Precinct 75 Mixed Use Development

I am a property owner of a previous project of Coronation. Since purchasing the apartment, my owners corporation has been in a law suit against their builders for a defective building.

The development so far has caused major disruption to our neighbourhood with works being done overnight with loud noises, immense dust from the site and road disruptions especially in the mornings. As a shift worker, this has made it extremely difficult since the development commenced.

There is already not enough parking in our area and the development isn't building enough spots to accommodate for the amount of properties they are building for residents alone and are not planning to make room for any visitor parking.

A 10 storey building is NOT appropriate for this area of the neighbourhood, especially for the street it is on. It is an absolute insult to our neighbourhood to allow a project like this to move forward.

Please take care of your current residents in the area, especially the long-standing residents who have been here for 30 years and longer.

I object to the modification of SSD-82639959, as the increased population density will lead to more noise, litter, and transient occupancy. The proposed studio apartments are below the minimum size recommended by the Apartment Design Guide, likely resulting in high turnover and reduced community cohesion. The development must be scaled back and include stronger measures to support a stable, sustainable community.

We need more housing in the inner west. It’s difficult to find big sites, it’s difficult to get development to stack up. Current height limits prevent meaningful further densification in most places, and heritage covers 43% of Inner West Council.

The primary reason the Inner West is becoming more expensive, pricing out the low-income segment whose contributions made it great, is because we don’t build enough housing.

Building new housing walking distance the Sydenham Metro allows us to colocate housing and public transport investment, which fits the State’s strategy.

Mixed-use (residential & commercial) is fantastic and there’s a reason all the most expensive parts of Sydney have it extensively.

I object to the modification of SSD-82639959, as the increased population density will lead to more noise, litter, and transient occupancy. The proposed studio apartments are below the minimum size recommended by the Apartment Design Guide, likely resulting in high turnover and reduced community cohesion. The development must be scaled back and include stronger measures to support a stable, sustainable community.

I am a local resident in the area and I have concerns with the updated Precinct 75 Project development to increase the no. of dwellings from 205 to 471 (130% increase) without adequately assessing and addressing parking and local traffic issues.

Parking Issues: As of now, residents do not have enough street parking. Many houses in the vicinity of the project do not have off-street parking available and based on the Traffic Impact Assessment (25035 - 23 July 2025) , only 193 resident parking spots will be available for the new 471 residents of Precinct 75. The requirement of parking allowances for residents of new developments should also be a function of the existing parking capacity in the area and not just based on accessibility as many of the new residents will undoubtingly be parking on the local streets. The existing street parking capacity is not taken into consideration in the assessment and if included would likely indicate that more resident parking spots will be required for the project to not worsen the already strained resident street parking situation. The developer should at the very least maintain the dwelling no. to resident parking ratio of >0.5 in the Approved Development and consider the current street parking capacity of the area. At the minimum, 236 resident parking spots should be proposed with the increase in dwellings. The proposal also doesn't include enough carshare spots. The requirement for the new development is 11 and the proposal is only for 6. The 5 existing in the area is to service the existing neighborhood and should not be counted for exclusive use by the Precinct. There are new developments in the local neighborhood that will add to the usage of these existing carshare vehicles as well. No assessment on capacity of existing carshares has been done in the provided assessment either. The development should provide the required carshare spots.

Traffic Flow Issue: The traffic assessment do not consider all the intersections with Mary St. The intersection of Bakers Lane and Mary Street has been left out of the assessment. There are significant traffic inflows to Mary St from Bakers Lane that would further add to local traffic congestion.

I am supportive of new developments and projects that enhance our community however, I believe the issues mentioned above have not been adequately assessed and considered by the developer.

Our neighbourhood does not have the means to take on such a large project. Parking, transportation and our local community cannot possibly deal with this increase in structure. Strongly opposed.

There isn’t enough parking provisions. I live around the corner and I can’t find a parking space most days due to clear ways, the climbing gym, airport parkers, and residents. It seems ridiculous to increase capacity this much with no provision of parking. If something as simple and obvious as this has been ignored, there no doubt is a multitude of other corners cut as well

I support the development application for Precinct 75 in St Peters. St Peters is majority low rise housing and is in dire need of an uplift. With its proximity to the Sydenham Metro line station and bus routes on the Princes Hwy, it is the perfect location for increased density. We are in a housing crisis and this is the perfect opportunity to increase housing in the Inner West.

I object to the modification of SSD-82639959, as the increased population density will lead to more noise, litter, and transient occupancy. The proposed studio apartments are below the minimum size recommended by the Apartment Design Guide, likely resulting in high turnover and reduced community cohesion. The development must be scaled back and include stronger measures to support a stable, sustainable community.

Please consider building in the outer suburbs of Sydney and not in. We are already overcrowded in St Peter's and surrounding suburbs. Traffic will be an issue for one not like it isn't already. We have no clearway in the main peak hour traffic and weekends which makes the commute long especially with the slow 40 km speeds. You haven't even proposed ample parking for this project also. It is a nightmare to park in the inner west and this will make it harder for existing residents. Are our motor vehicles a decoration that we can never move because there will be no where to park later on?. Also our public transport is already overrun and is already overcrowded. It cannot support more people. Please build elsewhere we do not need it here.

I object to the modification of SSD-82639959, as the increased population density will lead to more noise, litter, and transient occupancy. The proposed studio apartments are below the minimum size recommended by the Apartment Desig Guide, likely resulting in high turnover and reduced community cohesion. The development must be scaled back and include stronger measures to support a stable, sustainable community. Other key concerns regarding the modification include:
- 84% of the apartments are tiny 30 meter square studio apartments, below NSW minimum standard, which will lead to high resident turnover and fail to meet council's objectives for Build-to-Rent developments
- Existing road and infrastructure is already inadequate. Streets surrounding Precinct 75 are too narrow for 2-way traffic. An additional 850 residents will result in severe congestion, compromising emergency vehicle access and pedestrian safety
- The new proposal has a shortfall of 276 commercial and 227 residential parking spaces compared with Council DCP with NO visitor parking proposed. This will force hundreds of cars onto local streets and creates a parking crisis
Overbearing building heights - an increase in the number of levels to 10 storeys, exceeding the original rezoning intent Council LEPs and previous council resolutions to limit heights for amenity and character preservation. These excessive heights are incompatible with our predominantly single-storey, low density streetscape

I object to the proposal to increase the number of dwellings and building to 10 stories
This will be invasive to my privacy, bordering the precinct and parking will be insufficient. Both will devalue my home.

I'm writing to formally object to the proposed Precinct 75 development at the corner of Mary, Roberts, and Edith Streets, where I am a resident.
​While I support new housing, the current proposal's significant increase in dwelling density (from 205 to 471) and studio apartments is problematic. This fails to address the housing crisis by offering mostly tiny units and will likely lead to high resident turnover, harming community cohesion.
​The development also poses a major road and infrastructure burden. The planned number of new residents will overwhelm local streets, particularly the narrow residential roads of Edith St. This will create a pedestrian safety and traffic nightmare, especially with a major parking shortfall. The proposal's lack of adequate visitor parking will push more cars onto our streets, exacerbating an already stressed situation.
​Finally, the overbearing building heights of up to 10 storeys will negatively impact our local character and amenity. It is not in keeping with the predominantly single-storey, low-density streetscape of our area.
​I urge you to reject this proposal in its current form and require a plan that respects local infrastructure and our community.

I strongly object to the modification of SSD-82639959, as the increased population density will lead to more noise, litter, and transient occupancy. The proposed studio apartments are below the minimum size recommended by the Apartment Design Guide, likely resulting in high turnover and reduced community cohesion. The development must be scaled back and include stronger measures to support a stable, sustainable community.

This is not a good development for the housing crisis
Tiny studio apartments which are below the NSW minimum standard.
Insufficient road infrastructure

I object to the new proposal for Precinct 75 increasing dwellings from 205 to 471 on the following grounds:
It does little to ease the housing crisis as the increase is predominantly 30m2 studio apartments which is below the NSW minimum standard and with a insufficiently low amount of affordable housing, these are not long term housing solutions.
An increase to 10 storey building height, exceeding the original rezoning. The excessive height is incompatible with the predominantly single storey, low density streetscape.
Existing road infrastructure is already inadequate. The proposed additional residents will result in severe congestion and parking issues.
It fails to meet the minimum parking requirements set by the Marrickville DCP. There are significant shortfalls in both residential and commercial parking, with no visitor spaces provided. This will force residents and visitors to park on surrounding streets, worsening the current situation during clearway hours on Unwins Bridge Rd and creating a parking debacle.

Road and infrastructure burden, parking deficiencies, overbearing building heights.

existing roads infrastructures already inadequate. Streets surrounding the precinct 75 are already congested and narrow.
living in St Peters already feels like living in a sardine can. .Give us a break. You have given us the airport runways, WestConnex. You have devastated our suburb

I object to this project due to the burden on road and infrastructure and parking deficiencies. I live on this block and it is already incredibly difficult to drive down Edith street and also to find any suitable parking. I have two children and at times it is dangerous trying to get from my car to my door.

This project should not be approved if Precint 75 is unable to supply adequate parking.

Further, planning needs to reassess the local traffic and parking conditions in the area.

I would suggest:

40kms per hour on unwins bridge road, removal of clear ways on unwins bridge road, 15 minute parking spaces unless the vehicle has a resident permit, no supply of residents permit to residents of precinct 75.


I believe this would reduce the traffic burden in our area and funnel traffic onto the larger highway and tunnels, prevent the existing residents of the area from being unable to find parking and stop visitors to the retails businsss at precinct 75 coming by car and taking away the limited number of parks which are available to the residents of the area, many of whom do not have car parks on their property.
Thank you

I support the mixed-use development comprising residential apartments (BTR), affordable housing and commercial. Amendment to an existing consent to increase the approved dwellings from 205 to 471 and convert some commercial uses to residential.

I believe it will improve housing availability in the area.