WestConnex Dive Site Build-to-Rent (Annandale)

Refer to attached.

I object to the proposal for the following reasons:
1. The height of the planned building is excessive. It is out of character with the local area and will impact the visual amenity and solar access of the surrounding areas. It will impact upon views to the city for local residents. It will dominate the surrounding areas and is therefore highly invasive. I note that the proposal suggests that this is in line with other developments in the area - however those developments are at most 16 storeys (and many much lower), which is already impacting the surrounding area - and this proposal is a full 5 storeys taller.
2. Public transport in the area is insufficient for the proposed development. It is noted in the proposal that this is close to Stanmore and Newtown train stations, however it is not within a reasonable walking distance that residents are likely to utilise. Buses along Parramatta Road are also insufficient for this level of development. The proposal mentions that there is a "super stop" at this location, however commonly, buses along this corridor to the city are already full before they reach Johnston St, Annandale, and it is common for buses to therefore skip the stops where this site is located. The bus service therefore has insufficient capacity to support the needs of these additional residents.
3. I object to the plan to divide this area into 3 lots, with only the first lot (approx. 200 dwellings) to be set aside as build to rent, and the other 2 lots to be sold for private development, with no controls or requirements for those private developers. The proposed height of the Build to rent site will set a dangerous precedent for the other two sites, and private developers will no doubt attempt to seek even higher limits, which is not in line with the draft plans that have been suggested. Additionally, I note that the expectation for these other lots is that they would be sold for profit, with only minimal affordable housing. If anything, the entire site should be publicly developed as one lot at a lower height, with the majority as build to rent or affordable housing. This would help address the lack of affordable housing within the area without requiring such a large, tall development to be undertaken, and would have a much larger impact on the housing situation in the area. Selling two thirds of this lot for private development does not serve the public good and will not increase affordable housing supply.

I wish to object to the proposed development in its current form for the following reasons:
Height and character of the area
The proposed 22-storey building is out of keeping with the surrounding low- and medium-density character of the area. It will dominate the skyline, permanently altering the visual identity of the local area. Buildings of this height also create adverse microclimates — overshadowing and wind effects that directly reduce the amenity and liveability of the area for both existing residents and future occupants.
Such height will have a significant negative impact on the local community. While I understand the project seeks to maximise apartment numbers, a more balanced approach could deliver new housing without such excessive scale. Importantly, the Consultation Outcomes Report (June 2025) itself confirms that building height, bulk, and scale were among the most frequently raised concerns by the community. My objection therefore reflects not only my personal view but also the wider community feedback recorded in the consultation.
Flawed consultation process
Community consultation did not clearly present the inclusion of a 22-storey building. Instead, consultation materials emphasised “200+ apartments” without disclosing the actual height. This omission undermines the integrity of the consultation, as it is highly likely that additional objections would have been raised had the true scale been disclosed. The Consultation Outcomes Report acknowledges concerns about the adequacy of consultation, further demonstrating that this process did not provide the community with the information required to form an informed response.
Social impacts of high-rise living
Research consistently shows that residents of high-rise buildings tend to experience weaker social connections both with neighbours and with the broader community. The site already sits between areas of significant density, which will make community integration more difficult. High-rise developments of this scale also risk creating a disconnect between residents within the tower and those in the surrounding community. Given Camperdown’s existing character and community networks, this disconnect would be particularly damaging.
Infrastructure capacity
The proposal also fails to account for infrastructure limitations. Public transport is already at capacity — buses along Parramatta Road are often full, particularly during train disruptions. Traffic congestion is significant in the evenings and on weekends. Local schools are operating at or near capacity, and green spaces such as Camperdown Oval are heavily relied upon by the community. Additional demand generated by this development would place undue strain on already overstretched resources.
Conclusion
For these reasons, I object to the development in its current proposed form and ask the planning authority to reconsider the scale of the project, particularly the proposed building height, to ensure it is appropriate to the character and infrastructure of the local area.

Hi! I am from Orange and moved into Sydney at the start of this year for university, I fully support this project. I currently live in Kensington but due to councils around the Sydney area not approving enough housing I will likely not be able to afford to continue living in Sydney once I finish university. Along with this, it has put a huge financial burden on my family back home to try and support my rent in the eastern suburbs, more developments like this clear up the ability for people like myself to move into the city, have access to jobs and a community and makes it cheaper to live in Sydney as a whole (Even if each building is not by much, in whole it can change the entire market).
This particular development is in an area close to the city, on the doorstep of the university of Sydney and only a kilometer away from Newtown. Each of these factors on its own would make it worthwhile to build it up, especially as it would otherwise be turned into more characterless industrial lots on parramatta road.
The height honestly should be taller, this is the capital, not a country town, build like it. Along with that the extra height allows it to incorporate more greenspace and allow more people access to it, a complete win win.
Finally it is right next to the hospital, which makes it perfect for hospital staff who which to live nearby their work (unlike the lengthy commutes I have seen many nurses take in and out of the eastern and central parts of sydney).
I hope that this project is approved, thank you for your time!

Whilst I support the need for built to rent housing, the plans to only have 1 basement level for parking is not sustainable in an area that already has limited parking and congestion. To propose one level of parking for a 220 is unacceptable unless it is disclosed the number of parking spot the one level will have. On street parking in the area has already been changed to timed parking due to the proposal from local businesses on Booth street and surrounds. Without adequate parking allocation for residents to congestion and parking issues will increase.

I support this project, as it allows for more affordable housing options - as a university student who moved in from regional NSW, finding housing that is affordable and not ghetto. I’d like to continue to live in city, but because no apartments, it’s too expensive for me to stay long term sustainability.
Thank you!

I strongly support this proposal.
The reason as to why are the following
1. I support this proposal as it is close to the Sydney CBD, close to shops, and relatively close to public transportation. We need more housing supply as we are in a housing crisis.
2. It is excellent to see what seems to be an all electric building, saving future residents money & also reducing dependency and use of fossil fuels.
3. As the zoning is mixed use, it will allow for more retail and the provided dwellings will help to sustain businesses in the area.
4. It offers improvements to the area in terms of public space and improved through access

Subject: Submission on SSD-82714716 – Comments from Neighbouring Owner
Dear Planning Assessment Panel,
I write as an owner of the neighbouring development at 156–158 Parramatta Road, Camperdown, to provide feedback on SSD-82714716.
At the outset, I would like to note that I am broadly supportive of the proposal. The height, GFA, and land use mix are generally acceptable and represent a positive contribution to the renewal of this corridor. However, there are several matters that should be addressed to ensure the project achieves the best possible outcomes for residents, businesses, and the local community.
1. Site Accuracy

The site plan and Environmental Impact Statement incorrectly identify 156– 158 Parramatta Road as “commercial.” The property is mixed use, with several lots used for residential purposes. This must be corrected to ensure protections are applied for existing residents, particularly in relation to overshadowing and noise-sensitive uses during construction.
2. Parking Provision

The allocation of 53 car spaces for 220 apartments (approx. 440 residents), with only 35 for general use, is insufficient. This falls short of SEPP 65, the local DCP, and “The Guide to Traffic Generating Development.” Relying on the bare minimum under the Housing SEPP will create serious challenges for future tenants.
Additionally, no provision for EV charging is shown. Without adequate parking and charging, overflow will affect nearby businesses already under strain. For example, “Sax and Woodwind,” a long-standing Sydney music institution, relies on patrons travelling with large, valuable instruments who cannot feasibly use public transport. Loss of parking access could threaten the viability of such businesses.
Adequate parking is not only a compliance issue but also a missed opportunity to revitalise and sustain retail along Parramatta Road.
3. Electric Vehicle Charging

With EV adoption increasing rapidly, omitting charging infrastructure undermines sustainability and resilience. Provision should be incorporated now, with substations and basement power supply designed to accommodate future demand.
4. Street Trees

Reports are inconsistent regarding trees on Mallett Street. A condition of consent should require mature street trees to be planted at Stage 1. This will help mitigate urban heat and improve local amenity.
5. Ground Floor Uses

Prohibiting residential at ground level under item 4.3 is problematic. In this part of Parramatta Road, “active frontages” too often translate into vacant shopfronts. With high vacancy and limited pedestrian activity, the proposed controls risk perpetuating this problem.
Ground floor residential on Mallett Street would:
• reflect successful precedent (e.g. 38 Pyrmont Bridge Road)

• reduce construction complexity and cost

• improve streetscape quality with more greenery

• increase pedestrian safety and vitality through permanent residents

This change would also benefit the proponent, with stronger yield and enhanced land value.
6. Mallett Street Setback

A ground floor setback to Mallett Street, similar to Pyrmont Bridge Road, would add valuable amenity and align the development with the established character of the area.
7. Awnings

A continuous awning with integrated lighting on Parramatta Road should be included. This would mitigate heat, improve pedestrian comfort, and enhance night-time safety, especially near the bus shelter.
8. Staging and Construction

Clear staging information and construction management are essential. Acoustic barriers—particularly on the eastern boundary—will protect neighbouring residents and businesses from noise and dust impacts.
In Summary:

• Correct site analysis to reflect 156–158 Parramatta Road as mixed use.

• Provide maximum allowable parking and integrate EV charging.

• Permit ground floor residential on Mallett Street with setbacks and greening.

• Deliver mature street trees, continuous awnings, and proper staging/ mitigation during construction.

These adjustments will deliver significant benefits: stronger outcomes for the proponent, greater certainty for residents, and positive long-term impacts for the Camperdown community.
Thank you for considering these constructive recommendations.
Yours sincerely,

John Jandura
Owner Unit 10– 156–158 Parramatta Road, Camperdown

I am supportive of this project. It provides much needed housing close to the city, and the affordable housing near the hospital is also great.

Housing affordability is the biggest issue facing, our city, our state and country. A lot of it is attributed to the fact we don't have sufficient housing in locations like this, someone might make the case there's sufficient housing but just look at the rent prices and unit prices and ask yourself if you think they're reasonable. Those are market signals they are higher because of unmet demand, you can only really say there is sufficient housing once you can also say you'd pay that amount of rent or that amount for a unit without compliant.

In particular this development is especially good as it provides essential worker housing near the hospital.

Also the lot is vacant industrial land, which will probably end up as a car dealership given that seems to be most efficient use of industrial land along Parramatta road (it's not like we're seeing them used for manufacturing). Personally I'm not big on cars, and I guess dealerships need to go somewhere, but I think it's safe to say we have a housing crisis not a Camry crisis.

Also it looks nice, it means there's something to do here, I've used this bus stop quite a few times, it'll provide some shade for starters, but it would be nice to grab a bubble tea or something when getting off here, given the shop top housing it could even be a place to catch up with friends commuting from other parts of town as well.

I object to this project on the basis that the proposed height of more than 20 storeys is excessive, and the plan provides only 53 parking spaces for an envisioned 577 apartments. This is clearly not enough.

A 20-storey development is out of character with the area and will block light to numerous other buildings and many streets. It should be scaled back to 10 storeys or less.

Furthermore, the plan should provide for at least as many parking spaces as apartments, as parking in the surrounding neighbourhood is already hard to come by.

This is an area where the vast majority of buildings are 5 storeys or fewer. Excessive and poorly-provisioned proposals like this one risk turning the public against the worthy aims of more housing and higher density. More housing is great, but please spread it over a few 5-10 storey buildings, not a 21-storey tower!

I consider that the dive site should have more than the proposed 220 affordable residences on the site. The site is a unique opportunity to provide affordable housing as it became available due to changes to the WestConnex plans. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and I would like to see 500 residences under the long term affordable housing definition.
I would also like to see space within the site provided for community use with deep tree planting and summer shade.
Reticulated gas must be banned. Gas is very old technology and not fit for the 21st century under climate change. Indoor air pollution from gas appliances would be eliminated by this simple measure. The opportunity for renewable energy generation and storage batteries should be integral to the design. Charging technology for EVs (two way) and charging of electric bike plus bike parking should be included.
As the site is located on Parramatta Road, air pollution and noise from road vehicles needs to be reduced integral to the building facade design ie no balconies in immediate proximity of the roadway.
The location of the site on Parramatta Road means it has very good access to public transport bus services. The inclusion of very limited private car parking is essential. Share vehicle parking should be given preference.

Dear planning assessment panel, 
I hope this correspondence finds you well. I wish to comment on SSD-82714716 as an owner of neighbouring development at 156-158 Parramatta Road Camperdown and have drafted the attached letter. The proposed height and FSR is agreeable, concerns in summary; 
- Please add a condition of consent for maximum allowable car parking to future stages, or decouple residents parking as 35 spaces is detrimental to local business and residents, consider consolidating basements for future stages.

- Please allow ground floor residential uses, setbacks and urban greening to Mallett Street similar to precedent at 38 Pyrmont Bridge Road.
Height and GFA is acceptable.
- Please amend the site analysis and reporting to identify 156-158 Parramatta Road as mixed use to protect residents from future construction noise and overshadowing.  

Thank you for your consideration.

On behalf of Wilga St Properties Pty Ltd, a direct adjoining landowner to the abovementioned site, we wish to express our general support for the proposed development and commend the overall design vision and intent. However, we must formally raise our objection to the proposed permanent closure of Bignell Lane.

Bignell Lane has, for many years, functioned as an effective and necessary thoroughfare, alleviating pressure from surrounding main roads. Wilga St Properties, being sole owner of the entire property known as 63-65 Pyrmont Bridge Rd, have properties that have direct street frontage to Bignell Lane. Its closure would significantly impact our property, as it currently provides the sole point of access—both pedestrian and vehicular—to Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 126586 and Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 961083. The removal of this access would effectively render the car park serving these buildings unusable and would significantly devalue our property.

Moreover, the closure would inevitably redirect traffic to Mallet Street, creating congestion and increasing the risk of vehicular conflict. This redirection would also heighten safety concerns for pedestrians, as additional vehicle movements would be concentrated in an area not designed to accommodate such volumes.

The existing operation of Bignell Lane, as a one-way exit leading to Pyrmont Bridge Road, plays a critical role in facilitating safe and efficient traffic flow. Its continued use ensures smoother circulation, reduces reliance on main roads, and contributes to a safer interface between vehicles and pedestrians. To permanently close the lane would not only compromise site accessibility but also undermine broader traffic management and public safety outcomes.

For these reasons, we respectfully submit that the closure of Bignell Lane would result in a detrimental outcome for both our property and the surrounding community.

I strongly support the proposal for this apartment development in Annandale.

Sydney is in the midst of a severe housing shortage, particularly in the Inner West. Rent and house prices continue to rise at unsustainable levels, forcing out essential workers, young people, and families. The Joinery will deliver 577 new dwellings, including 220 dedicated for essential workers: helping ensure that teachers, nurses, and other critical staff can live close to where they work.

This is especially important for Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, which faces ongoing staffing challenges due to the lack of affordable housing nearby. Local schools are also losing teachers and students, a trend that developments like The Joinery can help reverse by keeping communities viable.

The proposal is well-designed, offering mixed-use spaces that combine retail and housing to create a lively, activated area. In addition, new public spaces and through-links will benefit not only future residents but also the existing Annandale community by enhancing amenities and connectivity.

This project represents exactly the kind of thoughtful, community-focused development that our city urgently needs. For these reasons, I strongly encourage approval of The Joinery development.

Thank you for taking my feedback into consideration.
From a passionate Sydney YIMBY.

I support this much needed development. We have a huge shortage of housing in the Inner West, which causes skyrocketing rents and prices (I was priced out after continual rent increases). Royal Prince Alfred struggles to find staff because of a shortage of local housing. Local schools are losing teachers as their student population nosedives. This is a great mixed-use, with a combination of retail space and housing that can complement each other and activate the area, as well as making good use of government land. New public space and through-links enhance amenity for nearby residents.

I strongly support the planning proposal for The Joinery, Annandale. Delivering 577 new homes, including 220 for essential workers, on a well-located former WestConnex site will help address the Inner West’s acute housing shortage. Its mixed-use design, new public space and through-links will activate the area and improve local amenity. Proximity to RPA Hospital means nurses and other staff can live closer to work, easing workforce shortages and long commutes. At 4km from the CBD, this is exactly where we should add homes. Please approve the proposal.

The proposal is out of alignment with the area's restrictions on building heights, which are limited to a maximum of four levels. Your proposal is for twenty-one floors. A massive increase that creates shadows on my residential building. These shadows, particularly in winter, will make the building even colder, and it is already cold enough during these months.
There is a restriction in the surrounding area regarding the maximum height of buildings for a reason. Your proposal impacts the area, residents, and property valuations. What is the point of having restrictions if the government and developers can come in and disregard them, compromising the integrity of the area? It is ethically unsound and inconsiderate, as big business and government are exerting power over suburbs and people who are trying to maintain their areas in the most considerate way for the long term. Please reduce your proposal to four floors and ensure it aligns with the rest of the region.

As a local i support the project. However I have concerns to the supporting amenities and accessibility of these amenities.

With a total of 577 dwellings to be housed on the location there will be an uplift in those requiring public transport and general amenities.

My recommendation is that appropriate feasibility be undertaken as to how people will access the location via public transport, and if current public transport services and their destination locations will support this incoming infrastructure, people and their living requirements.

As a local resident that uses the adjacent bus stop post dropping children off to day care, one cannot always access city bound bus services in the morning peak periods due to the fact that busses are FULL on arrival.

Further more, what other considerations will be given to general services such as a shopping centre (removing the need to further drive a car or access public transport), general doctors practice, schooling, playgrounds for children, open space etc.

Great project, maybe too many dwellings if not appropriately supported by required infrastructure.

Sydney needs more housing density and this is a great spot for it. I particularly love the inclusion of spaces for essential workers at RPA hospital.