Mixed Use Development - 903-921 Bourke St Waterloo

The reason for my objection to this DA specifically is on the basis of process. There appears to be two parallel processes running simultaneously, neither of which are referring to each other. The chaotic approach to consultations around this site, particularly for a development which has already gone through community consultation, is making it incredibly difficult for residents in the area to understand what exactly is being proposed or to provide their responses in time. I feel that this is a deliberate tactic.

For your reference, I have attached the objection I wrote to Sarah George Consulting for the SSD community consultation to this email, which focuses on the social impact of the proposed changes to this development. Sarah George and the developers organised an information webinar on the 25th of February which was essentially a marketing exercise that lectured locals on why the proposed changes would be a good thing and failed to address every single one of the substantive concerns raised in residents' letters prior to, and in the Teams chat during, the call.

You should be aware that off the back of this, residents in the area are organising and we will do everything we can to keep the Council and the State Government accountable on this development in particular, and on the shambolic SSD pathway being pushed by the HDA/State Government more widely. The media are beginning to pick up on this and our elected officials would do well to remember that there are people living in the areas this is being done to whose genuine concerns about their quality of life are being routinely ignored.

Context
This proposal to the NSW Government from DASCO (SSD-95997711)

I am writing to object the proposal to build a 38 storeys building in my neighborhood.
It will have such a significant impact on the infrastructure, much worse traffic, shortage of amnesties, and it will look so overbearing and ugly for a building that tall to be dumped into our neighborhood. Even Ovo building in Greensquare which is properly planned and in alignment with the architecture design there stands at 28 storeys.
This clearly will impact the quality of life for the residents here.
We are already under strain from increased population here.
This should be planned and thought properly in terms of the short and long term impacts. Not just commercial values.
It would be a bad decision and unwise to simply dump around 8000 people in such a short space of time in our neighborhood without proper infrastructure planning.
I hope my input is taken consideration.

Please do not increase the number of residents in this project. Eastern Waterloo is full as it is. Catching the bus is often a nightmare and most of these new units do not have car parks. It is not fair on the elderly and disabled who already have to fight to be shown any respect or care by the high number of younger residents.
The Danks St District development has enough new residents coming in already under the original plan. Increasing it is unconscionable. The extra units and people they will bring will be too much for the existing infrastructure.
This is the type of development that should be close to high volume public transport. There is no metro or train on the eastern side of Waterloo. The buses cannot cope as it is. Eastern Waterloo seems to be becoming a bit of a dumping ground for as many people as possible but it does not have the capacity you seem to be assuming it does. It is already at tipping point.
Please stop the extra apartments.

I would like to make a submission in relation to the above project firmly opposing amending the development application to greatly increase the number of housing units in the project.
The existing approval is for 6 x mixed use buildings containing 376 residential apartments. The requested amendment is to increase buildings to provide for approximately 250 additional apartments. This will almost double the housing density on the site.
The surrounding road system is already choked by traffic, BEFORE a single unit there is occupied. Traffic and consequent pollution will vastly increase with the approved 376 units, and will make the area virtually un-livable for existing residents in what is already a heavily populated region of Sydney. To increase that impost by yet another further 250 units will run the risk of turning the entire area into a heavily congested area. Several major roads intersect near the development and it is also a heavily foot trafficked area. The number of near accidents between cars and pedestrians has already increased in the last couple of years and additional load will simply make that risk an inevitability.

The value of existing properties is likely to take a significant hit. We are owner-occupiers and love the area due to the mix of proximity to the city, amenities and open, green space with some expansive sky views. The views and amenity of surrounding existing properties will be severely affected by this change as it is out of scale with surrounding developments with not enough green space around it to balance it out. There is high density housing and then there is ridiculous overdevelopment. This clearly falls into the latter category.

As a resident in the area, I object to SSD-95997711 (903–921 Bourke Street, Waterloo). I support more housing in principle, but this proposal goes too far in height and scale for the area and hasn’t shown that the impacts on neighbours and the public domain are acceptable.

I am especially concerned about parking and day-to-day access. Adding roughly 250 extra apartments without a clear, workable plan for resident and visitor parking, pick-up/drop-off, deliveries and waste collection will push congestion and parking overflow into surrounding streets that are already under pressure. The transport assessment needs to deal with kerbside demand and local street impacts in a realistic way, not just peak-hour traffic. If the numbers don’t stack up, the Department should require more on-site parking and/or strong, enforceable measures to prevent overspill impacts on nearby residents.

The proposed towers are also too tall and will cause major overshadowing, especially in winter. The EIS should clearly show what changes compared with the approved scheme, including winter shadow diagrams (hourly) and a plain-English summary of who and what will lose sunlight. If the increased height makes nearby streets, homes, or open spaces significantly darker, the proposal should be redesigned with lower heights and better setbacks.

More residents also means more demand on open space and local services. The proposal should not increase dwellings while keeping communal/public open space effectively the same. Any public benefit commitments already tied to the site (public domain works, plazas, links, and contributions) must be protected and, if density is increased, should be improved rather than diluted.

I ask to refuse the proposal as currently presented, or require a major redesign that reduces height and bulk, protects sunlight, provides a credible parking/traffic and servicing plan, and delivers proportionate improvements to open space and public benefit outcomes.

I strongly object to the inadequate parking provision in the expanded development. As far as I can tell from the plans, an additional 233 apartments are planned compared to the original approval, but only 20 extra parking spaces. There should be at least an extra 350 parking spaces to avoid excess cars clogging up the local roads

This submission is about the dev project submitted by DASCO (SSD-95997711) at 903-921 Bourke St Waterloo,
As local residents close to the dev project I strongly object the amendment (increase the building hight significantly) of this project for following reasons:
It will bring extra pressure on local transportation facilities that already tight
It will block the natural lights to surroundings neighborhood buildings that put our life in the dark shadows
It will further increase the shortage of local public facilities
It will worse the local climate conditions introduce strong wind tunnel on nearby buildings
This change will make Waterloo suburb overall living conditions worse that should be blocked by the government

Infrastructure strain, Shortage of amenities, Visually overbearing development and overshadowing impacts.

The marked increase in size of this development is not reasonable. Current road infrastructure does not support the scale of the proposed increase in the size of the development. This development has not taken the opportunity to remove a bottle neck double intersection at Bourke St, intersecting McEvoy and Lachlan St - these two, busy and narrow intersections could have been redeveloped into just one intersection. Additionally, Lachlan St could have been widened to allow for two lanes for the entire length that runs between South Dowling St and Bourke St to avoid merging and the traffic bottle-necking that plagues the area at these intersections. The new proposed height of the towers will become monstrosities in the area given neighbouring towers have been around the same size as the current proposal, being 21 and 12 levels. Those heights were already increases on original proposals, so to increase the heights again is unreasonable. There are plenty of other opportunities for projects of scale in Waterloo, with numerous industrial and commercial sites available for redevelopment. The proposed size and scale of this redevelopment is also not close enough to mass transit infrastructure and will overburden already choked roads and footpaths with more vehicles bikes and pedestrian traffic. Not to mention the size of the shadows that will be cast on an already built up area.

While I recognise issues raised by others including Waterloo Action Group Sydney does need more housing and consequently I support this despite potentially being negatively impacted. That said I do agree with concerns of others and agree that we do need more infrastructure in the area in particular in my experience Green Square station needs additional trains.

The concerns outlined below relate specifically to the proposed increase in height and floor levels beyond the originally approved development.

The additional floors will introduce further population density, placing increased strain on already overburdened infrastructure. Local roads, parking, and public transport are currently operating at or near capacity.
The uplift in density will exacerbate these existing issues.

The proposed increase in building height is also excessive in the context of the approved development and the surrounding area. The additional levels significantly amplify the visual bulk and will result in a more dominant and overbearing presence within the streetscape, beyond what was originally contemplated.

Importantly, the cumulative impact of the additional height across the proposed towers will result in increased overshadowing, particularly during the winter solstice. The uplift in scale directly contributes to a broader and more prolonged shadow impact on nearby residences and public open space.

Finally, the increased height raises further concerns regarding wind impacts at street level. Taller buildings intensify downdraft and wind tunnelling effects, which may adversely affect pedestrian comfort and safety.

In summary, it is the increase in height and density beyond the approved development that gives rise to these additional and compounding impacts, and this uplift is not supported.

Hello,
To my understanding, the proposal is to go from:
- Bourke Street North – increasing from 12 storeys (approved) to 31 storeys (proposed).
- Young Street Tower - increasing from 21 storeys (approved) to 38 storeys (proposed).
This is an addition of 233 apartments with only an addition of 20 parking spaces which will inevitably lead to cars being parked anywhere (legal or not). This is going to lead to a severe shortage of parking.

The considerably taller buildings (basically double the height) will lead to shadowing for most of the day surrounding buildings and potentially some wind tunnelling effects though the latter is less certain and more of a guess.

Public transport is already at or over capacity in the area. It is common for busses like 304 to not stop a the McEvoy with Elisabeth street intersection at around 8 AM and for would be passengers to have to wait for followup 304 busses which may still have spare capacity. The new metro station designated as "Waterloo" was a slap in the face for the residents of Waterloo and Zetland as that station is practically "Red Fern station" and only if you squint really hard at the map of Waterloo do you see that it fits in the most top left corner of the Waterloo suburb. So in terms of public transport this area is not seeing any improvement. The train station at Green Square is already at capacity which is baffling in terms of city planning that a station was built in an area which was going to see very significant development on the vertical which such little capacity (escalators, stairs and concourse area).

Last but not least, such tall buildings will be out of place with the surroundings and with what people understood this area would be like as it develops further. This is not fighting progress or the necessities of housing but surely instead of doing 31 or 38 storeys buildings we can keep building ones between 8 to 12 storeys to match the surroundings. We should be in the extremes of "only houses" or 38 story high rise. There is a middle path of reason to be walked and we can take plenty of inspiration from European cities which had to deal with growth pains roughly a 100 years ago and they didn't go with +30 storeys buildings but generally with 8 storeys.

Regards,
Alexandru Ionica

The proposed development would result in the following unacceptable impacts:
Infrastructure strain — The influx of additional residents would impose unsustainable pressure on local roads and public transport, which are already operating beyond comfortable capacity. Services such as the 304 bus and peak-hour trains from Green Square are routinely overcrowded, with buses frequently unable to stop due to being full. Increasing residential density without corresponding infrastructure upgrades is irresponsible and short-sighted.
Inadequate public amenities — Existing community facilities are already under significant pressure and are not equipped to absorb further demand. Even at present, it is often difficult to secure seating or workspace at the local library. This development would further erode access to essential public amenities and diminish overall community amenity.
Overbearing and out-of-character built form — The proposed height and bulk are excessive and inconsistent with the established character of the neighbourhood. The scale of the towers would dominate the surrounding streetscape, resulting in an oppressive visual presence and a clear departure from the area’s existing built form.
Unacceptable overshadowing — The two oversized towers proposed at 903–921 Bourke Street, when combined with the tower proposed at 881–885 Bourke Street, would create substantial cumulative overshadowing during the winter months. This would significantly reduce sunlight access to nearby homes, streets, and public open spaces, negatively affecting residential amenity and public enjoyment.
Adverse wind impacts — The height and massing of the towers are likely to generate wind tunnel effects at street level, undermining pedestrian comfort and reducing the usability and appeal of the public domain.
Severe parking shortfall — The proposal seeks to introduce 233 additional apartments while providing only 20 extra parking spaces. This is clearly inadequate and would inevitably push more vehicles onto already congested local streets. The result would be intensified parking competition, increased traffic congestion, and further strain on an area already experiencing substantial development pressure.

Strong objection to the proposed major changes to the proposed modifications to the development plans for 903-921 Bourke St Waterloo SSD95997711.
The proposed increase in height and density is excessive and a departure from the originally approve concept
This is going to put major stress on existing roads and infrastructure for all residents in the area.

Good afternoon,

I am a resident living nearby who is concerned about the proposed increase in the number of apartments (to 38 storeys!).

I am not a NIMBY. I don't oppose an increase, but the size of this increase is concerning because the surrounding infrastructure is already at capacity. Buses go past without picking up passengers because they are full. There is no parking (and the proposal is only providing an extra 20 spots). It would be different if there was a metro nearby, but the Waterloo metro isn't within walking distance.
For this to be approved, it needs to be accompanied by an actual increase in infrastructure - transport in particular, but also parkland, schools, another library and aquatic centre (the ones at Green Square are at capacity).

Housing increases like this need infrastructure. Please work together with TfNSW and the Department of Education to ensure that no increase is approved without accompanying facilities, and require the developers to put in another park or playground - the one that's currently part of the proposal won't be enough.

Thank you,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed amendments for the development at 903–921 Bourke Street, Waterloo.

The requested changes represent a substantial and disproportionate increase in building height, with one structure rising from 21 to 38 storeys and another from 12 to 31 storeys. This escalation goes far beyond a minor modification and fundamentally alters the scale, character, and impact of the original proposal.

Such significant increases raise serious concerns:

- Overdevelopment and scale: The proposed heights are excessive for the area and are inconsistent with the existing and planned urban character of Waterloo. This risks setting an undesirable precedent for future developments.
- Overshadowing and loss of amenity: The additional height will likely result in increased overshadowing of surrounding residential areas, reducing natural light, privacy, and overall liveability for current residents.
- Infrastructure strain: A development of this intensified scale will place additional pressure on local infrastructure, including traffic, public transport, schools, and community services, which may already be operating near capacity.
- Wind, visual, and environmental impacts: Taller buildings can create adverse wind tunnels, visual bulk, and broader environmental impacts that have not been adequately justified in the amendment.

The magnitude of these changes suggests a departure from the original planning intent and warrants careful reconsideration. Approving such a substantial increase without clear, demonstrated community benefit undermines confidence in the planning process.

For these reasons, I strongly object to the proposed amendments and request that they be rejected, or at minimum, subjected to a more rigorous review with genuine community consultation.

Sincerely,
Fatih Gurcaglar

I wish to formally object to the proposed modifications to the approved residential development, specifically the increase in building height. The revised proposal introduces excessive height and density that is inconsistent with the surrounding character and exceeds what was originally deemed appropriate.
The increased scale will place undue strain on already limited local infrastructure, including transport, schools, healthcare services, and public amenities, which are not equipped to support the intensified population.
Furthermore, the proposal fails to adequately address the imbalance between development and community needs, resulting in diminished amenity, overcrowding, and a reduced quality of life for existing residents.
For these reasons, I strongly oppose the proposed changes and request that the original approved parameters be maintained.

Subject: Submission – SSD-95997711 (903–921 Bourke Street, Waterloo)

I am writing to provide my submission regarding the proposed amendment to the development at 903–921 Bourke Street, Waterloo.

As a resident of the Tiara building facing Bourke Street, I will be directly impacted by this proposal. Given the building’s orientation (West facing to Bourke Street) and close proximity to the site, these impacts are not limited to my dwelling but are likely to affect multiple residences within the building.

While I acknowledge the need for additional housing, I have significant concerns regarding the proposed increase in building height and density.

The increase in height (up to 126m) will introduce a much larger built form directly opposite existing residences. This will result in substantial overshadowing, particularly affecting west-facing apartments in the Tiara building. The loss of natural light will be material and will directly reduce the amenity and liveability of these homes.

In addition, Bourke Street in this section is relatively narrow and already experiences consistent traffic. Introducing a development of this scale in such close proximity will:
- Create a noticeably darker streetscape due to increased building bulk and reduced light penetration
- Increase noise levels for existing residents
- Further intensify traffic congestion as a result of the significant increase in the number of apartments and residents

These impacts are cumulative and will significantly affect the quality of life of current residents in the surrounding area.

In its current form, the proposed amendment is not appropriate for the existing urban context and places a disproportionate burden on neighbouring properties. I respectfully request that the scale of the proposal be reconsidered, with a reduction in height and density to better balance the need for development with the preservation of residential amenity.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this submission.

Kind regards,
Nicolas Van De Walle
113/804 Bourke Street Waterloo,
2017 NSW

The proposal is way too big for the area. Will cause strain on infrastructure such as the (non-existent) public transport will be an eyesore on Bourke Street. We need more green space, not more ugly tall towers that cause wind tunnels and overshadowing.

Waterloo is already the most densely populated suburb in Australia, it does not need more mega towers.

I strongly object to the project, specifically the proposal for an amendment to the Development Application, for a number of reasons. First and foremost is the absurdity of this amendment, proposing that the buildings be increased in height from 12 to 31 storeys for Bourke Street North and 21 to 38 storeys for the Young Street Tower, at this stage in the development. They have already dug the pits and set the foundations for the buildings, can they prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they weren't always planning to increase the height of the towers before they broke ground? It calls into question the validity of the original submission for development approval and the due diligence carried out by the Department.

Secondly, the towers themselves at their newly proposed heights would create significant overshadowing of nearby buildings and materially change the character of that entire precinct. 12 and 21 storeys fit in with the suburb profile and are appropriate for the amount of amenities they have included in the plans, expanding beyond that is irresponsible and not appropriate for the area.

I hold no opposition to building new housing in Waterloo or anywhere nearby, but the mid-development expansion of the plans in this particular development are unacceptable and cannot be established as a precedent. The amendment to the DA should be denied and the process for amendments being submitted reviewed more thoroughly, this should never have made it to exhibition and should have received intervention from the Department at an earlier stage.