Mixed-use development with in-fill affordable housing - Leeds Street, Rhodes

Given the current housing supply crisis, I strongly support this submission as it seeks to substantially improve housing supply.
The provision of ground level retail use, communal open spaces, site links and public open spaces means that this project will significantly improve the local environment around it and have a substantial positive impact, in addition to the significant and important increase in housing supply.
It is crucial this development is approved as soon as possible.

I object to this now being up to 17 stories , This was not the original heights submitted and now typical Billbergia style and only thinking about money and not the impact on the community or existing resident who have purchased million dollar plus apartments now having views ruined because of their greed.

I also find that allowing a high rise of this size right on the foreshore is absurd as nowhere along the river all the way to city is a high-rise been built on river foreshore , Please see photo and River view and how now allowing a high-rise along river will ruin the the whole river structure allowing such a height so close to river and will look ridiculous , This height is normally built more inland and lower heights on foreshore which was the original plan. Image 2 is the proposed site and again does not fit in allowing a high rise along river and will stick out like sore thumb as nowhere is such a height ever been built so close to river. Why ruin the beauty of our city for one greedy developer ?

I object these heights and do understand why a application is even allowed after original plans approved , Billerigia are hoping resident do see the new application which many will not and therefore Billbergia gets to profit at the lose of residents who put there life savings into buying apartments.

Rhodes lacks the infrastructure for this increase in population. Placing people in currently well connected areas without actually improving the area to support this growth is shortsighted and not actually improving the livelihood, sense of community, crime or liveability for anyone. There are pockets of Sydney that actively reject accessibility (such as northern beaches and eastern suburbs or even five docks and surrounds) and this should be tackled. Development should happen across the greater Sydney area equally and fairly. Not cramming people in like sardines because the community lacks the time, resources, trust or language to object properly. The roads in Rhodes and surround are horrendous and you have developers lying to sell their over priced apartments as “15min drive from CBD” and things will only get worse with uncontrolled and unsupported growth. The blatant neglect and corruption by local council and lack of proper investigation and consultation by state government is disgusting. This development should not allowed or encouraged in this operating environment. Trains, shopping malls and car parks are all already at capacity. What will this new building do to the area?

I object to the key changes submitted by Billbergia Pty Ltd, Mixed-use development with in-fill affordable housing - Leeds Street, Rhodes (SSD-67419241)

Billbergia's primary interest appears to be increasing their profits, with little regard for how adding extra levels to this project will impact the Rhodes community. They have misused the government's low-income grant in an attempt to prioritize profits from selling high-value apartments, showing no commitment to providing housing for low-income residents as the grant intended. The current advertising for this building reflects a focus on high-priced apartments rather than affordable options.

At a recent community gathering in Rhodes, Rick Graf attended on behalf of Billbergia. During the event, questions were raised regarding the low-income grant that is being misused for high-value apartments. Graf's response was dismissive, claiming that the lower levels are intended for low-income buyers, which only confirmed that the additional heights were never designed with affordability in mind. This approach only serves to exploit loopholes for profit, disregarding the community's best interests. Their actions are damaging the living conditions in Rhodes, as they show no intention of addressing the traffic congestion and other problems now plaguing the area.

This is the second amendment application Billbergia has submitted for this development, altering the original plan. The company has a concerning history in Rhodes, continually increasing building heights during construction. They have already received approval for increased levels from the original plan and are now seeking permission for yet another height increase. Additionally, they plan to remove 17 trees and construct a seawall outside of the site boundary, further disturbing the natural environment.

Submitting amendment applications throughout construction is a dubious strategy that Billbergia, along with other developers, often employs in hopes that residents will overlook these changes, allowing them to be approved with minimal community opposition. This practice needs to be stopped.

I object to the key changes submitted by Billbergia Pty Ltd for 25-27 Leeds Street Rhodes.

Billbergia P/L only interest is increasing their profits and has no interetest that the effects adding extra levels to this project will impact on Rhodes, They have used the Governments low income grant as a attempt to prioritise profits for selling high value appartments and show no interest in providing apartments for low income as Government grant was intended, The current advertising sales for this building reflects this and is no mean low income apartments.

At a recent Rhodes community gathering Rick Graf attended on behalf of Billergia , These question were presented to him regarding the low income grant that's being miss used for high value appartments instead , Rick Graf's response was arrogant stating the lower levels are intended for the low income buyers which only verified that adding extra heights was never intended for the lower income but for their own loophole to increase their own profits therefore not in community favour , This behaviour is ruining the living conditions in Rhodes as they show no interest in improving infrastructure for the traffic congestion and problems that Rhodes is now suffering.

This is now the second amendment application Billbergia has applied for this development from the original plan ,Billbergia have a terrible history in Rhodes by continuing adding extra heights throughout construction and now they are repeating this greedy behaviour with this project , They have already been granted increased levels from original plan and now submitting for another level as well as disturbing nature by removing a additional 17 trees and construction of a sea wall outside of site boundary.

Sumitting amendment application throughout constructions is a sneaky habit Billbergia as well as other developers use in hope that residents miss these amendments and they are approved with little or no fuss from the community. This needs to be stopped.

I object to the key changes submitted by Billbergia Pty Ltd for the development at 25-27 Leeds Street, Rhodes.

Billbergia's primary interest appears to be increasing their profits, with little regard for how adding extra levels to this project will impact the Rhodes community. They have misused the government's low-income grant in an attempt to prioritize profits from selling high-value apartments, showing no commitment to providing housing for low-income residents as the grant intended. The current advertising for this building reflects a focus on high-priced apartments rather than affordable options.

At a recent community gathering in Rhodes, Rick Graf attended on behalf of Billbergia, During the event, questions were raised regarding the low-income grant that is being misused for high-value apartments. Graf's response was dismissive, claiming that the lower levels are intended for low-income buyers, which only confirmed that the additional heights were never designed with affordability in mind. This approach only serves to exploit loopholes for profit, disregarding the community's best interests. Their actions are damaging the living conditions in Rhodes, as they show no intention of addressing the traffic congestion and other problems now plaguing the area.

This is the second amendment application Billbergia has submitted for this development, altering the original plan. The company has a concerning history in Rhodes, continually increasing building heights during construction. They have already received approval for increased levels from the original plan and are now seeking permission for yet another height increase. Additionally, they plan to remove 17 trees and construct a seawall outside of the site boundary, further disturbing the natural environment.

Submitting amendment applications throughout construction is a dubious strategy that Billbergia, along with other developers, often employs in hopes that residents will overlook these changes, allowing them to be approved with minimal community opposition. This practice needs to be stopped.

I strongly object to the revised proposal allowing the development to reach up to 17 stories. This significant increase from the originally submitted plans is deeply concerning, particularly for existing residents who have purchased high-value properties with the expectation of unobstructed river views. Allowing this height would unfairly compromise those views and diminish the enjoyment and value of their homes.

Moreover, the placement of such a high-rise directly on the river foreshore is unprecedented and inconsistent with the surrounding built environment. There is no comparable development of this scale positioned so close to the river anywhere along the foreshore from this site to the city. This proposal disrupts the natural flow and visual harmony of the riverfront and sets a worrying precedent for future developments.

Foreshore areas have traditionally featured lower-rise buildings to preserve the natural landscape and maintain public amenity. This change disregards those principles and prioritises private commercial gain over the long-term interests of the community.

I urge the planning authority to reconsider this proposal and uphold a fair and consistent approach to urban development that respects both existing residents and the unique character of the riverfront.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed mixed-use development including fill and affordable housing at Leeds Street, Rhodes, as listed on your Planning Portal. As a resident of the Rhodes community, I am deeply concerned about the scale, impact, and cumulative effects of this development within the context of other recent and ongoing projects in the area.

Key Grounds for Objection:
1. Infrastructure Overload The Rhodes Place Strategy already envisions more than 4,000 new residential dwellings, including high-rise towers up to 45 storeys.
Multiple approved towers (e.g. 48-storey Harmony – Rhodes Central East, 42-storey Marquet & Mary Street) already push the precinct’s density beyond original expectations that capped initial development at 3,000 homes until infrastructure catches up—yet approvals are already exceeding this threshold. The proposed development will place additional strain on local infrastructure—roads, schools, public transport, and healthcare services—which are already struggling to keep pace with rapid growth.
- Rhodes Station Overload: Despite promises of upgrades, the station remains overcrowded during peak hours. New developments will worsen platform congestion and commuter delays.
- Limited Road Capacity: Blaxland Road, Concord Road, and Marquet Street are already congested. Additional traffic from new towers will compound delays and safety risks.

2. Environmental and Land Concerns The inclusion of fill raises questions about ground stability, drainage, and flood risk in a waterfront suburb. These elements warrant further environmental review and public transparency.
- Foreshore Encroachment: High-rise towers are creeping closer to the Parramatta River, threatening visual amenity and ecological balance.
- Tree Canopy Goals vs. Reality: While the Rhodes Place Strategy promotes increased greenery, recent developments involve significant tree removal and hardscaping.

3. Cumulative Impact of Intensification This proposal cannot be viewed in isolation. Its approval, alongside numerous other projects, contributes to piecemeal overdevelopment. The area needs a coordinated, sustainable growth strategy that fully considers long-term livability and community amenity.
- Height Creep: Projects like Harmony and Rhodes Central East have used planning bonuses to exceed local height controls, setting a precedent for future overdevelopment.
- Character Disruption: The scale and bulk of new towers clash with the original low-rise foreshore vision, diminishing the suburb’s livability and identity.

4. Community Character and Amenity The scale and design of the proposal may result in overshadowing, loss of privacy, and a shift away from the suburban character of Rhodes, which many residents value. We urge the department to consider the compatibility of this project with the surrounding built environment.
- School and Childcare Shortages: The promised new primary school is still pending delivery, while population growth continues unchecked.
- Health and Recreation Gaps: Despite some developer-led contributions (e.g. recreation centre by Billbergia), broader infrastructure remains insufficient for projected demand.

5. Affordable Housing Clarity While affordable housing is a critical need, details about its integration, tenure, and long-term affordability are unclear. We request greater transparency regarding how this component meets genuine community needs.

Leeds Street proposal must be assessed in the context of cumulative development pressure. Approvals are outpacing infrastructure delivery, and further high-density projects will tip the balance, undermining the Rhodes Place Strategy’s intent for sustainable, community-focused growth. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the department reevaluate the current proposal, consider community input more thoroughly, and require additional environmental and infrastructure assessments before progressing the application.

1. Insufficient Public Transport Infrastructure

Rhodes is already struggling to cope with the current population density. The public transport network — particularly the train station and local bus services — is under significant pressure, especially during peak hours. This development would further strain these services, and there are no clear plans in place to upgrade or expand the public transport capacity to meet the rapid and ongoing growth.

2. “Affordable Housing” in Name Only

The proposed affordable housing is unlikely to be genuinely affordable for the people who need it most. Previous developments in the area have claimed to include affordable housing, yet pricing remains well above what is accessible to low- or moderate-income households. Without clear definitions, eligibility criteria, and pricing controls, this component risks becoming a marketing label rather than a meaningful contribution to housing equity.

3. Overdevelopment and Simultaneous High-rise Construction

The cumulative impact of multiple high-rise developments being constructed simultaneously in Rhodes is severely affecting the quality of life for residents. Constant noise, dust pollution, blocked roads, and safety hazards have become part of daily life. Adding another large-scale development will exacerbate these issues and further compromise health, well-being, and access within the community.

4. Loss of Sunlight and Overshadowing

The increased building height will lead to significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties. This will reduce natural sunlight, impacting mental health, living comfort, and potentially the value of existing homes. The community deserves thoughtful urban design that respects existing residents and minimises negative environmental and social impacts.

I’m reaching out because I have genuine concerns that this proposed project could significantly alter the living environment I’ve come to value—introducing noise, traffic, and visual changes that may erode the neighborhood’s quiet character. I worry the added strain on local infrastructure and air quality could diminish residents’ day-to-day well-being. I’d appreciate the opportunity to discuss how these impacts can be thoughtfully addressed before any final decisions are made.

I strongly object to the project as per attached

Rhodes has no more capacity to build any more residential apartments

Subject: Objection to Proposed Development in Rhodes

The existing infrastructure in Rhodes is already under significant strain, with severe traffic congestion at entry and exit points and limited public transport servicing the peninsula. Introducing a high-density development under these conditions will not benefit current residents nor those moving into the area.

The use of low-income housing provisions as a means to bypass planning restrictions appears to be a blatant attempt to prioritise profit over community wellbeing. Such an approach is unacceptable and undermines the integrity of urban planning processes.

It is important to note that the single submission in favour of this proposal comes from an individual who does not reside in Rhodes. Those of us who live here experience daily the challenges posed by overdevelopment: compromised access, pressure on services, and declining quality of life.

Rhodes is already a high-density suburb, and numerous studies have highlighted the correlation between overpopulation and negative impacts on mental health, community safety, and social cohesion. Further intensification of development in this area will only exacerbate these concerns.

Moreover, the environmental consequences cannot be ignored. The site in question is adjacent to sensitive mangrove ecosystems which are highly vulnerable to disruption. Proceeding with such a large-scale waterfront project poses a serious risk to the local environment.

I urge you to reconsider this proposal. The residents of Rhodes have worked hard to build a vibrant, livable community. We should not be made to bear the cost of poor planning and unchecked development.

Rhodes is currently high density with poor infrastructure. Rhodes no longer feeling safe place to live as many drivers speeding, no stopping at the crossing. We nee more trains.
We need help to fix infrastructure before any further property development should be consider. I fully understand Australian needs affordable housing, Rhodes is not a suitable place as we are a very small suburb, over populated. We nee more transport service, traffic lights, speed cameras, street lights (that works), waste management, hoons with noise 9pm-3am speeding on Shoreline and Walker Street. Due to high density, we have seen more break in apartment, storage unit and local business shop. Canada Bay Council have increase our council fee but no one can see where the money is spend, many residents already consider to leave Rhodes, due to the poor conditions. Is no longer safe and no one is listening to the resident. We like to be heard in person not just over email. Affordable housing any more development is the last thing we need. Developer and council needs to work together make it happen and fix the current issue. Enough is enough, resident has been hit by a car already, are the council doing to act more after someone gets serious hurt or kill? Thank you reading my comment. We need voice and transparency.

As a local resident, I strongly object to the proposed amendment submitted by Billbergia on these grounds:

1. Destruction of Native Mangroves and Environmental Impact. The proposed construction of a seawall beyond the development site boundary threatens the delicate mangrove ecosystem along the Parramatta River. Mangroves play a critical role in maintaining riverbank stability, supporting native biodiversity, and filtering pollutants from stormwater runoff. Disturbing or removing this habitat will have long-term negative consequences on the local environment, marine life, and water quality. This contradicts broader sustainability goals and the intent of preserving Sydney’s natural assets. Significant amounts of money and effort has been put into cleaning up Parramatta river at Rhodes Peninsula by the government and council and undoing destruction caused by greedy corporations. We should not be going backwards and disrupting the ecosystem in the name of profits again.

2. Traffic Congestion on Walker Street and Leeds Street. Traffic congestion is already a major issue in the Rhodes area, particularly along Walker Street and Leeds Street. This is most acute during weekends and peak hours, when the local road network is overwhelmed. An increase in dwellings will place additional strain on already-congested roads, significantly worsening the situation for current residents and our many visitors to the Rhodes bay from neighbouring suburbs.

3. Public Transport Capacity – Rhodes Train Station. Rhodes train station is currently operating over capacity during peak periods with critical overcrowding already during any days with train issues. Any further residential development without a substantial upgrade to transport infrastructure will exacerbate overcrowding, impacting commuter safety and comfort. Increasing the height and density of this development will directly increase demand on an already stressed public transport system.

4. Emergency Vehicle Access and Public Safety. Leeds Street is one of the primary access points into Rhodes, and it is already known to be difficult for large emergency vehicles, such as fire trucks, to navigate due to traffic congestion. Adding further residential and traffic density risks blocking vital access for emergency services, which poses a direct threat to the safety of residents.

5. Unaddressed Council Objections. The council has already objected to the development last year on the grounds that the gross floor area exceeds the maximum allowable GFA, including bonus incentives allowed under the SEPP (Housing). Furthermore, using low income housing as a loophole to drive up the sellable price of their apartments is an extremely unethical practice.

There was too many buildings in this area, the community were over packed and loaded in this area, too much noises building new apartments we need a quiet area for living in day and night time, not keeping build nosying from 6am everyday

I strongly oppose this development proposal on several grounds. Rhodes is already grappling with significant infrastructure strain — there are traffic bottlenecks getting in and out of the peninsula, and public transport options remain limited and overcrowded. Adding yet another high-density development will only worsen these issues, to the detriment of both current residents and any future occupants.

It’s particularly concerning that the developers appear to be leveraging affordable housing provisions as a way to push through more construction. This comes across as a transparent attempt to bypass proper planning scrutiny, rather than a genuine effort to support community needs.

Rhodes is one of the most densely populated suburbs in Sydney. Numerous studies show a clear link between high-density environments and challenges to psychological wellbeing, community safety, and social cohesion. Increasing density further, without corresponding improvements in infrastructure and amenities, poses real risks to the health and welfare of local residents.

Additionally, the environmental impact of such a large-scale project cannot be ignored. The development site is near ecologically sensitive mangrove areas, which are critical habitats and already vulnerable. Large developments near the water’s edge can have lasting consequences on these ecosystems.

It’s also worth noting that the sole submission in support of this project is from someone who does not even live in Rhodes, while local feedback has been overwhelmingly negative.

This development does not align with the needs, capacity, or wishes of our community. Please reject this proposal and protect the livability and sustainability of Rhodes.

I strongly oppose the amended development application seeking to increase building height from the original approved plans to 17 stories for the following reasons:
1.Complete Departure from Original Approval
This massive height increase (from original plans to 17 stories) violates the planning principles of consistency and community trust. Residents purchased apartments based on the originally approved scale and character of the development.

2.Unprecedented Impact on River Foreshore
No comparable high-rise exists along the entire riverfront leading to the city center. The proposed 17-story tower would:
Create a jarring visual intrusion visible for kilometers along the river
Set a dangerous precedent for waterfront development
Disrupt the established low-rise character of the foreshore

3.Direct Harm to Existing Residents
This development would:
Destroy water views from million-dollar apartments purchased in good faith
Reduce property values for existing homeowners
Create excessive overshadowing and privacy impacts

4.Purely Profit-Driven Motivation
This amendment appears designed solely to maximize developer profits at community expense. The original height limits were presumably established through proper planning considerations that balanced development needs with community interests.

Please reject this application and uphold the original development plan.