Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment

Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment
Application No SSD-47105958
Location 24A Kingscliff Street & 27, 29, 31, 33 Lorien Way, Kingscliff
Applicant Uniting (NSW, ACT)
Council Area Tweed Shire

I OBJECT to the application on the following grounds:
1) Scale, height and size of project far exceeds local council regulations.
2) Scale, height and size of project will have a dramatic negative effect on local and my personal amenity.
3) Height of development, with Lorien Way currently single level with a few 2 story homes, while this development will be 4 stories plus utilities on roof, being 16.75 metre structure built on an EXTRA 3.6 metre fill, effectively 20.35 metres tall, towering over the current homes single and 2 level homes.
4) My amenity and streetscape will be destroyed as the development will completely dominate the view from my home as it towers over all existing homes.
5) Misrepresentation of Uniting’s application by adding an extra 3.6 metres fill before building the structure far above current height limits.
6) Height will impact sun and light to my property.
7) Height will allow residents direct viewing into my living room.
8) Light pollution will directly impact me due to the height.
9) Medium density accommodation such as this development is not in the Tweed Shire Development Strategy and Character Statement for North Kingscliff (this developments location) due to it being in an existing residential area. Medium density is only proposed for ‘greenfield’ developments, NOT existing residential areas where this development is proposed. Again, this is misrepresented in the applicant’s submission.
10) Increased traffic in a residential area. Substantial increase in population will increase traffic in an already congested roadway.
11) Building time. Construction is proposed for 4 years, with a claimed over 400 construction workers (claimed 440 construction workers).
12) Insufficient parking for the construction workers, crowding all the local residential streets with workers vehicles. With over 400 requiring parking as construction workers require to carry tools, making public transport impractical.
13) Noise from construction, with the large number of workers, and the obvious noise of construction. Being a shift worker I require to sleep during the day. The construction noise will negatively affect my sleep, quality of life, and mental health.
14) Flood impact is being ignored by the applicant (Uniting). The 2022 flood was only approximately 150mm from entering my home. This massive development on this flood prone area will increase water run-off thereby over running the current drainage system with the potential to cause flooding to all the homes in the area.
15) very limited increase in aged care beds. With the current facility having 120 beds, which will be demolished, there is an increase of ONLY 8 aged care beds to 128.
16) Projected cost of construction demonstrates the buying cost of accommodation units will be exceedingly high, meaning local aging residents will not be able to afford to purchase into the development.
17) The development is claiming to be for aged care, while it appears that it will simply be a retirement resort masquerading as Aged Care, as it is such a minor increase in aged care beds for such a massive and intrusive development.
18) A precedent will be set for massive overdevelopment in the Kingscliff village, destroying what people find attractive about Kingscliff.

The increased height of buildings in this part of Kingscliff is totally unacceptable.
The flood impact is real, given the site was heavily flood affected in 2022 and now to cover it in concrete is absurd. And of course, what happens in Kingscliff affects upstream.
Traffic and parking are going to be issues given the plan is to use a local narrow street as their entry/exit point.
Affordable (?) for whom ?

A high density development of this size would have a huge negative impact on the entire area. Not only traffic congestion and parking demands not met at the moment but years of construction noise and inconvenience for surrounding residents. Raising the height to 4 levels of which there are not buildings in the town of that height in a suburban area taking away the privacy of surrounding dwellings. If the site is to be filled the surrounding existing houses will be subject to flooding. This project should not be allowed to continue.

I object to the Uniting Kingscliff redevelopment (SSD-47810598) for the following reasons.

The size and scale of the development
The site is surrounded by 1 and 2 storey residences on three sides in Beach Street, Lorien Way and Drift Court. The proposed buildings are up to 4 storeys high and totally out of character with the surrounding low rise built environment
The bulk and scale of this development is a gross overdevelopment of this flood affected site. Many buildings are buildings to a height of 16.75 metres above ground level. This is significantly higher than Kingscliff’s current building height of 13.5 metres.

Negative impacts on the amenity and liveability of our property
Our one storey house at 25 Drift Court is a solar passive design. The shadow diagrams provided show that our house will be completely shaded for most of the afternoon in winter. We are retired and in our 70’s. We are home most of the day. I suffer from a chronic autoimmune respiratory disease. Our house would be darker and colder, resulting in negative heath outcomes. Our electricity costs will rise as we try to counter these impacts.
Our electricity costs will also be heavily impacted by the shading of our solar panels.
Our privacy will be negatively impacted with the development overlooking our outdoor entertaining area and living.

Flooding
The current updated flood report from 2022 is incomplete. During that flood the basin on the site filled to an average depth of 2 metres across the site. It took weeks to drain. Most of Drift Court experienced flood waters in the street and driveways. The drains were unable to cope with the volume of water.
Houses in Lorien Way are at a lower level to the proposed development. Water pushed from the site will increase the potential for flooding and property damage for these residents.
The potential for flooding in the surrounding streets will be further exacerbated by additional fill, raising the site by more than 3 metres in some places.

Construction time
Given the size of the proposed development, the construction phase is expected to last at least 4 years. Workers will be on site 5. 5 days of the week. This will have a significant negative impact on the liveability and amenity of our home and others surrounding the development site.
Dust, noise, vibration and heavy vehicle traffic will be constant. There is potential for property values of nearby residences to be negatively affected.

Traffic
The development site is accessed by narrow suburban roads. Lorien Way is often reduced to one lane because of cars parked on both sides of the street. The situation is similar in Drift Court.
During construction there are expected to be 450 workers on site. There is very little available parking in the surrounding roads. The construction site will be unable to provide parking for a large number of vehicles.
Workers are to be encouraged to find alternate transport but how? Many will not be local and they do have to transport their tools and equipment.
The proposed development of 199 dwellings, many of which are 2 and 3 bedroom residences, provides for 39 onsite car spaces. This paucity of on site parking will have negative impacts of the surrounding local roads.



Conclusion
The bulk and scale of the proposed Uniting Kingscliff development is a gross over development of a flood affected site. It is too big and is completely out of charter the surrounding low rise residences and Kingscliff generally.
I do not oppose an appropriate redevelopment of this site. I would support a similar development to that by Uniting in Yamba.
The redevelopment of the existing Uniting Kingscliff facility is overdue and the inclusion of additional aged care beds and some affordable seniors independent living units would be welcome. There is a great opportunity to redevelop this site to meet the needs of our aging population. The development as proposed provides only 8 extra aged care places.

Kingscliff Uniting Church makes the following submission in regard to Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment SSD-47105958 located at 24A Kingscliff Street and 27,29 31 and 33 Lorien Way.
There is an urgent need for retirement/nursing home accommodation in the Tweed Shire as the Tweed is dominated by an aging population.
This nursing home, approved in the 1980's, is aged and needs upgrading to improve its facilities for their residents.
We commend this redevelopment to you for approval.
Felicia Cecil
Kingscliff Uniting Church Council Chair.

I have undertaken a review of the SSD application (SSD-47105958) reports and accompanying material. This includes a review of:
• Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by PTC
• Green Travel Plan prepared by PTC
• Architectural Plans prepared by PLUS
• Landscape Plans prepared by Urbis
• Consultation Report prepared by Ethos Urban
• Access Report prepared by Purple Apple Access
• Infrastructure Report prepared by ADP
• Visual Impact Report prepared by Ethos Urban
• View Loss Assessment prepared by Ethos Urban
• Flooding Assessment Report prepared by Venant Solutions
• EIS Prepared by Planit Consulting.
I provide the table attached which outlines the elements I feel are relevant to be raised to the assessing authority and stakeholders. I have also attached my previous comments issued to the proponent on 19th April 2023, which in my view were not adequately considered through the consultation phase, updates to the development and specialist reports. In summary, my key issues relate to:
1. Bulk and scale which is highly inconsistent with the surrounding area and planning policies allowing this provision
2. Height impacts and design filling the site and mispresenting existing ground levels and height calculations
3. Traffic impacts at key access points and intersections
4. Lack of any active transport facilities to address existing deficiencies and accommodate the development’s specific users
5. Parking provision particularly for staff and construction workers
6. Conflicting design elements along the access handle to Kingscliff Street
7. Loss of existing trees along the access handle and mis-representation of this across the various reports
8. Inaccurate design cross sections
9. Church land use not addressed
10. Deep planting areas inconsistent with landscape and visual details
11. Pervious and Deep Planting area calculations using parking areas
12. Privacy impacts to neighbouring properties
13. Shadow impacts to neighbouring properties
14. Flooding impacts as a result of the proposal
15. Lack of civil engineering detail or report
16. Lack of detail or misleading visual representations.
Given the significant number of non-conformances, concerns and issues across various aspects of the proposal, I do not support the proposed development in its current form.
I would also request the opportunity to review and provide feedback on the various changes and subsequent updated reports in response to this and other submissions.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the Uniting Elderly Care development project. I am a property owner in Kingscliff. I have enjoyed how properties have been developed maintaining the character of this beautiful coastal village. This Uniting development however, is totally out of character with North Kingscliff. This large complex disregards the height limit and is land locked, surrounded by single family homes. This will create traffic problems and congestion with residents, staff, visitors and construction workers and machinery. Its massive size will erode the character of my beloved town. Please stop or modify these plans before it is too late to protect us.
Sincerely,

Hi, I am objecting to the new Uniting Kingscliff redevelopment. My reasons are, Kingscliff is not resourced and has outgrown the local Woolworths already. I am constantly finding food out of stock, and unavailable. It has been even worse since the new hospital. Adding another 200 residences will make the town unliveable. There needs to be more infrastructure put in place to accommodate the growing population before any more expansion is done in the area. The new Kings Forest is already going to cause massive issues for parking, buying local food and using the local services. This project should be put on hold, or scaled down as Kingscliff cannot accommodate for 400+ residents, plus their cares, staff and families.

REDEVELOPMENT OF UNITING CHURCH SITE: - ,
- EXCEEDS THE 3 STOREY LIMIT, ALLOWING THIS DEVELOPMENT TO EXCEED THE HEIGHT LIMIT IMPOSED WOULD SET A PREDECENT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AT KINGSCLIFF.
- TRAFFIC TO THIS AREA, WOULD BRING APPROXIMATELEY AN ADDITIONAL 250 VEHICLES PER DAY (THIS FIGURE IS FOR RESIDENTANTS, STAFF, GARBAGE/FOOD TRUCKS) KINGSCLIFF CANNOT COPE WITH THE INCREASED TRAFFIC DURING HOLIDAYS. INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PARKING IS VERY POOR.
-PROPOSED SITE IS A FLOOD PLAIN. CHANGING FLOOD PLAINS CREATE OTHER ISSUES FOR EXISTING RESIDENCE.
- SWAMP AREA, - CONCERNED FOR WILDLIFE
I STRONGLY OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL

I am attaching my letter.

Thankyou
Wendy

Objection is attached because the site kept crashing

I object to the development.

Please see attached file. Steve.

The objection against the Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment (SSD- 47105958) highlights several concerns:

Flood Risk: The proposed site is in a flood-affected area, evidenced by water inundating the site and adjacent areas during the 2022 flood.

Height and Overshadowing: The buildings in the redevelopment plan exceed current heights, leading to overshadowing of nearby family homes, compromising privacy in outdoor areas, living spaces, and bedrooms.

Solar Access Reduction: The redevelopment threatens to reduce solar access for surrounding properties.

Traffic Congestion: Concerns about increased traffic congestion due to the redevelopment.

Loss of View and Aspect: The proposed development may result in the loss of scenic views and aspect for neighboring properties.

Noise and Light Pollution: Anticipated disturbances from lights, noise from deliveries, shift changes, communal spaces, and mechanical equipment could disrupt the peace and quiet of nearby residences, impacting their quality of life.

Additionally, the objection questions the integrity of the development process, suggesting that Uniting Kingscliff initially proposed a larger-scale project and then scaled it back slightly to address concerns, implying a lack of transparency. The objection calls for the redevelopment to align with the existing character of the neighborhood, prioritize the well-being of surrounding families over profits, and urges honesty and respectfulness in the development process. It also emphasizes the importance of considering the mental health and stress levels of families affected by the proposed redevelopment.

I wish to object against Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment {SSD- 47105958}
I object on the following basis:
1. It is on a Flood effected site. In the last flood 2022 water filled the current site and parts of Drift Court adjoining the proposed Redelopment {Pictures attached}.
2. Included are buildings to a maximum height,above ground level , meters higher than current building heights causing overshadowing of current family homes impacting on privacy issues {overlooking outdoor areas,living spaces and bedrooms}
3. Reducing Solar Access.
4. Added Traffic congestion.
5. Loss of view and aspect.
6.Lights shining into family homes, noise with deliveries, shift changes, communal spaces and mechanical equipment day and night.
This gross overdevelopment represents another defining moment in not maintaining the character,fabric amenity and liveability of Kingscliff as we know and love it.
The Redevlopment of the existing Uniting Kingscliff is overdue and additional residential aged care beds and affordable seniors independent living units would be welcome.
But lets look through the Smoke and Mirrors.
John Martin the original "Go to Person"from Uniting suggested to my Husband and I in a Public meeting that no surrounding Family homes have been built to any height like this proposal. John suggested that objections should be made on this basis.
Uniting Kingscliff started with a larger scale development and then reduced it back slightly to supposedly appease concerns knowing all along they will have to play the game and give a bit.
With this Redevelopment what changes:
1. 8 more additional beds up from 112.
2. A few affordable seniors independent living.
But mostly on a HUGE scale.
199 High End Architectually designed Seniors Living Apartments in a Multistory setup.
41 of which will have 3 Bedrooms and 2 Bathrooms.
Uniting Kingscliff...Stay in context of existing Family Homes and Consider others before Profits.
Above All BE HONEST of your actual Intention.
Be Respectful -Take Ownership of the Mental Health and added Stress Levels of Families living around the Proposed Redevelopment that you have caused.

I wish to object against Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment {SSD- 47105958}
I object on the following basis:
1. It is on a Flood effected site. In the last flood 2022 water filled the current site and parts of Drift Court adjoining the proposed Redelopment {Pictures attached}.
2. Included are buildings to a maximum height,above ground level , meters higher than current building heights causing overshadowing of current family homes impacting on privacy issues {overlooking outdoor areas,living spaces and bedrooms}
3. Reducing Solar Access.
4. Added Traffic congestion.
5. Loss of view and aspect.
6.Lights shining into family homes, noise with deliveries, shift changes, communal spaces and mechanical equipment day and night.
This gross overdevelopment represents another defining moment in not maintaining the character,fabric amenity and liveability of Kingscliff as we know and love it.
The Redevlopment of the existing Uniting Kingscliff is overdue and additional residential aged care beds and affordable seniors independent living units would be welcome.
But lets look through the Smoke and Mirrors.
John Martin the original "Go to Person"from Uniting suggested to my Husband and I in a Public meeting that no surrounding Family homes have been built to any height like this proposal. John suggested that objections should be made on this basis.
Uniting Kingscliff started with a larger scale development and then reduced it back slightly to supposedly appease concerns knowing all along they will have to play the game and give a bit.
With this Redevelopment what changes:
1. 8 more additional beds up from 112.
2. A few affordable seniors independent living.
But mostly on a HUGE scale.
199 High End Architectually designed Seniors Living Apartments in a Multistory setup.
41 of which will have 3 Bedrooms and 2 Bathrooms.
Uniting Kingscliff...Stay in context of existing Family Homes and Consider others before Profits.
Above All BE HONEST of your actual Intention.
Be Respectful -Take Ownership of the Mental Health and added Stress Levels of Families living around the Proposed Redevelopment that you have caused.

As a resident of 23 Lorien Way, I have a number of concerns about the proposed uniting development. The development is grossly oversized which will negatively affect the quality of living for current neighbouring residents including: blocking of natural light and air movement, increased occurrences and severity of flooding, noise pollution, light pollution, air pollution, dramatically increased traffic, lack of parking and increased street parking issues, increased pedestrian noise, dangerous entry and exit of our own driveways due to increased traffic and suddenly becoming a corner block, invasive views from development units into our homes and yards, lack of privacy, distress and disruption during building of the development including air pollution from sedement and asbestos, noise of construction, noise of heavy vehicles, noise of demolition of neighbouring property. the scale of the proposal is significantly too large. a particular concern is building A which looks onto my property and will hold 16 two story units instead of 2 one story properties. this increase in residents in this section alone is a grossly oversized proposal and should be a single story. building A blocks sunlight and air from neighbouring properties and looks directly into neighbouring properties and my property. this is absolutely not respectful, fair, or fitting with the character of kingscliff. I would greatly appreciate this development NOT go ahead. thankyou very much for your time. I have attached a more detailed document highlighting my concerns.

See attached Document.

I object to the Uniting Kingscliff Redevelopment (SSD-47105958) because:
- I genuinely believe that this project will have negative impacts on our Kingscliff community and no positive results for the wider community as a whole.
- this project will impact negatively on the immediate surrounds which is a lovely small local community. If this project goes ahead then amenity of the residents in the area will be lost.
- the overbearing height of the buildings will cause loss of sunlight throughout the area, loss of solar power access, loss of privacy for the immediate neighbours.
- the project will add significantly to the traffic and congestion in the area which will be a safety issue because of the narrow road and streets. This is a family neighbourhood with young children using the streets to get to school. If the project is approved and goes ahead the quiet suburban amenity will be lost as constant deliveries, worker shift changes and loss of communal spaces for parking will impact.
I don’t understand why and how this project can be approved in the current application form as it
- is above the maximum height above ground level for Kingscliff
- it is a flood affected site at present and they plan to add fill to raise the site by 3 metres which will exacerbate the flood issues further.

It is for these reasons that I highly disapprove of this proposed application.
I love living in Kingscliff and appreciate the small town community feel of my home town Kingscliff.

I live in a street that runs off Lorien Way were 4 homes are to be demolished to create new access to the site for construction and then permanent access once the complex is built. Lorien Way is a narrow street which also has a bus route that cars and buses often have to pull over and give way to. To have construction vehicles going up and down Lorien Way during construction will become a danger and an absolute nightmare for those living here. Like most of the people living in this pocket of Kingscliff I am a retiree who moved into the area to live out my years in a stress free area and I object to four years of heavy construction vehicles accessing the site via the quiet residential streets of Beach Street and Lorien Way. Kingscliff is a small coastal village without any high rise buildings. The sheer size and scale of this project is unimaginable. We are zoned for buildings to be no more than 13.6m however this project has some of the buildings at 16.75m high which does not fit in with the requirements. The proposal is completely at odds with all other developments in Kingscliff, built on flood prone land. This proposal will create an increase in traffic movement on top of the increase generated by the Tweed Valley Hospital. I am not opposed to Uniting Kingscliff to upgrade or build new facilities but I do object to the size and scale of this project and the disruption it will cause. I object to the trashing of our town in the process. The residents living in the area closest to the proposal will be heavily and unfairly impacted, therefore I believe that this submission needs to be halted and re examined until such time that a more suitable solution is found. I thank you for your consideration.

I object to the Uniting Kingscliff redevelopement SSD 47105958
I object to the current Kingscliff height restrictions being exceeded.
I object to the site being raised with three meters of fill which will increase the building height even further.
The proposed developement is an over developement in this low rise surburban housing area.