The Timberyards by RTL Co.

I already made a submission but wanted to include some points and couldn't work out how toi ammend.
For all the residents on the surrounding street to this new development such as Edward St, which backs onto the dvelopment, I think it will be really important that there is some sort of parking restrictions introduced before construction begins so we can still park on our street and exclude trucks driving down in it for construction. Its a very narrow street with mostly semi detached houses with hardly any driveways and no garages. We all park on the street and parking can be quite limited already. We do not have the space for all the vehicles of the workers of this huge development - and we know that they will start parking in our street because its currently free and unmetered and there are few other options. I propose Edward St becomes metered 2 hour parking except for residents to allow us to be alel to park near our house for shopping and children wrangling etc. It would also be wise to exclude trucks from driving down our very narrow street - only one car fits as it is (others have to wait in the gutter for a car to pass now), residents have lost side mirrors already frequently in our street because iof the narrow width so a truck will not comfortably drive down it and the noise would be another disruption to an already noisy situation.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development plans for The Timberyards. As a resident of the local area, I have several concerns regarding the potential impact of the development on both my property and the wider community. My objections are outlined below:

Excessive Overshadowing and Breach of Legal Standards The proposed development is excessive in its height and scale and would result in significant overshadowing of homes along Sydenham Road, including my own. The amount of sunlight that would be blocked by the proposed building is far beyond what is legally permissible. This not only affects my property but also the quality of life for several neighboring households. The extent of overshadowing is unreasonable and will have a detrimental effect on our homes, health, and well-being. I request that the development be reconsidered to comply with legal requirements regarding overshadowing and sunlight access.

Inadequate Parking and Increased Congestion The development proposes nearly 2000 units, yet the amount of onsite parking provided is insufficient for the number of residents, let alone visitors. It is unrealistic to assume that the residents of this development will not own cars, nor that there will be no need for parking spaces for guests. Currently, parking is already difficult in the area, and the addition of hundreds of new residents without the necessary parking infrastructure will exacerbate this issue significantly. Street parking is already at capacity, and this development will make it unfeasible for residents and visitors to park in the area. The proposed parking provision does not meet the needs of the community, and I urge the planners to revisit this aspect of the proposal.

Increased Traffic and Local Disruption The scale of the development, with nearly 2000 units, will result in a dramatic increase in traffic in an already congested area. The roads surrounding the development are not equipped to handle the additional strain that will be caused by the influx of new residents, delivery vehicles, and visitors. The increase in traffic is not only an inconvenience but will also pose a safety risk to pedestrians and other road users. The local infrastructure is inadequate to support this level of development, and I believe the traffic and congestion concerns need to be thoroughly addressed before the proposal is approved.

Local Services Are Already at Capacity Local services, including childcare, are already operating at full capacity. The wait times for local childcare facilities are unreasonably long. My own family experienced a wait time of over six months for a spot at a local childcare center, which ultimately led us to seek alternative childcare options in other suburbs. With the proposed addition of nearly 2000 units, the demand for local services will only increase, further exacerbating existing challenges. It is unreasonable to approve a development of this scale without ensuring that local services are adequately prepared to meet the increased demand.

In conclusion, I strongly object to the proposed development of The Timberyards and request that these concerns be carefully considered before any further action is taken. Specifically, we would like to see the height of the buildings, particularly the one facing Sydenham Road, be reconsidered to better align with the surrounding community's needs and legal standards.

I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss these issues further and provide additional input as part of the planning process.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

I support the project in general but it can't go ahead as it is. You haven't allocated enough parking spaces per apartment and it's not fair as it discriminates against social workers being able to live in the area. As it is, a lot of these apartments are going up around the area with limited car spaces and it's becoming impossible to find parking generally and social workers have written into their contracts at work that they need access to their own vehicle to work in their workplaces. I'm sure social workers aren't the only ones who have this stipulation as well. If you want to continue to have a diverse community that holds a space for essential workers, you can't force everyone onto public transport because there are still those in the community that are forced to own cars even when they don't want to. Not everyone works in office spaces in the city and just commutes twice a day to their workplace. We definitely need more highrise high density living but you need to provide parking spaces for each of the apartments or at least 3/4 of them.

There are not enough parking spaces. The ratio is entirely problematic and based on fallacy around number of people currently visiting as well as proximity to the Metro. People have cars regardless of this situation. Locals still drive to this location to access the local establishments.

People will use these cars paces as commuter parking as well.

You need more parking.

Much more parking.

I strongly oppose this submission due to the overwhelming strain it would place on local infrastructure. The increased population density in the area bounded by Victoria Rd, Sydenham Rd, Farr, and Mitchell Street would severely burden already overstretched roads, such as Victoria and Sydenham Roads. These routes are already plagued by heavy traffic during peak times, exacerbated by recent high-rise developments like the one at Wick Park. As a result, bus travel along Victoria Rd now takes two to three times longer than before. This additional strain on the area’s infrastructure would be unsustainable.

As a resident of over twenty years, I have witnessed firsthand the significant impact of recent developments in Wick Park and the approval of night venues and alcohol-serving breweries in our area. These changes have severely affected our quality of life. We now face a lack of parking near our home, constant crowds of visitors to these venues, and unpleasant issues such as people relieving themselves behind our property. Additionally, we are dealing with increased rubbish, noise, and traffic. The proposed development of the Timberyards by RTL would further exacerbate the density in the area, making it increasingly difficult for our family to continue living here.

The continued overdevelopment of this area is untenable and eroding residents’ liveability. If the Timberyards development proceeds, it will push an already strained environment beyond its breaking point. Our community deserves to maintain a reasonable quality of life, and this proposal, along with the ongoing developments, threatens to permanently disrupt the stability and wellbeing of local families like mine. There is little regard for long-term residents like us in the area by State and Local Government bodies. I urge decision-makers to carefully consider the long-term consequences of such developments before approving any further changes.

This project has changed from the orginal proposal presented to council and rejected and yet somehow remains yet bigger! Previously this enormous development planned for 5 storeys on the area on Farr St, this has now increased to 8 storeys and now 7 buildings!
I live on Edward St which is parallel to Farr St with our tiny backyard adjacent to the factories on the western side of Farr St. Our street is predominantly small one to two level (mostly one level) semi-detached houses with no garaages and only a couple of driveways in the entire street. There is generall yno available parking on any given evening as we only have street parking. Our only sky is the small amount of blue we get above the factories on farr St. This proposal does not even mention Edward St in its impacts yet it stands to affect our street the most. We will lose our one tiny bit of sky (that we pay an enormous mortgage to enjoy) from these 8-13 storeys planned in the adjacent street. We will also likely lose our already impaired ability to park outside our house both suring the constrcution phase with all the workers in the adjacent street looking for somwehere to park and then when the many apartments are built- with its woefully inadequate 238 carspaces for 1100 apartments (?) - they will also likely park in our street! The traffic in this area of Marrickville is one of the worst with the ability to drive onto Sydenham Rd from Edward St already very difficult at most times of the day and the build up around Victoria St and Sydneham Rd is terrible. There does not seem to be any sort of admission of this or how top improve this for residents - imagine how much worsethis will be with all these extra apartments and the only main exit road being Sydneham rd. What an urban gridlock nightmare!! Let aloe the 41 months you proprse this building will take to construct with 6 months (!!!) of the worst for the basement drilling. My husband works from home as do many in our street - how are they expected to concentrate through these MANY years of construction noise, dust, and debris. Let alone the extended hours of construction those who go to work must deal with when they return to their small sanctuary they have paid a fortune to live in! How is 7am to 7pm reasonable and then all day Saturday 7am to 6pm??!! So we have one day per week to onyl dealw ith the usual flight and urban living noise. These are unreasonably long hours for any family to endure. My daughterwil be doing the HSC during theis time- study concentration will be seriously impaired by endless noise. I'm extremely disappointed that this development that was ooposed by local residents and our council has been pushed through to meet state development requirements without a thought to those who ahve to then live with it. There does not seem to be any scope for improved traffic, parking, the visual impact of these huge buildinsg in a low density small residential area and otherinfarstructure such as more scholls and green space to deal with all these extra residents. Is Wicks park anough to deal with danias other development and this?!

As someone who lives in the vicinity, from my experience the proposed project is much too high density for the area and what its current infrastructure can handle. The traffic on Victoria Rd, Sydenham Rd & surrounds is already regularly at a standstill. Adding 1,188 apartments and therefore a large amount of vehicles to the immediate vicinity is going to be catastrophic and result in a a permanent gridlock situation.

As well as the effect on car traffic this development would have on the Marrickville area, the extremely high density nature of the project bears a huge risk of creating an urban slum. As the area is still predominately light industry, injecting an unprecedented amount of apartments and thousands of people into a part of the Marrickville area that is lacking infrastructure in would be problematic to say the least.

Whilst I acknowledge there is a need to build housing quickly, the current scale of this project has the potential to permanently damage the cultural integrity of Marrickville and the wider area.

The sheer size and nature of the development will be the nail in the coffin for the cultural identity that Marrickville is famous for, the essence of that place. The over size towers, sitting opposite the other massive wicks park development will provide the greenlight to turn Victoria Rd into a faceless wind tunnel, like the awful planning in green square. If anything is to be saved prioritise the experiemce of place, not lineing developers pockets. Look at spot rezoning and a mix of warehouse conversion, favour social housing, not "affordable" (which actually isn't), or at the least have 30% affordable, not the measly 115 out of 1200 luxury apartments amd look through a regenerative design lense considering how the development can contribute positively to the broader community and place, beyond the veil of gentrification, could come of the profits go to supporting local arts and community spaces, rather than pushing them out.

I would like to object to a few key elements with the preposed development
1. Greenspace - the complex is going to apply for an exemption to the Biodiversity Conservation Act on the grounds that it will not generate significant impacts on biodiversity values given the site at present is currently devoid of significant vegetation. This makes sense in its current use, however such a large housing development requires green spaces for the residents to use - especially those with children and animals.
2. Parking for residents - for a complex with 1200 residences, the planned 350 car spaces is insufficient and unrealistic. This will lead to more cars being parked in the surrounding residential area where parking is already at a premium.
3. Traffic of surrounding areas (Sydenham Road, Farr Street and Victoria Road) - the current roads are very busy without this development, further analysis of the impact of additional housing needs to be taken into account and planned for accordingly (even if the residents dont have cars, there will be deliveries and visitors to consider).
4. Building height - the preposed buildings will be extremely close the flight path, which currently go directly over the school next to the development.