The Timberyards by RTL Co.

I strongly object to this proposal for a number of reasons:
- The development is FAR bigger than any other housing in the area. With approx 1200 units across 8-13 storeys, this is well over the current restrictions on Sydenham Road of 3 storeys.
- Less than a quarter of the units will have allocated parking. Parking in Marrickville is already difficult with many houses not having on-site parking. Current infrastructure cannot support the additional traffic or parking needs of this devlopment.
- Affordable housing allocation barely scrapes in at 10% – affordable housing is a huge problem in the Inner West, and housing developments like this only exacerbate the problem by taking up space that could be otherwise used for affordable housing.
- The number of 3-bedroom units proposed is staggeringly low – again, this will add to the housing crisis and discourage families from moving into the area
- The development is applying for exemptions for greenspace allowances – this not only will detract from the character of the area, but brings with it both environmental and mental health concerns for residents.
- A development of this size will drastically change the community feel of Marrickville. The developers have shown very little thought for the liveability of the units nor for the concerns of existing residents in the area who will be affected by it. Greed should not be the main motivator for the basic human necessity of housing!

Can you please look into fixing our roads in the area once the construction has been completed? I find that during the construction there are more large semitrailers on the roads and this congests our streets and ruins the existing roads.

Is it possible to see a plan of where exactly it will back onto Victoria Rd so I can see if it will effect me at all?

Please find attached submission letter.
I request my name to be withheld.

I am making this objection primarily due to the proposed 8 storey height of the proposed development. That is too high for all the obvious reasons, including overshadowing surrounding existing properties, which is unfair. Too many residents that will need catering for from parking to health care to child care etc. Too much for an already bulging suburb. As a resident of Marrickville for 28 years, I have seen this valid point disregarded by council so many times.

I strongly object to the project. I am extremely concerned about the number of residences being built. It is too many people to have condensed into that small of an area. There are very few car parks for the number of dwellings, by a long shot. It is already impossible to find a car park in the area, weekdays or weekends, this will create a huge problem, massive problem for local residents not being able to park their cars. The local area doesn't have the infrastructure to support this many new people in a small space. My daughter goes to dancing on the weekend near the bowling club and there is never any chance of getting a park, if there is a family member coming to watch her no hope of getting a park either at our house or near the dance studio. The expectation is likely that people in this development will walk to Sydenham station - well that is already a very dangerous walk. I walk there daily and am getting swiped by bikes on the footpath, have fallen over on the uneven footpath and I have almost been run over a number of time at the pedestrian crossing outside the bowling club. I know of two people who've actually been hit by cars there. Traffic in the area is becoming a problem, especially along Victoria road, this will only make that much worse. I am extremely concerned about the impact to Marrickville Public School - extremely concerned. My two kids go there, they are in Kindy and year 1 so will be there for some time to come. The new development totally encroaches on the school, it will be overlooking the school. It's not appropriate for a development of this size to be overlooking a school, the understanding that I have is that people will be able to see into the school.

We also have a child at Marrickville High School - there is no space at the school, its enrolments I believe have doubled in a very short period of time, only a few years. The school is grossly understaffed and under resourced. My son in year 10 frequently did not have regular teacher for subjects, there wasn't enough equipment in all of the rooms. I understand that not all of the dwellings support families - but some will, this will still bring in extra people to the area. I am not against extra people coming into the area, but we need to have the right infrastructure to support it.

This will be a complete disaster. There are too many units in a very small space, not enough parking by a long shot, it will destroy the neighbourhood, it will create havoc for the kids at school.

I would support something with a much smaller number of units, 100 or so, dwellings that supporter families and it must have at least 1 car park per unit.

Please refer to attached submission

Please see attachment for submission

I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed Timberyards development in Marrickville. While I acknowledge that housing developments should be a priority given the prevailing housing crisis in NSW, this proposal prioritizes profit over people and fails to meet the real housing needs of the area.

Lack of Affordable Housing
The current proposal includes over a thousand apartments, yet less than 10% will be classified as affordable housing. Additionally, the affordable units will only be rented at less than 20% below market rates, which does not provide meaningful relief for those struggling with housing costs in Marrickville. Given the scale of this development, a much larger proportion of genuinely affordable housing should be mandated - at least 30% which is in line with the peak housing not for profit organisations.

No Public Housing
The proposal completely fails to include any public housing. At a time when homelessness and housing insecurity are rising, it is completely unacceptable that a development of this scale does not allocate any units to public housing. Public housing is essential for providing long-term, stable homes for those most in need, including the growing number of older women who require long term public housing, yet this project offers nothing to address that urgent demand.

Excessive Co-Living and For-Profit Student Housing
A significant portion of the proposed development is dedicated to co-living arrangements and for-profit student housing, operated by SCAPE. These types of residences are designed for short-term accommodation rather than providing stable, long-term homes for local residents. Sydney and Melbourne are already saturated with expensive student accommodation, while our community faces a critical shortage of affordable housing for families, workers, and vulnerable residents.

Opposition to Build-to-Rent Model
The build-to-rent model in this development does not serve the long-term housing needs of the community. Instead of creating secure, owner-occupied homes, it prioritizes investment-driven rental properties, which will lead to higher rents and reduced housing stability. This model benefits developers and corporate landlords at the expense of local residents seeking permanent, affordable housing options.

Oversized and Inappropriate for the Area
The scale of this development is far larger than previous projects, including the Wicks Place apartments, and will significantly alter the character of the neighborhood. Infrastructure and community services must be carefully planned to support such a large influx of residents, yet the proposal does not adequately address these needs.

Lack of Transparency on Key Issues
The issue of excessive co-living spaces appears to have been downplayed in public consultations, limiting the ability of the community to engage meaningfully with the planning process. Transparency and proper community consultation are essential for a project of this magnitude.

I urge the NSW Planning Department to require substantial revisions to the Timberyards proposal, including:
• A significantly increased proportion of genuinely affordable housing, ensuring that at least 30% of units are available at deeply discounted rates.
• The inclusion of 30% dedicated public housing units to provide permanent homes for low-income and vulnerable residents.
• Removal of co-living and short-term accommodation units in favor of permanent, long-term affordable rental or private housing suitable for families and essential workers.
• The removal of the build-to-rent model in favor of a more balanced approach that supports owner-occupiers in affordable ways such as shared equity plans to achieve long-term community stability.
• Greater transparency in community consultations and planning processes to ensure that local voices are heard and respected.

Unfortunately I only became aware that submissions are due today for the giant proposal in Marrickville that is a 'build to rent for profit' development brought to you by SCAPE (for profit organisation that provides private student housing).
I understand that there are more than a thousand for rent apartment but LESS THAN 10% will be affordable (and this means ONLY 20% below market rates, so in other words, still unaffordable for most people).
This COMPLETE LATE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING in this block has not had much publicity at all. The development is called Timberyards. Of course, housing is extremely important and this is a sad example of wasting an opportunity for local housing.
It seems that our Labor government is putting this through under rapidly, yet I must voice my objection.

I support this development as it provides much-needed housing supply in Markville in reasonable distance of the CBD, currently apartments here are overpriced in terms of what you get in quality.

Compared with Melbourne where you can live even closer to the city and pay even less for the same quality apartment in terms of buying and renting.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Timberyards development in Marrickville. While I am a strong supporter of medium density housing and increased urban development which can bring benefits to our community, this project puts corporate profit over the genuine housing needs of local residents in a unique and popular Inner West suburb. These values will be put at risk by a project that goes against so much of the character that Marrickville has that is attractive to its residents and community.
Inadequate Affordable Housing: While the development plans reveal the construction of over one thousand apartments, less than 10% of them will be earmarked as affordable housing. Even these so-called affordable units will only be rented at a rate just under 20% below market value, which does little to alleviate the growing housing crisis. A significantly higher percentage of truly affordable housing must be included to meet community needs.
No Public Housing Provision: This proposal completely excludes public housing. Given the rising rates of homelessness and housing insecurity, it is unacceptable for a development of this magnitude to exclude public housing. Dedicated public housing units are essential for providing stable, long-term homes for low-income residents and must be incorporated into the plan.
Overreliance on Co-Living and For-Profit Student Accommodation: The integrity of Marrickville as an attractive place to live will be undermined by such a project. With a significant portion of the proposed development dedicated to co-living spaces and high-cost student accommodation operated by SCAPE, it prioritizes short-term, high-turnover rentals rather than providing permanent homes for local families and workers. With Sydney and Melbourne already oversaturated with expensive student housing, Marrickville should not become another hub for profit-driven, short-stay accommodation at the expense of real community needs.
Opposition to Build-to-Rent Model: The build-to-rent approach in this project is not designed to create long-term housing security. Instead, it favors investment-driven rental models that produces never ending profits for the investor, and inflates rental prices and limit long-term stability for tenants. This model is not in the best interest of the community and should be reconsidered in favor of homeownership opportunities and permanent housing solutions.
Excessive Scale and Impact on the Area: Marrickville has its own particular charm and attraction for new home owners and renters around its diversity, arts sector and connectivity. The sheer size of this development far exceeds that of previous projects, such as the Wicks Place apartments - which is already significant by local standards, and will drastically alter the character of Marrickville. There is no clear plan to ensure that essential infrastructure and community services will be expanded to accommodate such an influx of new residents.
Lack of Transparency in the Planning Process: The issue of excessive co-living spaces has been downplayed in community consultations, limiting the public’s ability to provide informed feedback. Transparency and meaningful community engagement must be a priority in any project of this scale.
I strongly urge the NSW Planning Department to require major revisions to the Timberyards proposal, including:
• A substantial increase in genuinely affordable housing, with at least 30% of units set aside at deeply discounted rates.
• The inclusion of public housing to provide permanent homes for low-income and vulnerable residents.
• A reduction in co-living and short-term rental units, with a shift towards permanent housing designed for families and essential workers.
• The removal of the build-to-rent model in favor of sustainable, community-focused housing solutions.
• Improved transparency and greater community involvement in the planning process.

As someone eager to move to Marrickville, I strongly support this development. The 1200 new homes will improve housing availability in this highly sought-after area, while the thoughtful design balances density with livability. The project's focus on active transport (762 bike spaces) and minimal car parking (278 spaces) perfectly suits the location's proximity to Sydenham Metro and Marrickville Road shops. The inclusion of retail space, affordable housing, and public spaces will enhance community amenities. Marrickville Public School has capacity for new students, making this ideal for families. This development represents forward-thinking urban planning that creates homes where people want to live with excellent supporting infrastructure.

This proposal is for a large volume of high quality, well located housing near shops, amenities and transport. If not here, where?

It will substantially improve the local streetscape, contribute to lowering housing costs and will enable more people to live in a well-serviced area of Sydney. There is plenty of infrastructure and local school capacity for it. It should be approved as soon as possible.

This looks like a great project in a great location.
I'm especially encouraged by all the bicycle spaces and lack of emphasis on parking. There are many of us (including with children) who don't have cars for all sorts of reasons and this site being well located near the metro makes this a great space for people to make that choice.

Sydney needs to be delivering a lot of projects like this and even at larger scales to start to tackle our states housing needs and this is a great step.
Looks like exactly the type of place I'd be happy living in with my young family.
A decent amount of housing, creative space, open space, communal space for residents - wonderful!

To whom it may concern

I am objecting to the project based on a few specific reasons.
1. Having 216 parking spots for over 1000 units is not actually going to work. I am a regular visitor to many businesses in the area around the site and its already hard enough to find a car spot now to attend to business. This is a major detriment to the local residents and businesses in at last a 1klm radius or more. While everyone would like to say the people who live there can use public transport in essence this will be unlikely and impractical, and there really needs to be enough spots for 1 for each unit. I also cannot catch public transport to those business's due to unreliable public transport that takes at least 30 minutes longer to get there.

2. The affordable housing is minimal. If developers want to build homes they need to have quite a lot more affordable homes for renters. Its time that we actually do have a better process for having homes for people who work in the area. The site is not far from RPA hospital and we should be ensuring that when we do these builds that there is a lot more affordable homes. It doesn't look like there is going to be many of those in this development.

3. The height of the building is MUCH higher than is currently zoned for that area. This is not in keeping with the local area and will mean that it will change the feel of Marrickville as well as impact local residents.

4. There is no infrastructure to support this. Schools and roads and shopping centre is packed to the rafters. Some days I can barely get into the Metro and find a park on weekends to do grocery shopping. This will just increase and create a barely liveable situation for people.

5. There is a lot of studio and 1 bedroom apartments. Are these going to be over priced for students and frontline workers? Or whats the target market? Seems like its just mainly for making a lot of money and not to promote community and organise homes for families.

I do agree we need more housing and this is a site that it can be done well on. Unfortunately I don't think this plan does this.

I object to the project as it currently stands.
This is a great opportunity to provide social and affordable housing on an excellent site close to amenities and public transport.
As a current renting resident nearby I welcome more housing and rentals available but I know that these - like nearby new apartments - will not be affordable and will not offer a mix of housing to people from varied social and economic backgrounds.
10% affordable and no social housing is a mistake and a travesty when you had such a big site with a lot of potential. I would support the project if its was 50% social housing/50% market rate housing.

There needs to be at least 1 car spot, per unit, incorporated into the design of the complex
The surrounding area of this proposed complex, already has major car parking issues
When a major event is on at Henson Park - the already congested area is even more congested, and car parking is out of control
The proposal has less than 300 car spaces provided for over a thousand units. The complex “rental pricing” will be at market value, and will not target students and the like without cars. The renters will be more established and will own cars!
Once the building is complete, you can't go back and say "Well we got that wrong"
The footprint of the proposed area will be more than be enough, to provide underground parking for 1000+ cars - And for the few units that don’t have cars, they could rent their car spot, to help reduce parking issues in the area
Whilst adding the necessary carpark capacity will add to the construction costs, it must be deemed a necessary requirement

I support the project if the car parking supply and traffic generation are significantly reduced.
See detailed submission attached.

As a local resident, I object to this project in its current form. While I appreciate the need for more housing during this housing crisis, I do not believe this development is the answer.

There are several issues, namely:
- the proposed height of the building;
- the ratio of 1 bedroom to 2-3 bedroom apartments;
- lack of affordability;
- lack of parking;
- pressure a large influx of people will have on current infrastructure.

The proposed height of 8 storeys will overshadow surrounding streets and homes, denying residents and the environment of adequate sunlight. 8 storeys is also far greater than the 3 storeys permitted.

There is an excess of 1 bedroom/studio apartments, compared to 2-3 bedroom apartments. Of the 1,188 proposed apartments, roughly 3/4 will be single occupancy and only really suitable for students or singles in temporary housing, particularly given the shared facilities (shared kitchens, laundry, etc). Only approx. 1/4 of apartments are suitable for families, couples or larger groups. We need more family homes, not studios.

Less than 10% of the apartments will be classed as Affordable Housing. Given the size of this development, this is woefully insufficient. We need more affordable housing in the Inner West for low-income residents. As someone on a low income myself, I find this especially appalling. It appears the developer is prioritising profits over people.

With the huge number of apartments, and even larger number of prospective residents, the proposed 216 parking spaces is simply inadequate. Parking is already difficult to find in the area, and the lack of parking spots in the development is only going to cause more chaos in surrounding streets for residents.

Adding an estimated 1,500+ people to the area from one development is going to put a significant strain on local services and infrastructure. Many services like GP clinics, RPA hospital, local schools and childcare centres are already under pressure due to the growing population. Developers must consider the strain they’re adding to local infrastructure when constructing such large developments.

Should the development be revised to be only 3 storeys, have an equal amount of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments (though far less than 1,188 overall), have a larger percentage of actual Affordable Housing (50% would be ideal), provide adequate parking within the development for residents, and work to lessen the negative impact to the surrounding infrastructure (keeping to 3 storeys and thus less apartments will help), I would be likely to support it. Until such changes are made, I cannot in good conscience support this development.

We are the owners of 199 Victoria Road and object to the proposed development of Timberyards, Marrickville without the consolidation of our property and nearby properties into the master plan. The development will severely impart the value of our property and future development prospects.