The Timberyards by RTL Co.

I am writing to formally lodge my objection to the proposed development at The Timberyards by RTL Co. This development poses significant concerns for the local community and I urge the council to reject this proposal for the following reasons:
1. Exceeding Legal Height Restrictions & Overshadowing
The proposed development exceeds the legally permitted height limit, resulting in an excessive overshadowing of surrounding residential properties. This infringement will severely impact natural light access and the general livability of affected homes, contravening existing planning regulations.
2. Proximity to Primary School & Safety Risks
The proposed residential and delivery driveways are located on Farr Street, a major pedestrian thoroughfare for children walking to the nearby primary school. The increased traffic, including heavy vehicles making deliveries, creates a serious safety hazard for young students and their families, increasing the likelihood of accidents.
3. Incompatibility with Local Character & Inadequate Buffering
The design of the development fails to harmonise with the established character of the local community. The absence of an appropriate buffer between the development and nearby residences will significantly impact privacy, aesthetics and the overall residential atmosphere. The scale and density of this project are entirely out of place in this area.
4. Traffic Congestion & Parking Deficiency
The addition of 1,188 apartments will place an unsustainable burden on the existing road network. The proposed allocation of only 240 car spaces for over 1,000 apartments is grossly inadequate, forcing additional vehicles onto surrounding streets where parking is already limited. Residents and visitors will struggle to find parking, further exacerbating congestion and frustration for the existing community.
5. Insufficient Infrastructure to Support High-Density Living
Unlike cities such as Tokyo and London, our community lacks the developed public transport infrastructure necessary to support high-density populations. Without substantial investment in transport, road and essential services including medical, school and childcare facilities , this development will place undue strain on public amenities, emergency services and local facilities.
Given these serious concerns, I strongly urge the council to reject this development proposal in its current form. The wellbeing and safety of existing residents, particularly school children, must be prioritised profit and an over an ill-conceived high-density project that disregards the character and capacity of our community.
I appreciate your consideration of this objection and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Amanda Beveridge (local resident)

The building at 8 storeys high is not in keeping with the surroundings. I recognise the need for medium density developments but this is too much. If it was under 4 floors it would be ok.

I strongly object to SSD-76927247 - The Timberyards by RTL Co.
As a resident in the local area, I have significant concerns especially in regard to parking issues.
Recently Wicks Park development was approved, this is directly opposite on Victoria Road. The area is minimal compared to what is proposed for The Timber Yards. We have been impacted by this development from when building works began, no parking for residents due to the huge number of workers, now issues continue as there is insufficient parking for the residents who live there, let alone their visitors who park in adjacent streets.
I refer to the Environmental Impact Statement
3.13.3 Carparking The development proposes a total of 278 carparking spaces, which includes 238 residential spaces (including 22 equipped with a car share vehicle), 33 retail spaces and 7 RTL Co staff parking spaces.
How can this minute amount of parking accommodate the 1,188 dwellings considering that most people own at least 1 car? Where will all these people park? Yes, not everyone has a car, but the majority do. This is insufficient.
Also, the bulk and scale of the proposed development facing Sydenham Rd. Consideration needs to be taken on the overshadowing and privacy of those residents whose properties are directly opposite (as the design breaches the 3-storey height limit to build 8 storeys) as well as privacy for those who reside in Frampton Avenue.
There also seems to be an insufficient amount of housing for larger families. The development only has allowed 40 x 3-bedroom dwellings from the 1,188.
More appropriate planning is needed regarding the increase of 1,188 households. Marrickville Metro shopping Centre is overcrowded as it is. There are insufficient medical practices, childcare facilities. How will local primary and high schools cope with the additional numbers?
Please take into consideration what the residents are requesting. This proposal has many things that will further develop Marrickville into a more vibrant precinct, but consideration needs to be taken regarding the negative the impacts on residents who already live here.
Thank you.

The accounted for number of car parks is insufficient for the size of the project. It is unreasonable and unrealistic to not account for every apartment to have a car spot. Occupants having a car would be the exception, not the rule.
The surrounding roads are not equipped for street parking.
Further, the planned height of the buildings is much too high for the area. It is a suburban area after all. 13 storey unit blocks do not go with terrace houses.
This development is not Marrickville nor should it be.

Dear to whom it may concern,
I understand the need to build more housing, be it, build to sell, build to rent social and affordable housing however, I am strongly opposed to the density and height of this development. The traffic on Victoria Road is already often grid locked and the plan submitted with well over 1000 apartments plus the retail is excessive for the neighborhood. The density and heights of the buildings are not in keeping with the adjacent properties which are low rise residential or light commercial/industrial, with the exception of the Wicks by Toga. The overshadowing to adjacent properties, the increase in traffic and the number of apartments are am completely against. I think the development needs to be redesigned to be in keeping with the area, rather than the current design which maximizes the yield for the developer to generate as much profit from the site as possible. The development proposed reflects money grabbing from the land owners and developer and I think it such a shame if it were to go ahead as planned.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express my objection.

I object to the project for the following reasons:
1. The proposed height of 8 floors to 13 floors of the buildings, the architecture and design are not sympathetic to the character of the local neighbourhood. The proposed height of 8 floors and above is aesthetically displeasing and out of character with the existing local community as it is too close to low density R2 zoned residential areas and to Marrickville Public School. As there is no buffer, the development not only looks out of place but it will cause overshadowing around Farr Street, the streets off Sydenham Road, including houses on Sydenham Road and Victoria Road.
2.The development will result in an increase in the number of dwellings or people affected by aircraft noise as these tall buildings are proposed to be build right under the flight path.
3.The development has not accounted for the traffic congestion and lack of parking space. This area is already heavily congested as people drive through Marrickville to get to the Airport, Princes Highway and the City. People park here from all over Sydney and then take an uber to the airport. It is cheaper to park in a Marrickville street and catch an uber to the airport than using public transport or the airport parking facilities. People drive here from everywhere to park and catch the Sydenham metro/ trains. There is not enough space for even placing bikes anywhere. At Farr Street, Woolworths/ Coles/ Australian Post trucks cannot physically get through the street without creating creating chaos and making it unsafe for the people in the area. Allowing to build 1188 apartments will exacerbate the existing problem of the traffic congestion and lack of parking space.
4. The development is not family-friendly and the rents will be expensive. There are only 40 units proposed with three bedrooms out of 1188 units. The company behind this development has advertised rents in other buildings around Sydney at an average of $800 a week for a studio less than 20square metres! That is not affordable housing. This Build-to-Rent development is more like "Build a hotel/AirBNB establishment to make money at the expense of the local community". Even though the project has the 2% minimum affordable housing requirement, that is not enough to make a true difference to housing affordability.
5. There is no benefit to the community. This is just an example of greed.

My family and I have lived in this area for 33 years.
I would like to raise the following issues as being of concern.
• Construction: 3 years of construction will result in noise pollution, dust pollution, increased heavy vehicles in the neighbourhood and potential damage to buildings through drilling. My young grandchildren could be negatively impacted by a dramatic increase in dust and dirt. The house will become very dirty, inside and out. I do not work so I am at home most of the day. Increased and constant noise can lead to stress and anxiety.
• Lack of parking on Farr Street is already an issue. This will only increase with the proposed addition of 1188 apartments (and only 216 residential parking spots). An increase in the number of cars trying to find parking will also be dangerous for my young grandchildren.
• More cars will lead to more traffic. Sydenham Road is a major thoroughfare and already very busy even on the weekends. Victoria Road is always very busy as well. Even with the completion of the Metro, traffic is bad during peak hours – buses are slow – there aren’t enough bus services.
• Sunlight and overshadowing: if the proposal proceeds with Building A being six storeys high, that will seriously affect the amount of daily sunshine we receive. A lot of houses in Marrickville are built on clay which makes them susceptible to damp and therefore mould. The morning sunshine goes some way to alleviate this, and I can’t imagine how many hours of direct sunlight we will lose with a six -storey building directly across the road (and a 13-storey building on Victoria Road).
• Apartment buildings usually attract a more transient population. This will alter the community significantly. Long-term residents are invested in the neighbourhood and community and look after each other. I don’t want to lose that in the area.

Thank you for reading my concerns.

the height of the proposed development is above the legal limit, too high which will overshadow our sun and the number of units is way too many with very few parking spots resulting in even more difficulty in finding a parking spot in our area.

I strongly object to SSD-76927247 - The Timberyards by RTL Co.
As a resident of Marrickville, I have significant concerns in regard to parking issues.
I refer to the Environmental Impact Statement
3.13.3 Carparking The development proposes a total of 278 carparking spaces, which includes 238 residential spaces (including 22 equipped with a car share vehicle), 33 retail spaces and 7 RTL Co staff parking spaces.
How can this amount of parking accommodate the 1,188 dwellings?
With an additional increase of 1,188 households, there will be significant negative impacts on places such as Marrickville Metro shopping Centre. Congestion on roads, insufficient parking. There are at present insufficient medical practices and childcare facilities. Will our local primary and high schools manage with the increase in population?
I can envisage that this develop could improve Marrickville local area, if things such as additional parking onsite be increased and the height of the buildings facing Sydenham Road be lowered from 8 storey to 3.

I am concerned about the high density proposal as well as the limited parking available.
This will lead to congestion on the roads and the suburb is not equipped to handle the density proposed.
The units should also be bigger with larger floor space and rooms.

I object to SSD-76927247 – the Timberyards by RTL Co.
As a resident of 14 years on Farr Street, adjacent and it appears to be totally overshadowed by the proposed development, I object on the following grounds.
Traffic Density and Particularly Parking - I am mystified at how anyone who has any experience of living and travelling in the are of the proposed development can view the proposed number of parking space ratio to apartments as in anyway feasible. This morning, Friday 21/3 March I drove around the surrounding streets close to my home for 15 minutes looking for a park. The proposal to introduce close to 1200 residential units with only just over 200 car park spaces will push car park spaces and traffic to beyond breaking point. with 85% of households in NSW having at least one car (regardless of public transport infrastructure) the development is going to introduce presumably about 800 hundred new cars needing parking to the immediate neighbourhood, drastically impacting on the quality of life for current residents and anyone moving into the proposed development. Obvious questions of 'How?' 'Where?' and 'Why?' apply. Everyone has the right to have these questions answered thoroughly and meaningfully before this gets any go ahead.
Height of buildings - we are informed that building very close to our and other houses are going to be 6 storeys high. we are also told that this is in breach of the local loom over Farr Street. I’ve read that the heights proposed breaches the Local Environment Plan. is this the case? Why is it therefore allowed? What are the reasons that the needs of this development over ride the rights of current residents? it appears therefore that on top of the traffic/parking chaos inflicted on all, hundreds of homes are being robbed of current access to sunlight/view etc. This is also not only about vista but also about older homes being denied required warmth/sunlight etc and the impact on those houses themselves as well as the people who call them homes. In short where does the justification for breaching existing plans come from?
Building - the overbearing scale of this proposal of course will mean disruption during the construction for a prolonged period of time. Residents in this area will therefore not only have to live with the significant negative impacts of this development once finalised long term but for the next how many years live adjacent to (withing if you count road disruption) a building site. There is a primary school here, children walk up and down this area every day to go to and from school. The noise, pollution, disruption and risks associated with this size of project next to residential/school areas do not seem to have been considered.
No one can I think of development as a principle but it has to be in scale and compliment to the current environment and existing community that we call home. Instead this seems to risk that very thing not only for those who currently live and any future residents of this proposal.
As stated above, Marrickville's current infrastructure is already at breaking point and this proposal as it stands is likely to tip current challenges over the edge.
I look forward to having the concerns above addressed in detail.
Peter Middleton

I object to the project in its current form for the following reasons
1: The project is 8 stories high on Sydenham Rd. This area is zoned for 3 stories. 8 stories on Farr St would leave very little light for properties on the opposite side. The project assumes that these would be developed later. This may not eventuate and would significantly reduce the amenity of these properties.
2: The project has less than 25% parking spaces available to dwellings leaving more than 900 dwellings without access to on-site parking. Locally there is very little parking and Sydenham Rd and Victoria Rd have time specific restrictions. There is an assumption in the documentation that renters/BTR developments do not require vehicles. This seems shortsighted.
3: The main residential and delivery access for the project is on Farr St. Increased traffic could be a danger to children travelling to and from school.
4: There is no plan for services in the area.
5: There are very few dwellings with more than 2 bedrooms. This is not useful for families.
6: There is very little affordable housing provision.
7: While there is a significant need for more available accommodation in the area, prioritising developments such as this will limit options.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Timberyards RTL Co. development on the grounds of significant environmental, social, and infrastructure concerns that will negatively impact the local community and surrounding areas.

1. Traffic and Parking Congestion

The proposed development will generate a substantial increase in traffic flow along [insert local roads], which are already experiencing congestion. Additional vehicle movements, particularly heavy transport vehicles, will exacerbate delays, increase accident risks, and create safety hazards for pedestrians and cyclists. Furthermore, the development lacks sufficient parking provisions, which will push overflow parking into nearby residential streets.

2. Impact on Local Infrastructure

The existing road network, public transport options, and essential services are not equipped to handle the added strain this development will bring. There has been no clear proposal for upgrading infrastructure, which raises concerns about long-term sustainability and livability.

3. Environmental and Heritage Concerns

This area is home to [mention any known endangered species, green spaces, or heritage-listed buildings if applicable]. The large-scale nature of the proposal threatens local biodiversity, increases noise and air pollution, and may lead to the destruction of important cultural or heritage sites.

4. Community Amenity and Liveability

The scale and design of the project are incompatible with the character of the surrounding community. The excessive height, density, and industrial operations will impact local residents’ quality of life, increasing noise pollution and reducing access to natural sunlight and ventilation.

5. Lack of Sufficient Community Consultation

There has been limited engagement with local residents and stakeholders regarding the potential impacts of this development. Meaningful consultation should be conducted before proceeding further, ensuring that community concerns are adequately addressed.

Conclusion

Given these significant concerns, I urge the planning authorities to reject the current proposal or require substantial amendments to mitigate its adverse impacts. I also request an extended public consultation period to allow for greater community input.

The most pressing issue facing all Australians is the housing affordability crisis. This project will create a good amount of housing supply in a great area for supporting infrastructure. Nearby public transport, schooling and shopping makes this a great spot to build.

With regards to the proposal of ~1200 units across 8-13 storey buildings at Sydenham and Victoria Rds.

I am concerned that this project is well over current planning restrictions.

With the addition of a significant number of apartments, why will less than a quarter of the units include parking, yet there are no additional traffic/infrastructure needs that i can see have been accounted for.
victoria road and near by axillary roads are already a chaotic mess. Will there be more and safer bike lanes added? Sydneham/marrickville is still very industrius, are there any added safety measures in place for the added foot traffic and cyclists?

RTL co will be making a significant profit from this build to rent scheme, and from what i can see will not be held accountable to provide fair market prices in good faith,the number of affordable houses planned should increase.
Affordable housing allocation barely scrapes in at 10%. With the housing crisis sydney is in, I would like to see minimun 30% affordable housing, and which continues to remain affordable housing after the initial rental contracts.

Whilst I support increased housing in Marrickville including a new precinct in this area I do not believe this Timberyards development has been designed to fit into the area or be conducive to creating a community.
The lack of parking on site will negatively affect the residents who move in as well as others living nearby.
There are far too many one bedroom units on the plan which at market value will be highly unlikely to be affordable to those wishing to engage in a rent to buy scheme and end up with investors purchasing and renting them out. A major part of this project is affordability however with so few of the apartments set aside for 'affordable housing'
Aside from the new Wicks Park building other unit blocks in the area have been capped at much fewer floors and I believe one of the planned buildings falls in an area which is zoned to be maximum 3 floors which is the appeal of this area of Marrickville.
This development in the current plans will create a shadow over my entire front yard and the entire section of Sydenham Road negatively affecting our lifestyle.
We love living in Marrickville and want plenty of others to experience our amazing suburb however this project is greedy on behalf of the developers and will not fit well with the surrounds.

I have concerns regarding the limited number of affordable housing options. I also don't think the current proposal takes into account the actual housing need, i.e. not enough 3+ bedroom apartments for families.

The project area is already congested area with historical houses, businesses, school and community. The existing infrastructure including roads, train lines, hospital, schools, parkings, sewer, water supplyand etc are not catered for the size of development. This will only create caos in the area.

The existing Roads such as Victoria Road North/South , Sydenham Road to the East/West are connecting Parramatta Road, Princess Highway, Airport, Enmore/Newtown, and are arterial roads,and again this size of development will destroyer the area.

I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed development at The Timberyards by RTL Co. This development raises serious concerns regarding its impact on the local community and I urge the council to reject this proposal for the following reasons:

Non-Compliant Height & Overshadowing:
The proposed development exceeds the legal height restrictions, resulting in extensive overshadowing of neighbouring homes. This would greatly reduce natural light and negatively affect the quality of life for local residents, violating established planning regulations.

Safety Concerns for School Children:
The proposed residential and delivery driveways are located on Farr Street, a critical pedestrian route for children attending the nearby primary school. Increased traffic, including delivery trucks, poses an unacceptable risk to child and pedestrian safety.

Lack of Consideration for Local Character:
The scale and design of the development do not align with the established character of the area. There is an inadequate buffer between the development and existing homes, leading to privacy issues and disrupting the community's residential feel.

Traffic & Parking Issues:
Adding 1,188 apartments will significantly worsen traffic congestion in the area. The allocation of only 240 car spaces for over 1,000 apartments is insufficient, forcing more vehicles onto surrounding streets where parking is already in high demand. This will make daily commutes and local travel increasingly difficult for residents.

Inadequate Infrastructure to Support High-Density Housing:
Our area does not have the necessary transport and infrastructure to support high-density residential developments. Without major upgrades to public transport, roads and essential services, this proposal will place excessive pressure on already strained community resources.

Given these concerns, I strongly urge the council to reject this development in its current form. The needs and safety of the existing community, particularly school children and local residents, must take priority over an unsuitable high-density project.

I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Scott Beveridge (Local resident)

In principle I support the project but object to the height of the buildings.
Height should be limited to the 7 floors on the original IW approved 10 year plan. Anything above this will be severely detrimental to the quality of life of the surrounding area.