Mixed-use development including in-fill affordable housing - 9 Blaxland Road, Rhodes

Please see attached letter.

I object on the basis that this project has been provided with an FSR of 20.88:1 whereas the property I own at 15 Leeds St has which is planned to be the site of a high rise retail centre has been given an FSR of 1.1:1. This development along with developments by this developer at 27 Leeds St and at Rhodes Central and Concord West together with the Meriton development on Blaxland Road will take up all the 3000 dwelling cap imposed by Canada Bay Council leaving no current scope for further development in Leeds St on sites not owned or controlled by Bilbergia. The HOB and FSR for gives the appearance of being transferred from sites in Leeds St that are not owned by Bilbergia to this site to the financial detriment of independant land owners in Leeds St by some process totally lacking in transparency.

Please see attached submission prepared by Ethos Urban on behalf of Ecove in relation to the proposed SSDA.

Location: 9 Blaxland Road, & 424 Concord Rd
Application Number: SSD-76424709
Applicant: BBG Management Pty Ltd
Proposal Exhibition period: August 7, 2024 – September 3, 2024.

I wish to object to the development proposal at 9 Blaxland Road, Rhodes.

I understand the need for increased apartment construction in Sydney to alleviate the housing shortage, however the proposed height (48 Storeys) is excessive and ridiculous. In my opinion, this and other apartment developments should be low to medium rise (4 to 10 floors) because:
• Excessive Height: The proposed 48 storey tower is close to other 40+ floor buildings and negatively impacts the area skyline. It reduces the “open look” of the area. High rise buildings cluttered close together become a “concrete jungle”. Being surrounded by these towers affects the well being of local residents who will have less open views of the skyline in the streets and places where they live. We do not want Sydney suburbs looking like Shanghai, Hong Kong or Tokyo. There are also many world cities which have predominantly medium rise apartments and offices and few high rise towers.
• Sensible Heights: Premier Chris Minns recently said “CBDs are the place to put really tall buildings”. The state government has also “allowed new developments of 6 floors within 500m of a railways station” in suburbs. 46 is NOT 6! Apartment blocks of 4-10 floors is a sensible plan that will help solve the housing problem and which is also sensitive to the interests and wishes of local residents and the environment. These developments are acceptable and not opposed by local residents. Massive high rise towers are not wanted or welcome!
• Effect on Services & Resources: Having many high rise buildings will put an enormous strain on services and resources in such a limited area like water, sewage, waste disposal, traffic, transport and street parking. Building low – medium rise will not overload these services in such a drastic way.
• Other suburbs & development: Rhodes is also not the only suburb where apartments can be built. Other suburbs and councils must also contribute to solving the housing problem. Most suburbs with good transport along the T9 railway line from Stanmore to Eastwood have apartment developments but none are massive towers like being proposed here in Rhodes. It is ridiculous to build and concentrate such massive towers in residential suburbs. Why does the government ignore the wishes and concerns of local residents?
• Blocking Views: There are many people who have already moved into the Rhodes area and bought apartments on the western side of the railway line facing East for the river and city views. The proposed 48 floor development and any other such massively tall buildings in front of them will completely block their views. 4-10 storey buildings will not impact the city & river views of most of these apartments.
• Blocking morning sun: This massive tower will block the NE winter sun that currently provides morning light and warmth to buildings and some public spaces (like Union Square) on the western side of the railway line.

A better plan? BUILD LOW – MEDIUM RISE APARTMENTS on the eastern side of the railway line in Rhodes. Many European cities have extensive apartment development with high rise in the CBD and low – medium rise in the suburbs. Low – medium rise development will still address the housing issue and maintain a pleasant, attractive and livable urban environment for local residents.

The council and government needs to consider the interests and well being of the residents who actually live in the area (who they are supposed to represent and who vote), rather than the financial self interest of developers and the easy money for the council (ie. rates) by allowing as many units as possible on a small footprint of land. Massive high rise towers are a “quick fix” and political point scorer for the government to brag about quickly solving the housing problem. Development in any suburb must be practical and sustainable in terms of services and resources in the area and the impact it will have for current and future local residents. Communities are about quality of living for ALL residents. Sensible low – medium development provides this.

Form of a petition (Please find the attached document)

TO THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

We, the undersigned residents and concerned citizens of Rhodes/City of Canada bay, strongly oppose the proposed development of the mixed-use and in-fill affordable housing project at 9 Blaxland Road, Rhodes, NSW.

While we recognise the need for affordable housing, we believe this development will have significant negative impacts on our community and fail to address the broader housing affordability crisis.

We urge the local council and relevant authorities to reconsider this proposal and seek more balanced, community-focused solutions

Principal petitioner
Name: E.K (Full name/signature recorded in pdf file below)
Address: 8 Walker St, Rhodes NSW
Postcode: 2138

Petition Against the Overdevelopment and Inaccessibility of Housing at 9 Blaxland Road, Rhodes, NSW
请愿书：反对在 9 Blaxland Rd, Rhodes NSW 的提议开发
청원: 9 Blaxland Rd, Rhodes NSW의 제안된 개발에 반대

Key Points:
Infrastructure Overload:
The proposed development will significantly strain Rhodes' already overburdened infrastructure, leading to increased traffic congestion, parking difficulties, and pressure on public services, thereby reducing the quality of life for current residents.
Negative Impact on Community Character:
The high-density nature of this development threatens to turn Rhodes into a dense urban environment, stripping the area of its unique community feel and cultural vibrancy. We advocate for developments that enhance, rather than detract from, the character of our community.
Construction Disruptions:
The noise, dust, and general disruption caused by the construction of this large-scale project will significantly affect the daily lives of residents, particularly given that the area is already experiencing substantial development activity.
Environmental and Aesthetic Concerns:
While the project includes some sustainable features, the overall effect will contribute to a "concrete jungle" in an area that should be preserved for its natural beauty and green spaces.
View and Sunlight Obstruction:
The proximity of the new tower to existing buildings, such as those in Rhodes West, will lead to significant view obstructions and reduced sunlight, unfairly impacting current residents.
Affordability and Market Dynamics:
The high price of these new units will likely attract overseas investors, driving up property prices even further and making it difficult for Australian citizens, particularly first-time homebuyers, to enter the market. We believe that if the government is serious about addressing housing affordability, developments should be directed to less saturated and more affordable areas, not high-demand, overpriced locations like Rhodes.
Shadow Impacts: Impact on Sunlight and Quality of Life:
The proposed development’s height and density will lead to substantial shadowing on surrounding buildings and public spaces. This will reduce the amount of natural light available to neighbouring residences, particularly those on Walker Street and other nearby streets. The reduction in sunlight can have adverse effects on residents’ quality of life, potentially leading to increased heating costs, reduced enjoyment of outdoor spaces, and a general decline in the liveability of the area.
Conclusion:
We call on the City of Canada Bay Council and the NSW Government to reject the current proposal for 9 Blaxland Road, Rhodes, and instead pursue development strategies that genuinely address the needs of the community and promote housing affordability for all Australians.

I would like to formally object to the proposed project, “Mixed Use and In-Fill Affordable Housing Development at 9 Blaxland Road, Rhodes NSW,” due to the following concerns:

1. Infrastructure Strain: The influx of new residents will significantly strain the existing infrastructure in Rhodes, which is currently unprepared to accommodate such growth. This will lead to severe congestion, parking difficulties, and a substantial decline in the quality of life for existing residents.
2. Community Impact: The proposed development risks transforming the area into a dense urban environment, similar to the Waterloo area, which lacks cultural vibrancy. We advocate for the creation of community spaces that enhance the well-being of residents, rather than contributing to an overwhelming “concrete jungle.”
3. Construction Disruptions: The development phase will likely bring about considerable noise, dust, and other disruptions that will negatively impact the daily lives of current residents. With numerous construction projects already underway, the area is experiencing overdevelopment and overcrowding. The council should prioritize high-rise developments in less densely populated areas.
4. View Obstruction and Proximity: The new project’s proximity to existing buildings, particularly those on 8 Walker Street, will result in significant view obstructions, leading to a further decline in residents’ quality of life. It is unfair to impose such inconveniences on current residents, especially when the local infrastructure cannot support additional high-density housing.

In summary, this development will not only overcrowd an already saturated area but also disproportionately benefit overseas investors, making the units unaffordable and inaccessible to Australian citizens. The overall impact on the community’s quality of life will be severely negative, and I urge the council to reconsider this proposal in favor of more balanced, community-focused urban planning.

I object to the development for the following reasons:
1. Height of the building is over-height and an eyesore which towers over surrounding buildings
2. The peninsula is small and is already over-crowded
3. There are a lack of green verges and green spaces especially play areas for children
4. The proposed school in Rhodes will create additional traffic flow issues
5. The current development along with the high-rise in Mary & Marquet (See Item 9 below) will overshadow existing apartments and public spaces which is why many owners and investors are selling out now. Little thought has been given to owners of apartments in the vicinity re shadowing. These apartments have been bought for over $1 million
6. Little or no thought has been given to the additional foot and vehicle traffic as a result of the high rise developments, and something has to be done in the very near future to alleviate this on-going problem, before these high rises are completed
7. The dog poo, leaf and rubbish litter in and around Rhodes is a blight on the neighbourhood and a reflection of Council’s priorities
8. What transport studies have been conducted based on the projected population of Rhodes? If any please publicise
9. Briefing Report 1-9 Marquet and 4 Mary St Rhodes (IProsperity) By the Dept Planning and Environment shows that 77% of residents objected to this proposal and yet these developments went ahead? Why is that and how could it be that a majority objected and the proposal still went ahead.? Unfortunately the pages were not numbered so I cannot give you the page number. See Below:

Public Exhibition of the Planning Proposal
Council publicly exhibited the Planning Proposal, a draft Development Control
Plan, three Voluntary Planning Agreements (i.e. 1. Billbergia; 2. Hossa Group;
and 3. B1 Group – Agreements 2 & 3 covering the site now known as the
IProsperity site) and supporting documentation during the period from 12 May
2015 to 16 June 2015. In response, Council received 76 submissions. Of the 65
general submissions, 77% objected and 23% supported the Planning Proposal.

10. NO MORE HIGH RISE FOR RHODES, IT IS FULL AND BETTER PLANNING IN FUTURE SHOULD BE A PRIORITY, WITH MORE CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO EXISTING RESIDENTS AND NOT ONLY TO DEVELOPERS.

I am a resident of Rhodes for 10 years now. I am able to distinguish how Rhodes was, before several buildings have been constructed and how it is now, after all these residential apartments were established. It is admirable to see such developments, however, several issues arises as well and these issues will hinder the betterment and safety of our environment. In addition, the more issues there are, the more challenges it is for the city council. The difficulties we are facing now is not entirely resolved, what more in time ahead? Issues such as robberies in apartments/ buildings, people walking their pets and leaving the dump, congested trains, people not following rules, cleanliness issues etc. I can also say that Rhodes have reached the maximum no. of residents/ families and small portions are left for "greens", therefore, in my personal opinion, there's no need for more residential units to build. Let us just concentrate in maintaining peace and well being of the families/ residents in the city of Rhodes.

Please see attached letter.

I'm concerned with the number of major projects seeking additional floors beyond what was consulted on and published in the Rhodes Place Strategy (https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-07/rhodes-place-strategy.pdf) and the future infrastructure shortfall which will arise if organisations (e.g. schools, hospitals, transport, fire, police etc.) base their long term decision making on this plan.

More specifically on this project - I believe this is one of the best sites in Rhodes to build high and if this was incorporated into the Rhodes Place Strategy or was a one-off proposal for additional floors I'd be in support of it. However given other projects in the area have made similar requests for additional floors and had these approved I believe that approving this project would push the area too far beyond the published strategy and lead to future infrastructure shortfalls.