruining the recreational experiences of the community as a whole in the precinct.

There needs to be cohesion for this development to be of benefit for the community. It seems like there is no real public space it’s become a private residence at the expense of our shopping centre