Shop top housing with infill affordable housing, Oxford and Nelson Street, Bondi Junction

This is setting a very unnecessary precedent in height for this particular area of Bondi junction, there is higher risk of more congestion in traffic and less street parking for existing residence. The loss of natural light due to the excessive height request is a big concern. We feel this request from the developer goes beyond what should be allowed and it’s absolute negligence from state planning that this is even being considered.

Dear Sir/Madam,
I write to object to the above proposal.
I am the owner of an adjacent property, 218 Oxford Street, Bondi Junction and have received the advice for the above.
As an immediate neighbour I strongly object to the proposal.
This development is already subject to the site specific DCP that allowed for substantial increase in height, scale and bulk over the adjacent lands. The proposal will further exacerbate the issues that were raised in the first DA of height, scale, overlooking and traffic.

My objections are the following:

TRAFFIC – SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN VOLUME AND NUMBERS
Increase in vehicle spaces by 45. This is a vast increase on the approved numbers and will result in even further congestion to an already saturated traffic situation to the whole of the Bondi Junction traffic situation that is unsatisfactory and has been referenced in numerous council reports.

Traffic access is dependent on the laneway to the rear of the existing shops that are regularly serviced for deliveries. This is still an unresolved matter from the first DA and will be simply exacerbated with the substantial increase in vehicles proposed. Deliveries of which there are substantial number and all through the day, will turn a two way lane into a one way lane, leading to further issues of traffic management.

VISUAL IMPACT – OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE – IMPACT TO CENTENNIAL PARK AND FEDERATION VALLEY
The towers are to be seen from Federation Valley within Centennial Park. The applicant’s own assessment is that the impact is significant. This is an extraordinary proposal for a commercial development of this type to overlook the birthplace of Australia as a modern nation. This is totally unacceptable and goes to the heart and values of our nation. If this is approved, what does it say to us as a nation? That the very symbolic place of the creation of a nation and will be by clearly marginalised forever.

BULK AND SCALE
The applicant’s own documentation clearly shows unacceptable impact on the surrounding 1 and 2 storey residences and commercial premises. Overshadowing will increase turning the immediate neighbourhood into a cold and windy zone.

HERITAGE
The local conservation area will be further affected by this substantial increase of the proposal. The scale, bulk and form of the proposal will further tower over the neighbourhood distorting the finely crafted and cherished community area into a dysfunctional urban form. This is not a desired outcome and creates a very poor legacy for society.

HERITAGE NORFOLK ISLAND PINE TREE
The existing Norfolk Island Pine tree has been struck by lightning and needs to be replaced with a new mature specimen tree.
Further, the landmark status of this tree will be further compromised by the proposal as the tree will lose its landmark status as a signal tree for shipping and its position on the top of the ridge will be totally obscured.

I urge the department to reject this further expansion of an already over development of the site.

the additional height requests are disgusting.
This is developers taking advantage of Local and State government.
Not only is the proposal an eyesaw to the skyline - especially from Centennial park, but also the increased traffic in the area is of serious concern to children walking from Bondi Junction to Woollahra public school.
Please limit this development to the previously (objected) approved height and do not allow any further.

as a local resident I am concerned that the project hasn't submitted a parking plan as yet. With the increase of floors and residents this will bring an increase to general traffic. Living on Ruthven St is already a calm slow moving traffic street and parking currently isn't to bad in the evenings however during the day (Monday to Friday) is almost impossible to park. With increased residents this will put further strain on the area. Waverley council has already suggested parallel parking to some of the street which is a poor decision especially on the Oxford and Ruthven St intersection with high pedestrian, cycle and motor traffic already making this intersection dangerous. Adding another 8 floors to this project will only make this park of Bondi Junction busier, harder to park and inevitably more dangerous for the families that live on the street and walk towards Woollahra Public twice a day.
I would urge everyone to re-consider adding any more floors and residents to these 2 already very large towers in what is a very low density housing area. High rises in Bondi Junction should never have come any further down Oxford st and I am sad this project was approved at the already existing height.
Making this site even bigger is a terrible idea and I question how the developer is planning to tell $6million units next to 'affordable' housing options.

I hope council can consider the young families who live near Ruthven and St James streets and the children who use these areas and the effect more traffic/parking/security it has on the area

Many thanks

The current propsed height of the project is within set LEP guidelines ( the old guideliens were 12 meatres).Reading the planning submission, no reasons have been provided as to why the height of the buildings need to be increased to accomodat eteh community housing or retail space. If they want to include these elements, then why can't they resdesign and incorporate them into the current approved plan without increasing the height ? No argument has been put forwad to say why the height needs to be increased to accomodate these elements and smacks of using the community housing clause to increase profit and height.If these elements are so important to the developer,then why werer they not part of the original plan submission. Come on council andespecially the planning team. Listen to the community not the developers wishes.

1. The traffic assessment for the proposed high-rise apartment block was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, a time when traffic volumes were atypically low due to lockdowns and remote work. This outdated data does not reflect current congestion levels and fails to account for post-pandemic commuting patterns, increased local activity, and growing residential density.

A revised traffic study is necessary to ensure that this development does not lead to excessive congestion, safety hazards, or disruptions to public transport. The reassessment should:
- Account for current traffic volumes during peak and off-peak hours.
- Evaluate the impact on public transport accessibility and service frequency.
- Assess parking availability and potential overflow into surrounding streets. Each apartment must have parking space within the building as I live on a surrounding street and we already need to park miles away from our house each day due to no parking being available.
- Consider emergency vehicle access to avoid response-time delays.

Failure to update the traffic analysis risks approving a development that could overwhelm local road networks, negatively impact pedestrian safety, and reduce accessibility for residents and businesses.

2. A development of this scale requires a comprehensive review of supporting infrastructure to prevent strain on essential services. Areas that must be addressed include:

1. Sewage and Water Management
- Are upgrades planned for sewage systems to support increased demand?
- Will stormwater drainage be improved to prevent flooding risks?

2. Healthcare and Emergency Services
- How will local hospitals and clinics accommodate the growing population?
- Are additional emergency response facilities being considered?

3. Public Transport and Road Networks
- Will bus and train services expand to support new residents?
- Are road improvements planned to mitigate congestion?

4. Environmental and Sustainability Measures
- What green spaces and recreational areas are included in the development?
- Will the project incorporate sustainable building practices to minimize its ecological footprint?

5. Community Consultation and Impact
- Has there been adequate consultation with local residents and businesses?
- What measures are in place to preserve the neighborhood’s character and livability?

Given the state significance of this development, all infrastructure elements must be reassessed to ensure long-term sustainability and minimal disruption to existing residents. A transparent review process, including updated traffic studies and infrastructure assessments, is critical for responsible urban planning.

Without affordable housing commitments, large-scale developments risk exacerbating economic inequality and reducing access to essential services as lower-income workers are priced out of the area. I believe the affordable housing needs to be available for longer than the required time of 15 years.

I am writing in support of the project. Bondi Junction needs more housing of all types to address the housing crisis. Its proximity to the train station and other amenities make it perfect, and more families should bolster numbers at Bondi's under-occupied schools.

I firmly object to this project, it will be blight on the Community of Bondi Junction. Blocking out our skyline, creating more shade, more noise, conjested traffic already on Oxford St and wind tunnels. We already have too many ugly very high buildings in this precinct and I certainly object to the height taken to 17 stories. What we would like is more greenery and comfortable and clean safe places for residents to gather. These types of buildings do nothing for the existing residents, they only assist the developers.

Certainly! Here’s an expanded version of your argument incorporating a section on affordable housing:

---

### **Request for Reassessment of Traffic, Infrastructure, and Affordable Housing in the Proposed High-Rise Development**

#### **Traffic Assessment Concerns**
The traffic assessment for the proposed high-rise apartment block was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, a time when traffic volumes were atypically low due to lockdowns and remote work. This outdated data does not reflect current congestion levels and fails to account for post-pandemic commuting patterns, increased local activity, and growing residential density.

A revised traffic study is necessary to ensure that this development does not lead to excessive congestion, safety hazards, or disruptions to public transport. The reassessment should:
- **Account for current traffic volumes** during peak and off-peak hours.
- **Evaluate the impact on public transport** accessibility and service frequency.
- **Assess parking availability** and potential overflow into surrounding streets.
- **Consider emergency vehicle access** to avoid response-time delays.

Failure to update the traffic analysis risks approving a development that could overwhelm local road networks, negatively impact pedestrian safety, and reduce accessibility for residents and businesses.

#### **Infrastructure and Planning Considerations**
A development of this scale requires a **comprehensive review of supporting infrastructure** to prevent strain on essential services. Areas that must be addressed include:

1. **Sewage and Water Management**
- Are upgrades planned for sewage systems to support increased demand?
- Will stormwater drainage be improved to prevent flooding risks?

2. **Healthcare and Emergency Services**
- How will local hospitals and clinics accommodate the growing population?
- Are additional emergency response facilities being considered?

3. **Public Transport and Road Networks**
- Will bus and train services expand to support new residents?
- Are road improvements planned to mitigate congestion?

4. **Environmental and Sustainability Measures**
- What green spaces and recreational areas are included in the development?
- Will the project incorporate sustainable building practices to minimize its ecological footprint?

5. **Community Consultation and Impact**
- Has there been adequate consultation with local residents and businesses?
- What measures are in place to preserve the neighborhood’s character and livability?

Given the **state significance** of this development, all infrastructure elements must be reassessed to ensure **long-term sustainability** and **minimal disruption to existing residents**. A transparent review process, including updated traffic studies and infrastructure assessments, is critical for responsible urban planning.

#### **Affordable Housing: A Responsible Requirement for Sustainable Development and Addressing the Cost of Living Crisis
Every **responsible development** should include provisions for **affordable housing**, ensuring that lower-income individuals and essential workers can access safe and stable living conditions.

At a minimum, a proportion of units should be designated for **affordable rent**, capped at **no more than 25% of the minimum full-time wage**. This would:
- **Promote socioeconomic diversity** within the community.
- **Ensure housing accessibility for key workers** such as nurses, teachers, and emergency responders.
- **Prevent excessive displacement** of existing residents due to rising rental costs.

Additionally, transparent policies should be outlined to ensure:
- **Fair allocation of affordable units** to those most in need.
- **Long-term affordability protections**, preventing speculative price hikes.
- **Government requirements to encourage developers to integrate affordability into the project’s framework.

Without affordable housing commitments, large-scale developments risk exacerbating economic inequality and reducing access to essential services as lower-income workers are priced out of the area.