Mod 6

My only issue what consideration has been given to the impact on traffic conditions. When the development is completed (including residential, retail and tourist premises) along with other developments in the neighbouring suburbs will have a major impact on traffic flow. Currently at peak times traffic along Woolooware and Gannons roads off Captain Cook Drive is way over appropriate capacities. People trying to access cronulla from Woolooware raod and South Caringbah from Gannons road face long delays and congestion.
Has there been any consideration given to widening or providing alternative strategies to these roads.

We are concerned about the increased traffic along Captain Cook Drive, Taren Point Road and Gannons Road. What plans are in place to deal with increased parking and congestion on the roads.
We are concerned about the loss of open space and the blight on the landscape with additional multi storey buildings.
We are concerned about the wetlands and the increased stress
placed on them.
Parking is already an issue in the parking lots facing the sports
grounds. residents are using these areas for additional parking
taking spots used by players and supporters.
We are concerned with increased demands on the electricity and gas, water and sewerage systems. What steps have been
taken here.
What action plans are in place to alleviate all these concerns -NONE.
Money seems to be the only object here - no concern for the residents of Cronulla, the traffic congestion or the schools already struggling to meet demand. People before profit please!!!!!!!

Re: Application No: MP 10_0229 MOD 2 & MP 10_0230 MOD 6


Attn: Director Key Sites Assessments


I am writing to object to the modified concept plan for the Woolooware Town Centre, specifically, the eastern precinct which would include residential apartment buildings, tourist and visitor accommodation.

I would like to preface this letter by saying that I don't fall into the "anti-development" category. Many developments have provided employment opportunities, new housing and burgeoning communities. The approved site, which includes a shopping centre and residential apartments, is a positive initiative for the area and is welcomed by many residents, including me.

I do, however, believe there is a fine line between development and over-development. This modification is a proposal to increase the Gross Building Area by approximately 5 times falls into the later category. This proposal, which includes 5 towers of up to 16 storeys above the retail podium, is outrageous.

My reasons for objecting are as follows:

* Traffic down through Gannons Road and Captain Cook Drive is already incredibly congested. To increase the number of residents will bring this area to a complete standstill even outside of peak times. This is already evident from 6am-9.30am & 2.30-7pm. The waiting time at these traffic lights has moved from 10 minutes to 20 minutes within the space of one year.

This is also the case for cars trying to turn right onto Denman Avenue at the top of Wolooware Road. Previously the wait time during peak times was a minute or so, it is now five minutes and increasingly dangerous. Visibility is poor and motorists are often taking risks to avoid waiting long periods of time to cross. Traffic is also now banked up down Woolooware Road, whereas this was never the case. To add more pressure to these roads is unreasonable.

Please note, that there are tens of thousands of new residents moving into council approved large scale developments within a 6 km radius. Some are due to start construction, some are near completion and others have recently been completed - Miranda (along the Kinsgway "the Hinkler", another on the boulevard, and a third one called "Palisades"), Caringbah (Taren point road & another on President Ave), Caringbah North (beside the high school on Captain Cook Drive), Woolooware Bay (Captain Cook Drive), Greenhills and Shearwater (Captain Cook Drive). There is also a huge scale development proposal in the Kurnell area which would include hotels, residential apartments and an athletics stadium. This doesn't include the smaller scale explosion in dual occupancies.

All these people have/ will have cars, most units will have two and sometimes three each. All of these people are and will be navigating the same roads.

* Parking. As it stands, a significant proportion (approximately 40%) of the car spaces allocated to people using the sports fields adjacent to and across the road from the Sharkies Development/Woolooware Bay have been taken up by new residents living in the current building and are used as permanent parking spaces. These were previously used exclusively for those using the facilities for one to two hour periods. Constant turnover of car spaces is an absolute necessity for those using sporting facilities. At this point in time, there is only 50% occupancy in the building. Clearly, this large scale development is not providing adequate parking to meet the demands of residents who have moved in, let alone those who are yet to do so. For people using the sporting facilities, this is not viable.

* The modification proposes to increase the car spaces from 770 to 1078 spaces which equates to a 40 % increase in car spaces yet Bluestone Capital proposes a 519% increase in Gross Building Area (39,520m2 to 244, 559m2), or 30 extra storeys. These figures are grossly mismatched. Where will these residents park? Where will shoppers park? What will the traffic be like getting in and out of the retail centre, to and from the apartments, into the stadium when a game is being played and when the sporting fields are being used? If we are adding to the problem we already have on this road, the situation will be untenable. I would like NSW Planners and Developers to see the state of traffic and parking conditions on a Monday afternoon from 4pm onwards during the 6 month Oztag Season (September - March). Getting in and out of the carpark and crawling onto Gannons Road is horrendous. And each year it gets worse.

Further to this point, parking in Cronulla is also impossible as a result of continued development in the surrounding areas. Most weekends parking is unavailable and on many occasions we've had to return home, unable to use the beach.

I've also noticed a huge increase in the number of cars parking along Denman Avenue and in the side streets near Woolooware train station as there are insufficient spaces available to commuters. This causes more congestion and less street parking for residents outside their homes.


* Another factor to consider is the local schools. None of the local schools have the resources, space or capabilities to expand without compromising the integrity of the education they are providing our children. What will happen when we have tens of thousands of new residents? Where will they be schooled? Is the State Government funding new schools to accommodate the exploding population in the Woolooware/Cronulla/Caringbah/Kurnell precinct? Or will we be packing more and more children into demountable buildings in our already under-funded and under-resourced schools?

I refute the argument that schools will not be affected due to the targeted demographics of those interested in the new high rise developments. Families with children are increasingly living in high rise apartments as it is an affordable housing option.


* I also note that the Sutherland Shire Council has already exceeded its obligations in relation to new housing targets. Presently, the Southern Sydney District target is 83 500 new dwellings by 2036. My question is; why is the Sutherland Shire, particularly this area, shouldering the majority of the Southern Region's shortfall?


Given the infrastructure in the surrounding areas is already unable to cope with the current demands (roads, parking, schools, hospitals, sporting facilities etc), I strongly oppose this "modification".

The original agreement / application (which has already been approved) should be honoured by all parties - local residents, the developers, the NSW Planning Department & the Joint Regional Planning Panel. This modification should not be used as a means to increase the profit margins of the developers at the expense of the community and its limited infrastructure.

I also believe that continuing to ignore underlying public sentiment and the growing opposition to overdevelopment will have adverse political effects on the State Government at the next election.



Regards

I object to the proposal for the following reasons - the Mangrove community is an environmental asset to the area. There needs to be green corridors for the native wild life. The traffic is already a nightmare on Captain Cook Drive. There will not be enough parking for the 2 sports fields that already have the current occupiers using these carparks. The Shark leagues games cause that much congestion on the weekends its a safety concern. In summer Captain Cook Drive and The Kingsway are an absolute joke. Please come nd see this before you make any decisions.

Planning Services
NSW Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Attention: Director-Key Sites Assessments

* Modification 2 to MP 10_0229 - Concept Plan - Mixed Use Development, Cronulla Sharks
* MP 10_0230 MOD 6 - Modification to Cronulla Sharks Stage 1 - Retail/Club Precinct

The following comments relate to both of the above group of documents.
Dear Sir/Madam,
The proponent and the Department should understand it is difficult for the general community to spend the time searching thousands of pages of documents in order to comment on these proposals in a limited time frame of 1 month. Please be aware that the Precinct submission speaks for hundreds of these local residents. The Dept of Planning should have allowed 3 months to consider the submission and then allow time for community discussion and further input on this vitally important issue to the local area. If there is a lack of individual community submissions it is because many residents feel that their concerns will not be listened to and why waste their time writing a submission. Residents were extremely disappointed with the last PAC decision.
North Cronulla & Woolooware Precinct Committee and Cronulla Residents wish to send our objection to the above proposed Development Applications for Cronulla Sutherland Leagues Club for the following reasons:
1 It is a massive overdevelopment on top of already PAC approved site of GFA 88,712sm.
2 PAC suggestion of integration of residential with retail site.
3 The "Town Centre" in reality an isolated site
4 Special Parking rates should be required for isolated residential sites
5 Insufficient Parking allowances for retail/club/hotel/residential/function rooms/Centre of Excellence additions totalling 39,520 sm
6 Impact of parking and traffic on Woolooware local streets and playing fields
7 Part 3A transitional projects should be terminated
8 High rise overshadowing Woolooware High School
9 Storm/Waste Water direction changes
10 Visual Impacts
11 Community Consultation re North Cronulla Precinct
12 RAMSAR


1. MASSSIVE OVERDEVELOPMENT ON TOP OF ALREADY PAC APPROVED SITE OF GFA 88,712Sqm
The community is again distressed with more and more modifications which increase the bulk and height of the development, and further stress on local infrastructure. The new additions of three residential flat buildings, a serviced apartment/hotel building, function rooms, community rooms and a Sharks Centre of Excellence add a 44% increase from the original approved site of 88,712m2.
This is far beyond the scope of the original development which has had many modifications since the PAC approval which stated "the maximum gross floor area shall not exceed 84,915sm comprising: 58,420sm for the Residential precinct, and 26,495sm for the Retail Club precinct. We are now at the position of 66,862 sm for the Eastern Retail/Club precinct, which is an increase of 40,367 sm or 52.35% increase over PAC's maximum .

2 PAC/SSC/DEPT OF PLANNING SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE THE ORIGINAL PAC APPROVAL TO PROVIDE INTEGRATION WITH RETAIL SITE
In the Request for Sears 23.9.16 document, the proponent states that:
* SSC were concerned with "the town centre as separate retail and residential precincts without integration".
* Department of Planning suggested the reduction of 100 dwellings in the residential western side was able to be transferred to the other side.
* PAC concluded "design ingenuity could be used to overcome these and take further advantage of the sites settings".
We believe PAC and SSC were suggesting integration through "design ingenuity" and the Dept Planning suggestion that 100 units could be moved (taken from the western complex) did not mean add extra units but changing design. It is more than covered by the addition of 125 room serviced apartment hotel building, function and community rooms and a Centre of Excellence.
The apartments on the western side were scaled down due to height and density issues, along with parking and transport issues for such a large volume of apartments in a site 1.5 kilometres walking distance from nearest (Woolooware) station and no public transport.
We object to this being used as a lever to add 3 more apartment buildings of 222 units to the already approved 600 units on the western side.
3 "TOWN CENTRE" IT IS NOT. IN REALITY AN ISOLATED SITE SURROUNDED BY PLAYING FIELDS, SCHOOLS, GOLF CLUBS AND PROTECTED RAMSAR WETLANDS

The so called "town centre", surrounded by 2 golf courses, Woolooware and Cronulla high schools, 2 playing fields, Ramsar protected wetlands, is a massive overdevelopment of an isolated site.
The PAC report of 27 August 2012 stated "the proposal may be better characterised as a "village". SSC stated it is not a "town centre", as it is not close to a primary school, that a town centre would have lower residential parking rates, and that centres are based around railway stations. The site is 1.5ks from a station. Mark Speakman MP stated it should not be classed as a town centre as it doesn't meet the criteria and goals in the Metropolitan Plan and it is surrounded by sporting, education and industrial uses. SSC stated it would be car dependent.
The "town centre" is careering along a path of huge intensive over development with many of the basics missing in that it is an isolated and car dependent site, posturing, and appearing to be fully accepted by Dept of Planning, as a "town centre" .
It is greatly out of character for the area.
4 SPECIAL PARKING RATES SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ISOLATED RESIDENTIAL SITES
Parking rates for 220 apartments planned for the Eastern side are set at the minimums of 1 space for 1 and 2 bedroom, and 2 spaces for 3 bedroom. Only 258 car spaces are provided, at an average of 1.17 car spaces per unit.
A report* by Sutherland Council states that motor vehicle use continues to be the most dominant form of transport in the Sutherland Shire. In 2010, 735,000 motor vehicle trips were made in the Sutherland Shire, an increase of 97,500 trips from the previous year. 76% of all trips were made by car in 2010. *http://www.sutherlandshire.nsw.gov.au/files/assets/website/publications/sutherland_state_of_the_shire_report_2011-2012.pdf
This isolated site 1.5 kms from a station will have a higher number of motor vehicles than a conventional town centre site located close to a railway station. The nearby playing fields cannot allow unit dwellers to park in their already very limited spaces. The only extra parking available to residents without a car space is to go into the nearby suburb of Woolooware and park in the residential streets. Woolooware residents are already complaining about the higher instance of parking at the station and around the area with only 2 buildings occupied on the western side.
The Dept of Planning should consider the high use of cars in the Shire, the lack of street parking, and provide for additional parking for the residential units in an isolated high rise residential site.
As the western site is now approved as such, there is an opportunity to rectify this by allocating the extra 258 car parking spaces to the eastern site for more parking for the retail, club and hotel development and disbanding any attempts to add more units to the eastern site.
Many people are unable to use public transport to reach their workplace due to the location of their workplace or the fact that their job involves shift work and public transport is not an option.
5 INSUFFICIENT PARKING ALLOWANCES FOR RETAIL/CLUB/HOTEL/ FUNCTION ROOMS
The precincts presentation to PAC in the past was instrumental in increasing the parking level to 770 spaces for the previously approved Retail Club development. Now the GFA** is increased by 39,450 m2 which is an increase of 44% from the already approved 88,712m2.
The parking increase is 258 spaces for the residential section, leaving just 30 spaces for the hotel, business centre and Sharks accommodation facility. It is noted that there are another 50 spaces for the Centre of Excellence.
Buried in 6.5 is the fact that the visitor parking for the residential units of 45 spaces, and 128 spaces for the hotel and business centre are to be taken out of the 770 spaces already confirmed by PAC for a much smaller development!
The 770 spaces was carefully decided by PAC, and to say that another 173 spaces can be deducted from this is clearly wrong.
There is no street parking in busy Captain Cook Drive. Parking in this isolated site is critical to its success or failure.
Council and the Dept of Planning should look carefully at the parking provisions of other retail and club operations in the shire and compare the rate of parking in this development.




THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER OF SPACES FOR THE RETAIL CENTRE
RETAIL CENTRES Trade area m2 Car parks at Retail Centres Shopping centre floor space m2 per car park
Sharks 23,000 ESTIMATE 1057 21.75 (average excl Roselands)
Roselands
50,000 3600 13.88 m2
Miranda Westfield 108,000 4,320 25 m2
Southgate 23,000 1049 21.92
Caringbah Village (Woolworths centre) 5,500 300 18.33

Excluding Roselands which has exception parking levels, the other three local centres have been averaged at 21.75 m2 of retail floor space per car parking space. At that average, the figure of 1057 car parks for Sharks emerges, based on local competitive retail centres.
THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER OF SPACES FOR THE CLUB ONLY AREA
CLUB AREA Trade area m2 Car parks at comparative local club Club floor space m2 per car park
Sharks 3500 ESTIMATE 250
Cronulla RSL
3500 155 22.58 m2
Cronulla RSL is an excellent example of the parking required for the Sharks club with the same sized trade area.
Parking is very tight at Cronulla RSL at that rate. However , it has the advantage of being a 2 minutes walk from Cronulla rail station, thousands of people living in units all around it, local parking areas next door and more parking at Cronulla Central. This cannot be compared to Sharks where the station is 1.5kms away, and a recent bus service has commenced with services only hourly on the weekend from around 8am to 8pm (weekdays 6.30am to 8pm every half hour).
We do not have the figures for Tradies, but President McLeer states they seek to have an abundance of parking for patrons who expect to have always available supplies of secure, well lit, undercover parking.
We would argue that the Sharks club must have a minimum of what Cronulla RSL has at 155 spaces, but in reality, more parking is necessary for Sharks without nearby parking options and surrounded by large areas of sporting fields, golf clubs and school. An estimate could be 250 spaces.
AN ESTIMATE OF THE TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED FOR THE EASTERN SITE SHOWS ANOTHER 727 PARKING PLACES NEEDED FOR REASONABLE OPERATIONS
TOTAL FOR CLUB/RETAIL/HOTEL/BUSINESS CENTRE/RESIDENTIAL/RESIDENTIAL VISITORS
ESTIMATE/ACTUALS PARKING IN PROPOSAL
RETAIL 1074 E 770
CLUB 250 E (PART OF 770)
visitors 45 A 0 (INCLUDED IN 770)
Hotel/business centre 128 A 0 (INCLUDED IN 770
Residential Units (if proceeding) 258 A (but insufficient) 258
TOTAL 1755 1028

Clearly if sufficient parking cannot be supplied, the development should be scaled down in size. To summarise we would like to see the 3 Residential towers of 220 units eliminated and the 258 car parking spaces allocated to the Retail/club shortages.
Is staff car parking covered in the calculations by the consultants? If not, parking levels required.
6 IMPACT OF PARKING AND TRAFFIC ON WOOLOOWARE LOCAL STREETS AND PLAYING FIELDS
Council and Dept of Planning should consider the local impacts of unit dwellers parking at the playing fields and the local residential streets around the Sharks and around Woolooware Station and act now to fix this situation while it can be rectified. The parking levels of this isolated centre must be re assessed.
We owe it to the children of the local area impacted by unit owners parking on their playing fields, the residents who have to cope with their streets being raided for parking, and the club members who want to visit and be assured of safe and adequate parking at the site. This is a basic to ensure the high rise development lessens its impact into the Woolooware and Cronulla community into the future.
The PAC when approving the original smaller concept plan stated in summing up, "Reliance of private vehicles would also increase the traffic impacts and parking demands of the site". At a briefing held by the club for the Precinct some local residents were already stating they had noticed higher levels of parking problems and there are only 2 blocks occupied in the residential west precinct.
The traffic is a huge issue in the area and it impacts further west along Captain Cook Drive and onto Taren Point Road in peak times.
7 PART 3A TRANSITIONAL PROJECTS SHOULD BE TERMINATED
When will Part 3A projects be terminated to avoid the continuing stream of modifications inflicted on the community, the council,local infrastructure and the planning system. The original concept was reduced from 700 units to just under 600 units to gain PAC approval and now this modification is doubling the original concept. It is extremely unfair to impose these continual modifications on the local community. To date there has been already 13 modifications each for MP10_0229 and MP 10_0230 not including these 2. Already there are another 2 proposals added just this week.
These 2 modifications should be seen as a whole new concept plan as the changes are so great.
On Friday 6th May the then Minister for Planning Rob Stokes made a press statement about under the heading "LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO SIMPLIFY THE PLANNING SYSTEM". A point made was Ending transitional arrangements for projects approved under Part 3A, including modifications.


8 HIGH RISE OVERSHADOWING WOOLOOWARE HIGH SCHOOL
According to the shadow diagrams of the high school at winter solstice, major shadowing will impact on the school lunch area and onto A Block from 12.45pm. This will make the classrooms even colder during the winter months for students and therefore also impact on their concentration and learning. At least the vegetation allows for some sunlight to come through. It will also make the classrooms very gloomy which also impacts on learning as it affects the mood of the students. Therefore the overshadowing of the school is more of a concern than the proponent it accepting.
9 Storm Water/ Waste Water direction changes and Environmental Impacts
The area is flood prone and on a number of occasions Captain Cook Drive has been closed due to flooding. Woolooware High School has been closed due to flooding. There are signs up stating the area is prone to flooding. Changing the watercourse is of great concern. What impacts is this going to have in regards to flooding in the area?
Of even greater concern are the impacts the change of direction into Woolooware Bay will have on the mangroves, wetlands,bay and birdlife, riparian zone and the Aquatic Reserve.
This is unacceptable.
10. Negative Visual Impact
Residents bought in the area because it had large open space areas and low rise density zonings. Residents paid a great deal of money to enjoy the relaxed atmosphere this area provided and to escape the inner city densities and problems . This has now been taken away from them. Now they are forced to look at highrise, high density apartments and greatly increased traffic and parking problems which occur in the inner city areas.
At least one hundred plus residents have had their family dream shattered due to this development. There has been no regard for the residents of Castlewood Ave, Church St, Fairs Ave and sections of the Kingsway in regards to the impacts on their bay and city views. The area was zoned private recreation and low density and these residents invested heavily in their homes to enjoy uninterrupted views across the bay to the city. These views should have remained however the planning dept changed the zoning. It not only destroys these views but it also greatly decreases the value of these properties. To say views don't count is a contradiction of the proponent and the Dept of Planning as the proponent is promoting what amazing views their units have and charging huge money for these units. Futhermore, none of these residents have even been notified of this modification. Some residents will be left with no views at all except units.
11. Community Consultation
"A meeting with the North Cronulla Precinct Committee was arranged (immediately following the Club Members Display and Discuss Session, at the Club) so they could also be fully briefed and view the publicly available information. Unfortunately, the Committee's representative did not attend and so no briefing was able to be given."
As President of the Precinct I was extremely surprised to read this. I have been on the committee for a number of years including these dates and had never received an invitation to attend this meeting.I have checked with other committee members and they cannot recall any invitation either. There is no record of receiving an invitation in our correspondence or minutes. The committee would like to know who this invitation was sent to,what address was it sent to and be forwarded a copy of the invitation. North Cronulla Precinct has been a community association since 1994 ( established through Council initiatives). We definitely would have given a written or verbal response if we were unable to attend. A number of committee members spoke in front of the PAC.
12. RAMSAR boundaries
This modification should be assessed against the RAMSAR boundaries gazetted in August 2011. This boundary is larger and the new plans may not meet the requirements of RAMSAR. The original PAC decision was based on old boundaries from 2008.
To conclude The North Cronulla and Woolooware Precinct (including Cronulla Residents) totally object to this modification. It should be noted that concerns have been raised in letters and news articles about the height and density of the original development(which was smaller) since its original application under Part 3A by Ex Planning Minister Tony Kelly, Ex Planning Minister Brad Hazzard, Cronulla Local Member Mark Speakman and Sutherland Shire Council.

Yours sincerely

North Cronulla & Woolooware Precinct Committee Inc Cronulla Residents

This is over-development at it's worse a 600% increase in floor space and only 50% increase in car spaces.Even putting this forward before the western development is finished is ludicrous.
At the moment you cannot park at the sporting fields next to the development as the tenants of the partially completed building occupy those spots as there is a lack of parking already,because of the position of this development wedged between the water, golf course and school there is no extra street parking as there is no parking on Captain cook Drive either.The existing Woolooware shopping centre where I reside has no parking for customers because of this developments existing tenants parking all day to use the train station. This development i will impact on the lives of all Woolooware residents and I hope the opinion of Sharks football supporters who live outside the area but have given there support because of a campaign by Cronulla Sutherland Football club have no weight on the decision.
There are so many reasons this development is wrong I can only hope sanity prevails

This is over-development at it's worse a 600% increase in floor space and only 50% increase in car spaces.Even putting this forward before the western development is finished is ludicrous.
At the moment you cannot park at the sporting fields next to the development as the tenants of the partially completed building occupy those spots as there is a lack of parking already,because of the position of this development wedged between the water, golf course and school there is no extra street parking as there is no parking on Captain cook Drive either.The existing Woolooware shopping centre where I reside has no parking for customers because of this developments existing tenants parking all day to use the train station. This development i will impact on the lives of all Woolooware residents and I hope the opinion of Sharks football supporters who live outside the area but have given there support because of a campaign by Cronulla Sutherland Football club have no weight on the decision.
There are so many reasons this development is wrong I can only hope sanity prevails

I purchased a home in Woolooware with wonderful city and bay views. I accepted the original design as "progress". Even though it was going to cause some loss of my views but I always had reservations of the impact on both the infrastructure and the environment. The extra development will have a great impact on mine and my families lifestyle as our views will be nearly gone.
The impact on local schools, hospitals , sewerage is going to be enormous.
As it stands now it is virtually impossible to park at Woolooware shops and railway station, this extra development with make it impossible to park.
The project does not offer affordable housing and the idea of it saving the local football team is no longer viable as the western development has ensured the longevity of the Sharks
With all the existing approvals for duplex's townhouses etc being built in the surrounding suburbs the parking and infrastructure is and will be further tested.
Already residents of the sharks development appear to be parking in the car spaces in the sporting grounds across the road and to the west of the development. Where the football crowd will park is another question. As on game day they park as far away as the next suburbs to get to the game and after it there is major traffic jams.
The original concept was completely out of character for the area and any change to the original concept will make it even more so.
Already the roads in the area are struggling with the traffic and the state government do not appear to have an answer to this problem and with the extra development it can only get worse.
The impact on wildlife, marine life and noise will be greatly enhanced if the extra development is allowed to go through.
It must also be pointed out the extra development will not only have a visual impact on the residents near the development but also on the lifestyle and views of those on the southern Woolooware side in streets such as the Kingsway , Fairs Ave , Castlewood Ave and other streets in that area

Traffic congestion on Capt Cook drive is already causing delays and inconvenience requiring daily alternate non direct navigation to destinations The road already services local sporting clubs , playing areas,Shark Club,patrons schools Greenhills &, Sheerwater residents all of above have associated services add to this commercial and residential developments at Kurnell and along Capt. Cook Dve. this area is only in early development

I am against the proposal

I object to this proposal

i object

I object

I am writing to express my concerns with the continually increasing size of the development at Woolooware Bay Town Centre.
Whilst I am not against development what I am concerned about is the massive size of this development.
The modifications in the current requests are to add yet more buildings into what is a foreshore area. This, along with yet more parking will simply add to what is a very crowded area and the original developments is not even completed!
The roads in the area are already at capacity and this development will add more vehicles to the already crowded roads and particularly in winter with the football in progress our local roads will be choked.
The amendment to "provide for additional land uses" is vague at the very least.
What the residents want to know is what are those proposed uses as I would hazard a guess it would be more apartments.
This amendment asks for six new buildings of 8 -15 stories.
This is overdevelopment on a massive scale and is not in keeping with the area.

see attached

Planning Services
NSW Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Attention: Director-Key Sites Assessments

* Modification 2 to MP 10_0229 - Concept Plan - Mixed Use Development, Cronulla Sharks
* MP 10_0230 MOD 6 - Modification to Cronulla Sharks Stage 1 - Retail/Club Precinct

The following comments relate to both of the above group of documents.
We object to these modifications for the following reasons-
* Lack of infrastructure for roads. The road system in the area is at full capacity and the state government and council have no plans to improve the road system. The traffic becomes much worse as you approach Taren Point Rd and on Taren Point Road in peak times. The Dept Of Planning is not taking into consideration the huge already approved developments in Woolooware, Cronulla and Caringbah. Many people cannot get to work by using public transport due to the location of their workplace or they are working shifts so they have to use cars.
* Significant loss of city and bay views due to heights of the buildings for a number of residents and a loss of property value. Many residents in Castlewood Ave, Church St, Fairs Ave and parts of the Kingsway will lose the majority if not all of their beautiful bay and city views. We purchased our home knowing the land was zoned recreation and low density. We should have had uninterrupted bay and city views for the rest of our lives but the Dept of Planning changed the zoning to allow this development to be constructed. Much of the support gained for this development was only gained because it was going to save the Sharks football club and football team. That has been saved. This new modification will leave us and many other residents with barely any views. It is really devastating for us to lose "our dream" and our neighbours will also. We have worked hard all of our lives to achieve this. We are not rich we are just hardworking local people. If the buildings were limited to 6 and 7 storeys the impact would be negligible. The Planning Dept does not take into account the impacts on the lives of residents nor does the proponent. It is frustrating and depressing to see Woolooware Bay advertising how amazing the unit views to the city are, when there has been no consideration given to residents who have had that view taken away from them.
* Lack of notification and too short a response time. I have spoken to a number of our neighbours and they received no notification of this modification although it impacts on them severely. We only received notification because we still own a property in Woolooware North. The Planning Dept needs to send notifications to all people living in the 2230 post code areas.
The 4 week response time is not long enough for residents to be able to go through the documents and make a submission. We work and have family commitments so residents have very little time to do a submission.

* Insufficient parking. The local streets are already being parked out by existing and already approved local developments such as units, townhouses, houses and duplexes being built in Woolooware, North Cronulla, Cronulla and Caringbah North. Due to shift work and location of work place most families/couples have 2 cars.
* Insufficient parking around the station. At present people are parking further and further down in the side streets near the station and local residents are having trouble parking outside their own homes already.
* Where are people going to park for the football games? How is the area going to cope with the thousands of people attending these games with this extra development? The area is at a standstill already and people are only just starting to move into the first block of units.
* Out of character with the area. The original concept plan is already greatly out of character with the area. What started as 6 storeys with council approval grew to 8 and 9 storeys and then to the huge high rise development approved by the PAC.
* The negative impacts on our lifestyle and amenity. We purchased our first home in Woolooware for its village like atmosphere and open space outlook but now we are looking at many multi-storey units and a huge retail centre as well as being impacted by the extra traffic and extra cars being parked in the streets. It is like living in dense city area.
* The previous development was reduced from 700 to approximately 600 units under the original concept plan that was approved by the Planning and Assessment Commission (PAC) now it is being increased to a total of 800 units and 125 hotel rooms. Would the PAC have allowed this?
* Environmental issues- Further destruction of the essential mangroves. Further negative impacts on the local wildlife and marine life in Botany Bay. Increased air and noise pollution for nearby residents from the greatly increased traffic.
* RAMSAR - this increased development needs to be assessed on the current RAMSAR boundaries gazetted in August 2011.
* Further significant loss of city and bay views due to heights of the buildings for a number of residents.
* Lack of general infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, medical facilities, sewerage.
* Insufficient time for residents to adequately respond to this application as most residents work and have families so we only have a limited time on our days off to read through a document of this size
* This is not a simple modification. This is a whole new concept and should not be accepted as a modification. It is doubling the size of the original Concept Plan and should not be accepted as a modification. Even Ex Planning Minister Tony Kelly stated his concerns about heights and densities in the letter approving the Part 3A request. Our local MP mark Speakman has also stated his concerns that the original concept was far too dense and high, and out of character with the area
* Ending transitional arrangements for projects approved under Part 3A, including modifications Legislative planning changes announced on May 6th 2016- How long are these modifications going to continue for? The PAC decision has become a joke! This is not a modification.
* This is not about saving the Sharks football team and club anymore.
* It does not provide affordable housing for local families or first home buyers as the brand new units are expensive
* I was not given a comment sheet when I attended the community consultation evening
Regards

Objection as per attachment

see attached

see attached.

see attached.