Rozelle Village, mixed use development with affordable housing.

Thank you for the opportunity to object to the application for increased density, above what has already been approved, on this site.
Our household's position is as follows:
> We support new housing in the area, especially affordable housing
> We welcome new people of all different stripes joining our community
> We support renewal of the site and understand the need for density to drive return on investment.
> We respect the current DA and despite personally finding the design oversized and ugly, we see no value in arguing over something locked in and agreed.
> Our concern with the proposal to further increase the number of units and residential parking on the site, which we understand to be near a 50% increase, is about cars, and the traffic impacts to local streets and the intersection at Darling St and Victoria Rd.
> Our street, Belmore St, is a one way that does not function well on heavy traffic days (weekends) and peak times, under current car movements. At times we are unable to turn right into Darling St, despite lights being green, and we can't turn around and go the other way.
> We can't see how road and traffic performance will not be compromised by more cars and traffic movements being added to the precinct.
> We are concerned Belmore St residents, and those using Belmore St as a thoroughfare will be delayed for long periods, unable to exit the street in either direction
> We can see Victoria Rd becoming even more dangerous as frustrated drivers try to transact the intersection against traffic signals - this in an area with hundreds of kids moving to and from Rozelle Public School (we have three ourselves)
> We ask that detailed traffic modelling be done for the proposal and if our concerns are founded, that the additional residential floorspace be rejected.
Happy to be contacted or to speak to this submission if required
Thanks again
Solaire Eggert and XXXX XXXX

Please refer to the attached correspondence

Dear Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, I write as a concerned resident of Rozelle that will be impacted by the proposed project.
My principal concerns can be summarised as follows:
(1) The proposed bulk and scale of the project is not in keeping with the surrounding area. Even an 11 story building as currently approved would tower above neighbouring buildings. There is no building currently taller than 4 stories within 500m, and no building taller than 6 stories within 1km of the proposed development.
(2) The proposed bulk and scale of the project provides for significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties – including on the southern side of Victoria road in residential areas. This is not adequately evidenced by the 3 hourly shadow diagrams provided particularly during the hours of 1-4pm.
(3) There will be significant impacts to local traffic flow arising from the project that have not been mitigated in anyway. The following are examples of existing eproblems which will be further exacerbated by the project.
• The junction between Darling St and Victoria road is already in gridlock particularly at peak times and on weekends. Traffic backs up from the lights crossing Victoria street on Darling street in both directions. It is often not possible to turn right form Belmore street or left from Waterloo St into Darling St.
• It is not possible to turn right onto Victoria Road from Darling St (Balmain Rd) and therefore there is no direct way to travel south bound on Victoria Rd without taking back streets through Rozelle. The proposed development will significantly increase the flow of traffic on local roads taking this route.
• As has been widely reported in the media, the Rozelle interchange has already significantly impacted peak hour traffic trying to access the ANZAC bridge from Victora Road. In peak hour this traffic will frequently bank up from the Anzac Bridge to Victoria Road.
(4) Parking for existing residents in the area is already limited – along Waterloo St, Belmore St, Evans St, and Red Lion Streets, parking has been impacted in recent years by the “Tottis” restaurant on the corner of Belmore Street and Evans St. Further car parks are due to be removed with the addition of a cycleway through the area. The proposed development will further put a strain on local parking availability.
(5) The submission claims that there are significant public transport options for new residents including access to the bus corridor along Victoria Road. However, the availability of buses heading into the city is already insufficient to meet local demands. At peak times, buses which arrive at the corner of Darling St and Victoria St heading into the city are generally full and there is often a line of up to 50 people waiting to get onto a full bus. The submission also references the ‘Bays’ metro station as a viable public transport option, despite the fact this metro line is yet to be built and is more than 20 minutes walk from the proposed site. The State government decided not to build a metro station in Rozelle. Is it realistic to believe people will walk more than 20 minutes each day to take the metro into the city?
(6) The submission proposes a new supermarket in the complex. There are already four supermarkets within c500m walking distance of the site (Metro Woolies, Foodworks, Maloneys and Fruitology.) What is the marginal utility of another supermarket?
Following review of the proposal, I am left with the following unanswered questions.
• Why does the proposed development need to be c12-13 stories higher than every other property within a 1km radius?
• Will the proposed project forever change the landscape of Balmain and Rozelle given its excessive bulk and scale?
• Are the impacts to local residents from increased traffic, overshadowing, crowded public transport and services justified?
• Aren’t there more suitable areas to build such high density projects such as at the white bay power station site next to the proposed Bays metro station?
In view of the above, I strongly object to the proposal.

Dear Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, I write as a concerned resident of Rozelle that will be impacted by the proposed project.
My principal concerns can be summarised as follows:
(1) The proposed bulk and scale of the project is not in keeping with the surrounding area. Even an 11 story building as currently approved would tower above neighbouring buildings. There is no building currently taller than 4 stories within 500m, and no building taller than 6 stories within 1km of the proposed development.
(2) The proposed bulk and scale of the project provides for significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties – including on the southern side of Victoria road in residential areas. This is not adequately evidenced by the 3 hourly shadow diagrams provided particularly during the hours of 1-4pm.
(3) There will be significant impacts to local traffic flow arising from the project that have not been mitigated in anyway. The following are examples of existing problems which will be further exacerbated by the project.
• The junction between Darling St and Victoria road is already in gridlock particularly at peak times and on weekends. Traffic backs up from the lights crossing Victoria street on Darling street in both directions. It is often not possible to turn right form Belmore street or left from Waterloo St into Darling St.
• It is not possible to turn right onto Victoria Road from Darling St (Balmain Rd) and therefore there is no direct way to travel south bound on Victoria Rd without taking back streets through Rozelle. The proposed development will significantly increase the flow of traffic on local roads taking this route.
• As has been widely reported in the media, the Rozelle interchange has already significantly impacted peak hour traffic trying to access the ANZAC bridge from Victoria Road. In peak hour this traffic will frequently bank up from the Anzac Bridge to Victoria Road.
(4) Parking for existing residents in the area is already limited – along Waterloo St, Belmore St, Evans St, and Red Lion Streets, parking has been impacted in recent years by the “Tottis” restaurant on the corner of Belmore Street and Evans St. Further car parks are due to be removed with the addition of a cycleway through the area. The proposed development will further put a strain on local parking availability.
(5) The submission claims that there are significant public transport options for new residents including access to the bus corridor along Victoria Road. However, the availability of buses heading into the city is already insufficient to meet local demands. At peak times, buses which arrive at the corner of Darling St and Victoria St heading into the city are generally full and there is often a line of up to 50 people waiting to get onto a full bus. The submission also references the ‘Bays’ metro station as a viable public transport option, despite the fact this metro line is yet to be built and is more than 20 minutes walk from the proposed site. The State government decided not to build a metro station in Rozelle. Is it realistic to believe people will walk more than 20 minutes each day to take the metro into the city?
(6) The submission proposes a new supermarket in the complex. There are already four supermarkets within c500m walking distance of the site (Metro Woolies, Foodworks, Maloneys and Fruitology.) What is the marginal utility of another supermarket?
Following review of the proposal, I am left with the following unanswered questions.
• Why does the proposed development need to be c12-13 stories higher than every other property within a 1km radius?
• Will the proposed project forever change the landscape of Balmain and Rozelle given its excessive bulk and scale?
• Are the impacts to local residents from increased traffic, overshadowing, crowded public transport and services justified?
• Aren’t there more suitable areas to build such high density projects such as at the white bay power station site next to the proposed Bays metro station?
In view of the above, I strongly object to the proposal.

Please see attachment

Dear Minister Scully,
Please accept the below as a submission on the proposal for increased density at Rozelle Village under State Significant Development proposal SSD-68298726. I ask that you consider this submission and please share it directly with the planning department.
While I recognise the need for investment in affordable housing, the Rozelle Village proposal raises - again - a number of issues which have been objected to before, which I ask you to consider:
1. Affordable Housing Provisions
The current "Approvals" for the 12 stories-towers have been granted on the basis that they also provide affordable housing - what has happened to that? Still, they also lack in detail and raise concerns as to the adequacy of what is to be included. First, could you please ensure that the affordable housing units are provided in perpetuity to ensure a long-lasting supply of affordable housing stock for our community.
Currently, these units could be returned to full market rate after a period of only 15 years. We need affordable housing options now and into the future, we cannot allow these dwellings to return to the private market after such a short period of time.
As we have seen in our neighbourhood, the developers pocket the financial incentives and "preferential treatment" for providing "affordable housing", but as soon as the "affordable housing" has been built, it is turned into AirB&Bs or overpriced student accommodation.
The proposed increase in density to allow for increased affordable housing will have a significant impact on the local community. I will turn to these matters in detail shortly. The current Approvals already were granted on the basis to provide affordable housing (amongst other criteria). Even higher density than in the current Approvals will have a too big an impact on
• traffic
• overshadowing
• and re completely and utterly unsympathetic to the Village character of the community.
May I ask yourself and anybody involved in the review of the current Development Proposal to review and consider previous submissions on the "Tigers" development as well as relevant traffic studies.
2. Overshadowing
The new proposal under the affordable housing SEPP will see a significant increase in height and density, going from 12-13 stories up to 14-16. This is an increase of approximately 12 metres on what was previously approved. This is a significant uplift in an area that would already struggle to cope with the approved development. This increase in height and density would have a significant detrimental impact on the existing community.
For example, under the new proposal, Cambridge Street on the western side will now be in mid-winter shadow until 10am. There will also be impacted morning solar access for the western side of Waterloo Street between 10am and noon, while Darling Street and Hancock Street will be put into afternoon shade during mid-winter. I ask the planning department to work with the developers to address the impact on solar access for residents by considering a re-design that decreases the bulk of the building to lower the impact on solar access.
3. Traffic impacts
There are significant concerns around the impact of increased traffic in what is already a busy suburban area. The proposal includes an increase in parking from 324-398 – primarily for residential use. The surrounding streets where access to the building would be are very narrow and can easily become congested. The likely increase in vehicle movements as a result of the uplift proposed by the developer is concerning. There are also serious questions about the reliability of the traffic modelling done, given this same modelling failed to predict the impact of the Rozelle Interchange.
While the planned Bays West Metro is suggested as being a solution to traffic, it is currently outside the radius considered to be ‘walkable’ under most planning metrics. Furthermore, Victoria Road and the surrounding areas are not pedestrian friendly, and it is unlikely that people would be comfortable walking such a distance on relatively unsafe routes for pedestrians.
If the planning department wants to incentivise people to walk and use public transport, much more would need to be done to make Victoria Road more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. Otherwise, this increased development will only further drive congestion and traffic problems. I invite you and you fellow decision makers to visit Darling Street during morning and afternoon peak hours and on Saturdays and Sundays.

4. Lack of community benefit
Under the current proposal, there appears to be no further benefits to the local community beyond the proposed affordable housing units to be provided for just 15 years. The Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) has not been updated to include any additional investment in public amenity. The public plaza has a strong retail element and is not a genuine community space.
In conclusion, I strongly object to this new Development Proposal. The local Community has really had enough: it has been over 10 years to-and-fro with the "Tigers", we have had to put up with the Rozelle Interchange and are suffering from that still. And again, some new Developer comes along, cashes in and disappears, with the local Community having to deal with the damage.
Yours sincerely,

I object to height increase for affordable housing, overshadowing and no analysis of overshadowing of my Heritage listed property

As a Rozelle resident, I'm genuinely saddened and very worried by this proposal.
Beyond all else, it makes a complete mockery and lie of the New South Wales Government's agenda for more high-rise apartment blocks across Sydney. We've been repeatedly promised these would be capped at six-storeys - how on Earth have we arrived at SIXTEEN storeys? This seems arrogant at worst - and deceitful at best.
Blind Freddy can see that 16-storey residential towers are as workable in Rozelle as a snowflake is in hell. To park monoliths like these in the middle of a low-rise heritage neighbourhood is not just ugly and out of place - it's plain wrong. Why are we even contemplating development like this in an area like that?
Those of us who've invested in this neighbourhood have done so for its character. We're proud to live in a small slice of old Sydney with terrace houses, heritage homes, a busting high street and some amazing views. Yes, there's been some new development too - most of it appropriate and well-guarded. But none have bought in to live in the shadows of 16-storey towers. What a soul-destroying thought.
I appreciate the desire to do something with this site. And I appreciate it's dragging on. But something has gone very wrong for us to end up here. After all these years, this is now feeling like quick cash for a quick fix. We must do better than than - lest we make a VERY big mistake. Frankly, I'd sooner see the site stay as is. For better or worse, we've all gotten used to it.
Let's not forget, this site had a long history as a community hub. It's not appropriate for this developer or any other to now try and extract 16 storeys of revenue from it - at the expense of that same community. That's both arrogant and outrageous.
I'm not opposed to redevelopment of this site. And I'm not opposed to multi-storey housing on it. But not like this.
Back to the drawing board. Six storeys tops. And if this developer can't make that work, then they must sell to one who can.

See attachment, the issues include:
traffic congestion in Belmore St
Size of development (and the 30% increase for affordable housing
Impact to the surrounding neighbourhood (shadow/solar access, visual & social)
Geotechnical impacts to Rozelle Interchange Tunnels

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at Rozelle Village, including the increase to 16 storey towers on the following grounds:

1. Increased Traffic Congestion
The proposed development will lead to a significant increase in traffic within the area, exacerbating an already congested road network. It will also cause further issues with parking in the area, which is already at maximum capacity in terms of space. Although the proposed development has car spaces, it does not take into account visitors to the apartments and to the shops and attractions that are to be included. The Inner West region is known for its narrow streets and limited parking availability, which this development will strain further. The existing infrastructure is not equipped to handle the substantial rise in vehicle movements that will be caused by both residents and service vehicles associated with this project.

The projected increase in traffic would not only hinder the flow of vehicles but also pose a risk to pedestrian safety and increase pollution levels in a densely populated urban environment. Further, I note that there are a number of schools and day cares surrounding the area, making the affected pedestrians particularly vulnerable. I urge the Council to thoroughly assess the traffic impact and reconsider this development on these grounds.

2. Impact on the Local Landscape and Environment
The development proposes changes that will irreversibly alter the character and landscape of the area. The Inner West is celebrated for its unique architectural charm, heritage buildings, and green spaces. Introducing large-scale developments with no regard to the local landscape will detract from the visual and environmental appeal that residents and visitors value. I reiterate that the size of the proposed developments is in stark contrast to the look and feel of the surrounding buildings.

New developments should maintain the area’s character and not have an adverse impact on existing architectural and design qualities.

The proposed design is not in keeping with the established architectural style and urban fabric of the Inner West. The area is renowned for its heritage buildings and cohesive streetscapes, which foster a strong sense of community identity. The development, however, features a design that is incongruous with the surrounding properties, undermining the aesthetic and historical integrity of the neighbourhood.

The Council’s has always considered in approving new developments, the importance of ensuring that such developments are compatible with the existing character of the area. This proposal does not align with these guidelines, and its visual bulk and scale will dominate the streetscape, creating an unsightly and overbearing presence. The Council should take into account the visual amenity and community concerns regarding the potential erosion of local character.

4. Overpopulation and Insufficient Supporting Resources
The Inner West is already experiencing significant population growth, and this development will exacerbate the strain on essential services and infrastructure. Local schools, healthcare facilities, and public transport are already stretched to capacity. This extends to the traffic and public transport issues arising from Westconnex. The introduction of additional residents without adequate planning for supporting resources will severely diminish the quality of life for both existing and new residents.

Council is well aware that any development should ensure that sufficient infrastructure is in place to support population growth. There is currently no indication that the necessary investments in public services, green space, or transport upgrades have been made to accommodate the influx of new residents this development would bring. This will lead to overcrowded public spaces, increased demand on already limited services, and further strain on transport networks.

In light of the points raised above, I strongly urge the Inner West Council to reconsider this proposed development. The increased traffic, landscape alterations, design incompatibility, and insufficient supporting infrastructure present significant challenges that will negatively affect the community and environment. I respectfully request that the Council take these objections into consideration during their assessment and prioritise the preservation of the local character and the well-being of current residents.

Thank you for considering my submission. I trust that the Council will carefully evaluate the concerns raised by the community regarding this development.

Yours sincerely,
Stefanie & William Bakhos

This proposal is an abomination. Anything over 8 storeys is far too much. It will reduce our view of the sun and the sky. It will increase traffic in an area that is already challenged. If cars and trucks are allowed to exit on to Waterloo St, which is already a rat run through to Victoria Rd, it will make life untenable for the residents of Waterloo St and endanger our lives and our peace. The shops proposed for the development would seriously destroy our vibrant high street, Darling St. And our relationships with the shop owners, which is part of the village vibe of Rozelle. Bringing back the Tigers Club is a complete waste of time, since the demographic moved away a long time ago. This development will completely destroy the quiet, friendly environment we now inhabit. The development is at the top of a hill and completely out of character with the Victorian and Edwardian architecture here. It will stand out as an eyesore for miles around and the resulting population of the towers will add to the total mess which is public transport in peak hours here, with people unable to get onto overfilled buses running along Victoria Rd. This development should never have been allowed to proceed.

From Anzac Bridge city, along Victoria Rd there are No dwellings above 6 stories Directly beside carriageway to Parramatta.
This amended application has increased by 25% the initial proposal. There are adequate facilities at Balmain, Rozelle, Birkenhead, 2 at Leichhardt and many in the city as well as local small outlet shops.- therefore No Requirement for "additional supermarket and/or a registered club" particularly as it's a residential project which Will exacerbate local traffic and affect local small businesses, existing registered and other venues. There is No requirement for residential parking facilities due to a pronounced public transport system available. Project does not blend into, enhance and severely affects the major intersection of Victoria Rd and Darling str which is already impacted by constricted traffic due to carriageway alteration from Drummoyne to the Rozelle interchange. There has been a Pronounced Silence for the local community of this project and to Inner West Council which is concerning being anti transparency in presentation. Construction of this project Will Severely impact Victoria Rd, Balmain Peninsular and All surrounding residential community. There is No Statement of Origin as to Ownership of this project- Q= is this of foreign investment? A project of this construction Magnitude and Land Purchase well in excess of 250M$, has been denied a public hearing by Minister for PPS. Construction timeframe and cost is questionable. Severe concern of the impact of tunnelling along Victoria Rd to City and M8 has not been addressed. There is significant concern of "shadowing" nearby the major intersection of Victoria RD and Darling str Rozelle as the project placement is virtually directly adjacent to the apex of this intersection. In closing I feel this project is Gross, Excessive and Questionable toward the local community and Requires a Full Proper Public Hearing to validate it's proposal to be considered granting approval.

Attached Letter of Support

As a parent of a young child in Rozelle, I am deeply concerned about the impact that this level of density will have on the suburb of Rozelle and the precident it sets. The infrastructure, services and schools are not equiped for this level of density.

Education is already not being catered for:
The number of 4 year olds that are missing out on placements for preschool at Rozelle Public School, KU and the other preschools is already too high. Within my mothers group alone which consists of 10 familys of kids starting kindergarten in 2026, only 2 have secured preschool placements.

The standard of living for residents will be reduced:
We chose to live in Rozelle for a reason. We liked the heritage homes, community, proximity to the city and character. We sacrifice space and pay a premium in rent and mortgages for this. We rely on the parks to entertain and find balance. A highrise development like this reduces our access to the appropriate park areas (ie with shelter, toilets etc).
Traffic is increased and so too is the demand on public transport. Not everyone has the luxury to work from home and you would know from the Public Transport data that buses during peak are at capacity in Rozelle and passengers miss out.

There are other areas where increased housing can be achieved without impacting negatively on the community.
Parramatta Road has suffering businesses, where apartments can be built above to cater for demand and allow affordable housing. This would help the businesses through foot traffic and spread out the density of residents. There are other opportunities in Rozelle too such as the unused warehouses. We have already suffered the "pinch point" caused by the interchange. This increased density to the developmemt site will ultimately create more pinch points in Rozelle; not just from the road traffic, but across the limited resources we already have. Spread this out, dont concentrate it one spot and set precident for this to continue.

I am writing this letter on behalf of my mother Juliet Sheen who resides on Waterloo street, Rozelle who is elderly. She has lived on the street for 30 years +
It is welcome news that at last the Rozelle Village plans to commence work. It is commendable that the project includes affordable housing in this current climate.
It is however unworkable to have the number of dwellings proposed given the traffic constraints in the area; the number of dwellings in Waterloo and adjacent streets that have no off street parking (estimated to be about 90%). The intersection proposed for the dwelling is one of the 4 entry points into Balmain. A school is located close to the adjacent corner
The height of the buildings is completely out of keeping with the precinct and will cause a large overshadow over surrounding residences.

The local community has had a long running history regarding this site and the height that it should be built to. That should not now be ignored. Further, the increased height will have significant overshadowing on the surrounding longstanding homes in the area which include terraces that only obtain light through front and rear windows. The sunlight that is currently enjoyed by the surrounding properties will almost disappear (particularly in winter) by overshadowing if the development is to increase in height. The shadow diagrams show that during winter, overshadowing will extend beyond Waterloo Street to homes 2 to 3 rows behind. In winter, Waterloo street will receive no direct sunlight as a result of overshadowing until around 12/12:30pm. By which time the amount of sunlight is minimal given the time of year and length of days. Further, 2 buildings, not surrounded by any other buildings of that height are not sympathetic to the surrounding properties, diversity of homes in the area coupled with the rich heritage and history of Rozelle, Lilyfield and Balmain, being predominantly federation style homes and terraces. There is simply nothing of that bulk, scale, and size around the proposed development site and having 2 large towers standalone will destroy the rich culture and history of Rozelle and its surrounds. The developers already have approved 12 storeys and they need to get on with developing what they have been approved for. There have been long standing battles and applications regarding the height and scale of this development. Each of those times, the local council and community have made clear that they do not wish to be over-towered and overshadowed by a goliath building that is not in keeping with the character and charm of Rozelle and buildings surrounding the proposed Rozelle Village.

I do not support the proposed amendments to the Rozelle Village development for 2 reasons:
1. Congestion impacts - the development is in an area which already experiences significant congestion (especially at peak hour and on Saturdays). Adding additional dwellings is going to further exacerbate this.
2. Parking impacts - parking for residents is already at a premium with many houses in the area not having any off street parking. To build 238 dwellings and only 208 residential parking spaces will not work. Additionally it appears that there are no visitors parking spaces so this will also spillover into the surrounding streets.

I am a Balmain resident.

This proposal is exactly what this site calls for and what the community needs. The development is large but contains affordable housing, additional residences and important services, all of which are urgently needed:

1. It would provide 59 new affordable housing units. This alone ought to strongly encourage approval

2. The site has excellent public transport links, with several bus lines running along Victoria Road and Darling Street. With the possible exception of development over a railway station, if this site is not suitable for high density infill development what site is?

3. It contains a supermarket. Woolworths operate the two other large supermarkets on the Balmain peninsula. A third supermarket will (assuming it is not run by Woolworths) will create urgently needed price competition and so save residents money

3. Approval would give the best possible chance for this derelict site to be developed as soon as possible.

Finally, I am not in any way associated with the developer.