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

I write to formally object to the proposed State Significant Development (SSD) at Leeds Street, Rhodes by Billbergia Group, currently on public exhibition.
My objection is based on serious and ongoing concerns regarding Billbergia’s compliance history, the cumulative burden of overdevelopment in Rhodes, and the systemic lack of effective oversight and accountability by both state and local authorities.

1. Persistent Breach of DA Conditions by Applicant

The developer has a clear and documented history of disregarding development consent conditions, including:

Repeated breaches of construction hours;
Failure to comply with traffic and access permit conditions;
Excessive dust, noise, and vibration without proper controls;
Obstructive and disrespectful conduct from contractors and subcontractors on-site;

Public domain works executed recently with no notice or coordination with affected neighbours.

These are not isolated incidents. They represent a systemic culture of non-compliance that has gone unaddressed, largely due to an ineffective enforcement framework.

2. Lack of Enforcement – Government Approval Without Oversight

One of the most concerning aspects of this planning process is the disconnect between approval and enforcement.

The NSW Government grants SSD approvals, yet responsibility for enforcement falls largely to local councils, who lack the resources, monitoring systems, or will to act. In practice:

Most compliance breaches are not detected by Council officers, but are only investigated after residents escalate complaints;

Infringement notices are rare (compared to what has happened), and where issued, amounts such as $6,000 are inconsequential to large developers and are treated as a cost of doing business;

There is no public transparency or accountability regarding repeat offenders.

If the Department cannot guarantee effective, ongoing monitoring and enforcement, this application should not be approved. Granting approval without the means or intent to uphold the law makes a mockery of the planning system and disrespects the rights of residents.

3. Cumulative Impacts and Liveability Decline in Rhodes
Rhodes is already suffering under the weight of:

Excessive density increases with no corresponding uplift in public infrastructure;

Chronic traffic bottlenecks and safety hazards around construction sites;

Degraded air and noise quality due to overlapping building programs;

A lack of usable public open space in proportion to the growing population.

This proposed development adds yet another oversized tower to a precinct already at breaking point, and under the management of a developer with a troubling enforcement history.

4. Formal Notice and Legal Consequence
The Department is formally put on notice:
If this application is approved, and Billbergia or its contractors once again violate DA conditions or planning laws — including, but not limited to, unauthorised works, breach of permitted hours, or public safety risks — I reserve all rights to pursue legal action, including initiating proceedings for negligence and/or failure to regulate.

The Department cannot disclaim responsibility after approval. A pattern of avoidable, foreseeable breaches — well-documented across previous stages — will not be tolerated under the protection of “delegated enforcement.” Approval without meaningful enforcement is complicity.

Conclusion
I urge the Department to reject this SSD application in its current form. Approving another high-impact development under these conditions — with no change to the enforcement regime and no demonstrated commitment from the applicant to improve behaviour — would be reckless and irresponsible.

If the Department insists on approval, it must be conditional on stringent compliance reporting, independent monitoring, meaningful penalties, and binding community accountability mechanisms from day one.

Sincerely,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed mixed-use development with in-fill affordable housing at Leeds Street, Rhodes (SSD-67419241). While I support the need for increased housing supply, I have serious concerns regarding the project's impact on traffic, the environment, and community infrastructure.

🚗 1. Traffic and Transport Impacts
Increased Congestion: The development proposes up to six towers ranging from 10 to 18 storeys, significantly increasing the local population. Leeds Street and surrounding roads (e.g., Blaxland Road, Concord Road) are already heavily congested during peak hours. This development will exacerbate traffic bottlenecks and reduce road safety.

Insufficient Public Transport Capacity: While Rhodes Station and ferry services are nearby, current public transport infrastructure is already under pressure. Without confirmed upgrades to capacity or frequency, the influx of residents will overwhelm existing services.

Parking Shortfalls: The development may not provide adequate parking for residents and visitors, leading to spillover into surrounding streets and further strain on local parking availability.

🌱 2. Environmental Concerns
Foreshore Impact: The proposed high-rise buildings are located directly on the Parramatta River foreshore, an area that should be preserved for public access and ecological protection. The visual bulk and scale of the towers will disrupt the natural riverfront character and set a concerning precedent for future developments.

Loss of Green Space and Trees: The project involves tree removal and significant hardscaping. This contradicts the Rhodes Place Strategy’s goal of enhancing green space and tree canopy coverage.

Flood and Stormwater Risks: The site is near the river and may be vulnerable to flooding. Increased impermeable surfaces will heighten stormwater runoff, potentially impacting water quality and increasing flood risk downstream.

🏫 3. Community Infrastructure Deficiencies
Strain on Schools and Health Services: The development will bring hundreds of new residents, yet there is no clear commitment to expanding local schools, childcare, or health services. The proposed new primary school in the Rhodes Place Strategy is not yet delivered.

Lack of Social Infrastructure: There is limited provision for community centres, libraries, or recreational facilities to support the growing population. The proposed public spaces within the development are insufficient to meet the needs of both new and existing residents.

Construction Disruption: The scale and duration of construction will cause prolonged noise, dust, and disruption to the community, particularly for those living nearby.

🏙️ 4. Built Form and Urban Design
Excessive Height and Density: The proposed heights (up to 18 storeys) are inconsistent with the original planning intent for the foreshore, which envisioned lower-scale development to preserve views and amenity. This scale is out of character with the surrounding area and will overshadow public spaces.

Precedent for Overdevelopment: Approving this project in its current form may encourage similar high-density proposals along the foreshore, undermining the long-term vision for a balanced and sustainable Rhodes precinct.

Request for Consideration
I respectfully urge the Department to:

Require a comprehensive traffic and transport impact assessment with mitigation strategies.

Mandate greater setbacks and reduced building heights along the foreshore.

Ensure infrastructure upgrades (schools, transport, green space) are delivered before or concurrently with development.

Reassess the environmental impacts, particularly on the riverfront and local biodiversity.

Thank you for considering this submission. I trust that the Department will prioritize sustainable, community-focused planning outcomes for Rhodes.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed residential development at Leeds Street, Rhodes. As a resident of Shoreline Drive in Rhodes, I am deeply concerned about the significant negative impacts this project will have on our community, property values, and overall quality of life.

1. Decrease in Property Values

High-density developments can lead to a decline in property values due to factors such as increased traffic congestion, noise pollution, and reduced green space. Research indicates that developments perceived to reduce the quality of life in an area can lead to a decrease in property demand and value.

2. Increased Population Density

The proposed development will significantly increase the local population, leading to overcrowding and strain on existing infrastructure. High population density can result in problems such as traffic congestion and exacerbated air pollution, affecting the quality of life of urban residents.

3. Environmental and Health Concerns

The increased population density is likely to lead to higher levels of air and noise pollution, which are associated with various health issues. Living in high-density environments, the effects of environmental factors like pollution, noise, and traffic congestion are felt more acutely.

4. Strain on Public Transport and Parking

Our area already faces challenges with public transport capacity and parking availability. The additional residents will exacerbate these issues, making it difficult for current residents to commute and find parking spaces. Traffic congestion is a major problem for sustainable urban development; heavy traffic inevitably reduces the happiness of life and increases the cost of living, leading to a loss of labor force in urban areas.

5. Safety and Security Concerns

The increased population density may lead to higher crime rates and reduced safety in the area. High-density developments can lead to overcrowding, strain on public services, and the degradation of local amenities, all of which can negatively affect property values.

6. Mental Health and Quality of Life

Overcrowding and reduced access to green spaces can negatively impact residents' mental health and overall well-being. High-density residential development correlated with higher congestion costs, less green space per capita, and pollution impacts lead to a lower value of socio-cultural index.

Given these concerns, I urge the State Authorities and the greedy developers to reconsider the approval of this development. The potential negative impacts on property values, quality of life, and community well-being far outweigh any potential benefits. I respectfully request that you take these issues into account and reject the proposed development.
Thank you for considering my objections. I look forward to your response.

The area of Rhodes is already over-populated and it's becoming a place we can hardly call home as it is extremely hard to park on the streets, to share supermarkets and facilities and most importantly to drive around.
I often worry about my mental health and the effect of massive crowds have in my life. I never chose Rhodes as a place to live in thinking I was going to be left down my State Government who seems to only be concerned about the profits the developers can make. Could someone please stop the massive high-rise towers which have converted our already small streets in concrete jungles.
I struggle to handle the level of pollution in the area, not to mention that using public transport is an absolute nightmare.
I beg you to please stop the massive & greedy developers from doing what they are doing to our area! please!!

I object to the project because:
1. Rhodes is already overcrowded. Currently we are suffered traffic congestion from Rhodes to/from Concord Road. Without upgrading the infrastructure, more traffic jam is resulted.
2. Increased 6 storeys mean more residents lives in Rhodes. This can reduce our current access to services, reduce pubic spaces, decrease in living quality, which will increase the risk of mental health issues of residents
3. The site is adjacent to mangrove ecosystems. Large scale development is contradict to environmental sustainability goals.

The area is already congested and land is limited. Further housing developments may place additional strain on the community and infrastructure.

I object to this development proposal for the following reasons:
1. The area is already very crowded. Adding more buildings and people will put extra pressure on local traffic, facilities, and services.
2. The affordable housing component may negatively affect local property values. As owners, we are concerned this could impact our investment and the overall quality of the neighbourhood.

In my view, this development is unnecessary and not suitable for this location

1. Too much people living in Rhodes
2. Traffic jam everywhere. Traffic condition do not support the increased residents.

1. Traffic condition do not support the additional 6 mixed-use and residential towers
2. Too crowded in Rhodes

Dear Sir/Madam;
For strongly object to the project in Rhodes -Leeds street, Rhodes1. Trees should not be cut down for the benefit of developers and the greening of the community should not be sacrificed. There is not enough greening there.
2. The density there is already very high and should not be increased. It will destroy the living environment. Traffic and living environment will deteriorate.
3. Affect the view.


Thanks
Lihong guo

As a resident of this community, I have serious concerns regarding the negative impact this development will have on the already overburdened infrastructure and quality of life in our neighbourhood. Rhodes is currently experiencing significant strain due to overpopulation and excessive density. This development, if approved, will only exacerbate these existing problems.
1. Increased Traffic Congestion
The roads in and around Rhodes are already congested, particularly during peak hours with only 2 main roads leading in and out of the center. Adding a high-density development will worsen traffic flow, increase commute times, and raise safety concerns for pedestrians and cyclists.
2. Strain on Infrastructure and Services
Our local services—including schools, healthcare facilities, public transport, and recreational areas are already operating at or near capacity. This development will place further pressure on these vital services without adequate plans for expansion or support.
3. Loss of Community Character and Amenity
Rhodes has long been valued for its residential charm and community-oriented feel. A large-scale development threatens this character and risks turning our suburb into a high-density zone that is inconsistent with the area’s intended residential planning vision. Crime rate is already rising in the area, and we have no local police or fire stations.
4. Noise, Pollution and Construction Disruption
The proposed development will bring prolonged periods of noise, dust, and disruption to nearby residents and the environment. Post-construction, the increased population density will also lead to more noise and reduced air quality, affecting the health and well-being of the community.
5. Environmental Concerns
There are insufficient details on how this development will preserve green space, manage stormwater runoff, and protect local flora and fauna. Sustainability and environmental responsibility must be central to any new construction project.
Conclusion:
I strongly urge the council to reconsider this development proposal and to prioritise the needs and voices of current residents. Growth should be sustainable, carefully planned, and in keeping with the capacity of our local infrastructure and the spirit of our community. Approving this project would disregard the long-term wellbeing of the residents and the suburb as a whole. The approval of the current developments has already added to the pressures on the community with too manly high-rise building approved and underway. We cant handle another project like this and the community will not tolerate it.

To Whom It May Concern:

As an owner of an unit in Rhodes NSW. I have previously living in Rhodes for many years. I am writing to formally object to the proposed development (Application Number: SSD-67419241) at Leeds Street, Rhodes

The existing infrastructure in Rhodes is already under significant strain. Traffic congestion at key access points is severe. Introducing another high-density development under these conditions would place further pressure on already overstretched services and negatively impact both current and future residents.

The use of affordable housing provisions in this proposal appears to serve more as a loophole than a genuine effort to address housing needs. Leveraging such mechanisms to circumvent established planning guidelines undermines public confidence in the integrity of urban development processes and raises serious concerns about the developer's priorities.

In contrast, those of us who live here experience first-hand the consequences of overdevelopment: reduced access to services, increased traffic, overcrowded public spaces, and a general decline in livability.

Rhodes is already one of the most densely populated suburbs in the region. Further intensification, without a corresponding upgrade to infrastructure and services, risks compounding issues relating to mental health, community safety, and social cohesion.

Environmental considerations must also be taken seriously. The proposed site is adjacent to sensitive mangrove ecosystems that play a vital role in local biodiversity and coastal resilience. Large-scale development in such proximity poses a serious threat to these fragile habitats and contradicts broader environmental sustainability goals.

In conclusion, I respectfully urge the planning authority to reject the Leeds Street development proposal. The residents of Rhodes deserve thoughtful, balanced urban planning that enhances—not diminishes—our quality of life.

Yours sincerely,

The project is placing extra pressure on the already overloaded traffic and transport system in Rhodes. No remediation measures haven been taken to address such issues brought by overpopulation.

I strongly object the plan of the mixed-use buidling complex on Leeds Street Rhodes.
- Rhodes is known for its fantastic landscape with the combination of view of city and river. Adding such a high rise on along the shore will damage the harmony of the nature for sure. The residents who have already spent millions of dollars having the views will be ruined by the greedy Billbergia who only think of profit and don't care about the existing community.
- Rhodes residents have been suffering severe traffic congestions not only on weekend but also weekdays. Withought further development on the roads and other infrascture, the situation can only become worse not even to mention adding more building complex to the already jammed areas.
- It appears the state government is exploting the house supply rather than genuinely solving the housing shortage which Billgergia are taking advantages of and using this as a chance to maximise their own profit. This is totally unacceptable to prioritise a private company's profitability over the wellbeing and benefits of the whole community.
The hardworking residents of Rhodes deserve a better living environment and should not stand the cost of poor planning over development.

Formal Objection to Proposed Development in Rhodes

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development in Rhodes.
The existing infrastructure in the area is already under significant strain. Severe traffic congestion at both entry and exit points, combined with limited public transport options, make Rhodes ill-equipped to support further high-density development. Under these conditions, the proposed project will not serve the interests of current residents or those expected to move into the area.

The invocation of low-income housing provisions as a means to bypass established planning restrictions appears to be a clear attempt to advance commercial gain at the expense of community wellbeing. This tactic is deeply concerning, as it undermines the integrity of the urban planning process and erodes public trust.

It is also noteworthy that the sole submission in favour of this proposal was made by an individual who does not reside in Rhodes. Those of us who do live here are acutely aware of the daily challenges resulting from overdevelopment—diminished access, overstretched public services, and a declining quality of life.

Rhodes is already among the most densely populated suburbs in Sydney. Studies consistently show that excessive population density can have detrimental effects on psychological wellbeing, public safety, and social cohesion. Adding further pressure through unchecked development will only worsen these issues.

In addition, the environmental implications of this project must not be ignored. The site is located adjacent to fragile mangrove ecosystems that are highly sensitive to disruption. A large-scale waterfront development of this nature poses a significant threat to local biodiversity and undermines broader environmental commitments.

Furthermore, the state government appears to be leveraging the housing crisis as a pretext to advance commercial interests—an approach that is neither sustainable nor equitable. A more forward-thinking and socially responsible solution would involve investing in improved planning and urban design in currently underdeveloped or less-favoured areas, rather than continuing to intensify population density in already overburdened communities. This pattern of development risks turning suburbs like Rhodes into exclusive, high-cost zones, eroding affordability and increasing inequality.

This proposed development also stands in direct contradiction to the Federal Government’s zero-carbon policy. Increasing population density without adequate infrastructure and environmental safeguards will inevitably lead to higher emissions, increased traffic congestion, and greater environmental degradation—undermining national efforts to reduce pollution and combat climate change.

I strongly urge you to reject this proposal and reconsider the long-term impacts of overdevelopment on our community, environment, and collective wellbeing.


regards
Wing Lau

I have reviewed the EIS document containing the visual assessments, and the proposed built form looks fine to me. It is very much in keeping with other low/mid rise developments in Rhodes. As a resident of Rhodes, I do have concerns about the capacity of passenger rail going forward, as we will need more frequent services to handle the ever growing number of rail commuters on the T9 line. Therefore I hope the Planning department has given due consideration to the need for rail/station upgrades required to support developments like this. I also hope the final design can emphasise the use of pedestrian through-links to open up areas of the foreshore that are currently inaccessible. Ultimately I am supportive of this project as Sydney is in the midst of a housing crisis and we need more high quality, well-located developments like these.

Significantly affect surrounding residential.

Current Rhodes does not have enough plans including tree. We need plan more tree. Why allow cut trees?
Rhodes does not have parking and public fictitious. How they can allow build more property.

Hi,
I am writing as a local resident and property owner to formally object to the proposed development by Billbergia on Leeds Street, which involves the removal of 17 established trees and an increase in building height by 3 meters.
My concerns are as follows:
Loss of Established Trees
The proposal includes the removal of 17 mature trees. These trees contribute significantly to the character of the neighbourhood, local biodiversity, and overall air quality. Their removal would reduce green space in our area and negatively affect the visual amenity and livability of the surrounding environment.
Increased Building Height and Overshadowing
Increasing the height of the proposed apartments by 3 metres raises serious concerns about overshadowing, particularly for residents living on Walk Street who face east. Many of us rely on morning sunlight for both comfort and well-being. The additional height will cast longer shadows, especially during the winter months, diminishing sunlight access and potentially affecting property values and residents' quality of life.
Community Impact and Lack of Consultation
While affordable housing is important, such developments should not come at the cost of existing community amenities and liveability. Significant changes like increased building height and tree removal warrant thorough consultation and careful urban planning to ensure balanced outcomes for all stakeholders.
I urge the council to reconsider this proposal in its current form and request that:
A full sunlight and shadow impact assessment be conducted and made publicly available.
Alternatives to tree removal be explored or a clear and sufficient replanting plan be presented.
Community concerns be more fully integrated into the development assessment process.
Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Yimei Zhou

Especially in times of a housing crisis, checks need to be put in place to ensure that housing is affordable and isn't adversely impacting the rest of the community. This new plan of 17 floors will not only block sunlight for many people on Walker Street, but will also greatly increase traffic in the area, especially at the traffic signal of Walker, Blaxland and Leeds. The plan to chop down an additional 17 trees is just another step in turning Rhodes into a colossal heat island, just like much of Western Sydney.