Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
EASTLAKES
,
New South Wales
Message
Subject: Objection to Proposed Eastlakes Development Application in its Current Form
I request that my name, address and email address be withheld from the submissions planning portal for this development
I wish to lodge a formal objection to SSD-90572458, the proposed redevelopment of the Eastlakes Shopping Centre site at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes in its current form, and its potential impacts on local residents, the bulk and scale, community infrastructure, environmental quality, and neighbourhood character.
As a 10 year resident in the Eastlakes community, and 40plus years as a customer of the previous shopping centre, I have long looked forward to a suitable improvement to our area, something that is sorely needed! I do though, hold significant concerns regarding the scale and intensity of the proposed development and its compatibility with the existing urban environment, and implore the developers to do better. When first viewing the architectural plans, I was genuinely shocked by the sheer scale. Rather than complementing the surrounding neighbourhood, it appears overwhelmingly large and out of proportion with the existing built environment.
The only community consultation that was provided on this was a session on a weekday morning at 10am about 3 months ago, at the Community Centre in Eastlakes, when many people could not attend! No other session was offered. We also have a significant elderly population in this area, and/or others for whom English is not their first language.
The proposal seeks approval for 736 apartments within four high-rise residential buildings reaching approximately 14 to 18 storeys. This scale of development is excessive for Eastlakes and is out of character with the surrounding built environment. The proposed building heights and floor space ratio represent a substantial intensification that risks overwhelming local infrastructure and changing the established character of the suburb.
The previous proposal by the former owners, Crown, for more than 400 apartments was already widely regarded as excessive. It makes me wonder whether the new developer’s true objective is something closer to 500 or 600 apartments, while initially proposing more than 700, knowing that such a figure is unlikely to be approved. If the final outcome is then reduced to their actual target, they can present it as a compromise that reflects community feedback, so a smaller request seems more reasonable although that was their objective all along.
1.Traffic and Transport Impact
The development will substantially increase the local population.
Eastlakes already experiences congestion around Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding local streets. Introducing 736 dwellings, retail uses and additional commercial activity will significantly increase traffic movements.
A key concern is the impact this development will have on the existing road network surrounding Eastlakes, particularly at the main entrance to the shopping centre precinct via Racecourse Place, which looks like it will remain in place. This area already experiences significant congestion and operational issues daily. Residents of The Grand on Evans Avenue regularly experience difficulties exiting the building due to traffic volumes and vehicle movements associated with the shopping centre, in addition to vehicles frequently illegally parking on Racecourse Place visiting the Grand, which I myself see daily.
The area is going to generate substantial additional vehicle movements in an area that already experiences traffic challenges during peak periods, and added to no parking of an afternoon and evening! Our surrounding streets are generally very narrow, and only allow for traffic movement in one direction. The assessment does not appear to adequately demonstrate that the surrounding road network can accommodate the projected increase in traffic without significant impacts on existing residents, especially as many residents are two car households.
While traffic assessments may indicate that the road network can technically accommodate projected vehicle movements, the reality experienced by local residents is that the area already operates under significant pressure. I live here and know this! And many households own two cars.
The Department should give significant weight to the existing traffic and safety issue and require a more rigorous assessment of cumulative traffic impacts before any determination is made.
2. Overshadowing, Privacy, and Amenity
The height and bulk of the proposed buildings will result in significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties and public spaces, for long periods, as document Appendix X - Solar Light Reflectivity Study shows, including where I live on Mascot Drive. There are also concerns regarding loss of privacy, increased wind impacts, and general deterioration of residential amenity for surrounding residents. The big developers build these towers, and then we the residents are make the best of its consequences. I am pro development, just not to this scale.
4. Strain on Open Space and Public Domain
Eastlakes has limited public open space relative to the increased population generated by this proposal. The development primarily relies on private communal space, which does not replace the need for publicly accessible parks and recreation areas, nor any improvement to such.
The Department should ensure adequate public domain improvements and open space contributions before approving a development of this scale.
I am concerned about the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposal, loss of vegetation, which we have already seen by the complete removal of all trees on the site and surrounding footpaths, loss of tree canopy,(in a council area that has sits below the standards for such), and screening for residents who live on Barber Avenue, construction-related pollution, noise and dust, and additional strain on stormwater systems, as well as tree canopy and landscaping outcomes.
5. Neighbourhood Character
Eastlakes has an established character and built form that contributes to its identity and liveability. The scale, density, and design of the proposed development appear inconsistent with the prevailing character of the area, which is predominantly 3 level walk ups, and will result in an overdevelopment of the site, and does not complement the existing The Grand on Evans Avenue.
The proposal introduces a level of intensity that is more characteristic of major metropolitan centres than a small suburban neighbourhood such as Eastlakes. Are we to be the next Mascot, Zetland, or Wolli Creek, but without the train station?
The proposed development appears to prioritise density over integration with the existing urban fabric. The bulk and scale of the towers easily dominate the surrounding area and significantly alter the visual character of Eastlakes. It feels like a steamrolling of our suburb.
I am also concerned that the architectural design does not demonstrate the level of design excellence that should be expected for a development of this scale and prominence. It is disappointing! The proposed buildings appear generic in form and do not provide a distinctive architectural response to the Eastlakes context! The new development should not exceed the Grand’s height but keep in character. We have been waiting a long time for the redevelopment, and it should exhibit a high standard of architectural merit. In its current form, the proposal fails to achieve these objectives.
6. Construction Impacts
The construction phase is likely to create significant disruption for nearby residents through noise, dust, vibration, traffic diversions, and reduced access. Given the scale of the proposal, these impacts could persist for an extended period, being years, and have not been adequately addressed.
Request
For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Department:
• Refuse SSD-90572458 in its current form; or
• Require substantial reductions in building height, density and scale to reduce its impact; and
• Undertake further assessment of traffic, infrastructure, environmental, and community impacts before any determination is made.
I ask that these concerns be given full consideration during the assessment process.
The long-suffering residents and broader community of Eastlakes deserve a great shopping centre and surrounding accommodation, delivered through a respectful and thoughtful development that puts us first and creates a place of which we can all be proud.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on this proposal
Yours faithfully,
Ana
I request that my name, address and email address be withheld from the submissions planning portal for this development
I wish to lodge a formal objection to SSD-90572458, the proposed redevelopment of the Eastlakes Shopping Centre site at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes in its current form, and its potential impacts on local residents, the bulk and scale, community infrastructure, environmental quality, and neighbourhood character.
As a 10 year resident in the Eastlakes community, and 40plus years as a customer of the previous shopping centre, I have long looked forward to a suitable improvement to our area, something that is sorely needed! I do though, hold significant concerns regarding the scale and intensity of the proposed development and its compatibility with the existing urban environment, and implore the developers to do better. When first viewing the architectural plans, I was genuinely shocked by the sheer scale. Rather than complementing the surrounding neighbourhood, it appears overwhelmingly large and out of proportion with the existing built environment.
The only community consultation that was provided on this was a session on a weekday morning at 10am about 3 months ago, at the Community Centre in Eastlakes, when many people could not attend! No other session was offered. We also have a significant elderly population in this area, and/or others for whom English is not their first language.
The proposal seeks approval for 736 apartments within four high-rise residential buildings reaching approximately 14 to 18 storeys. This scale of development is excessive for Eastlakes and is out of character with the surrounding built environment. The proposed building heights and floor space ratio represent a substantial intensification that risks overwhelming local infrastructure and changing the established character of the suburb.
The previous proposal by the former owners, Crown, for more than 400 apartments was already widely regarded as excessive. It makes me wonder whether the new developer’s true objective is something closer to 500 or 600 apartments, while initially proposing more than 700, knowing that such a figure is unlikely to be approved. If the final outcome is then reduced to their actual target, they can present it as a compromise that reflects community feedback, so a smaller request seems more reasonable although that was their objective all along.
1.Traffic and Transport Impact
The development will substantially increase the local population.
Eastlakes already experiences congestion around Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding local streets. Introducing 736 dwellings, retail uses and additional commercial activity will significantly increase traffic movements.
A key concern is the impact this development will have on the existing road network surrounding Eastlakes, particularly at the main entrance to the shopping centre precinct via Racecourse Place, which looks like it will remain in place. This area already experiences significant congestion and operational issues daily. Residents of The Grand on Evans Avenue regularly experience difficulties exiting the building due to traffic volumes and vehicle movements associated with the shopping centre, in addition to vehicles frequently illegally parking on Racecourse Place visiting the Grand, which I myself see daily.
The area is going to generate substantial additional vehicle movements in an area that already experiences traffic challenges during peak periods, and added to no parking of an afternoon and evening! Our surrounding streets are generally very narrow, and only allow for traffic movement in one direction. The assessment does not appear to adequately demonstrate that the surrounding road network can accommodate the projected increase in traffic without significant impacts on existing residents, especially as many residents are two car households.
While traffic assessments may indicate that the road network can technically accommodate projected vehicle movements, the reality experienced by local residents is that the area already operates under significant pressure. I live here and know this! And many households own two cars.
The Department should give significant weight to the existing traffic and safety issue and require a more rigorous assessment of cumulative traffic impacts before any determination is made.
2. Overshadowing, Privacy, and Amenity
The height and bulk of the proposed buildings will result in significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties and public spaces, for long periods, as document Appendix X - Solar Light Reflectivity Study shows, including where I live on Mascot Drive. There are also concerns regarding loss of privacy, increased wind impacts, and general deterioration of residential amenity for surrounding residents. The big developers build these towers, and then we the residents are make the best of its consequences. I am pro development, just not to this scale.
4. Strain on Open Space and Public Domain
Eastlakes has limited public open space relative to the increased population generated by this proposal. The development primarily relies on private communal space, which does not replace the need for publicly accessible parks and recreation areas, nor any improvement to such.
The Department should ensure adequate public domain improvements and open space contributions before approving a development of this scale.
I am concerned about the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposal, loss of vegetation, which we have already seen by the complete removal of all trees on the site and surrounding footpaths, loss of tree canopy,(in a council area that has sits below the standards for such), and screening for residents who live on Barber Avenue, construction-related pollution, noise and dust, and additional strain on stormwater systems, as well as tree canopy and landscaping outcomes.
5. Neighbourhood Character
Eastlakes has an established character and built form that contributes to its identity and liveability. The scale, density, and design of the proposed development appear inconsistent with the prevailing character of the area, which is predominantly 3 level walk ups, and will result in an overdevelopment of the site, and does not complement the existing The Grand on Evans Avenue.
The proposal introduces a level of intensity that is more characteristic of major metropolitan centres than a small suburban neighbourhood such as Eastlakes. Are we to be the next Mascot, Zetland, or Wolli Creek, but without the train station?
The proposed development appears to prioritise density over integration with the existing urban fabric. The bulk and scale of the towers easily dominate the surrounding area and significantly alter the visual character of Eastlakes. It feels like a steamrolling of our suburb.
I am also concerned that the architectural design does not demonstrate the level of design excellence that should be expected for a development of this scale and prominence. It is disappointing! The proposed buildings appear generic in form and do not provide a distinctive architectural response to the Eastlakes context! The new development should not exceed the Grand’s height but keep in character. We have been waiting a long time for the redevelopment, and it should exhibit a high standard of architectural merit. In its current form, the proposal fails to achieve these objectives.
6. Construction Impacts
The construction phase is likely to create significant disruption for nearby residents through noise, dust, vibration, traffic diversions, and reduced access. Given the scale of the proposal, these impacts could persist for an extended period, being years, and have not been adequately addressed.
Request
For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Department:
• Refuse SSD-90572458 in its current form; or
• Require substantial reductions in building height, density and scale to reduce its impact; and
• Undertake further assessment of traffic, infrastructure, environmental, and community impacts before any determination is made.
I ask that these concerns be given full consideration during the assessment process.
The long-suffering residents and broader community of Eastlakes deserve a great shopping centre and surrounding accommodation, delivered through a respectful and thoughtful development that puts us first and creates a place of which we can all be proud.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on this proposal
Yours faithfully,
Ana
Christian Del Rosario
Object
Christian Del Rosario
Object
ROSEBERY
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission Objecting to SSD-90572458 – Eastlakes Mixed Use Development (19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes)
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Christian Del Rosario
1 Randolph St
Rosebery Resident
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Christian Del Rosario
1 Randolph St
Rosebery Resident
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
HILLSDALE
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Shannon
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Shannon
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Support
Eastlakes
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission in Support of the Redevelopment of Eastlakes Shopping Centre (SSD-90572458)
I write in support of the redevelopment of Eastlakes Shopping Centre.
I lived in Eastlakes with my family for several years and continue to have an apartment there. I therefore remain closely connected to the community and care about its long-term wellbeing. My support for this proposal comes from that ongoing connection and from my belief that Eastlakes should continue to evolve in a way that benefits both existing and future residents.
The shopping centre and surrounding area have not undergone substantial renewal for many decades. Before its demolition, the former centre was dated and underutilised relative to the potential of the site. This proposal represents an important opportunity to renew Eastlakes in a considered and well-planned way.
The redevelopment will provide additional housing, including affordable housing, in an established area with access to transport, shops and essential services. At a time of significant housing pressure, well-located areas such as Eastlakes must be allowed to evolve and contribute to the needs of a growing population.
A renewed shopping centre will also improve the quality and range of local retail, services and community amenities. It will support employment, strengthen the local economy and create a more active, accessible and welcoming centre for existing and future residents. Renewal of the site will also allow for modern infrastructure, improved accessibility and better public spaces that the previous centre could not provide.
Importantly, this is also a matter of intergenerational fairness. Like other members of the Eastlakes community, my family and I relied on and valued the services, infrastructure and amenity Eastlakes has provided, while also contributing to the community over many years. This experience reinforces my belief that the same opportunity should now be extended to younger people, families and future residents.
Eastlakes should be allowed to evolve through new housing, improved facilities and modern infrastructure. Planning decisions should, of course, be considerate of the needs of current residents. In my view, this redevelopment will enhance the services, amenity and infrastructure available to them, while also meeting the needs of younger people, families and future residents seeking access to well-located housing and community facilities. Progress should not be opposed simply for the sake of preserving the status quo.
Traffic impacts are a manageable part of urban renewal. They should not be treated as a reason to prevent development that will deliver substantial and lasting benefits to the wider community.
Development will bring change, but that change can be managed thoughtfully. Eastlakes needs considered renewal, greater housing choice and modern community infrastructure. This proposal provides an important opportunity to deliver those benefits for existing residents, families and generations to come.
I therefore support the application and encourage the Department to approve the redevelopment.
Thank you for your consideration.
I write in support of the redevelopment of Eastlakes Shopping Centre.
I lived in Eastlakes with my family for several years and continue to have an apartment there. I therefore remain closely connected to the community and care about its long-term wellbeing. My support for this proposal comes from that ongoing connection and from my belief that Eastlakes should continue to evolve in a way that benefits both existing and future residents.
The shopping centre and surrounding area have not undergone substantial renewal for many decades. Before its demolition, the former centre was dated and underutilised relative to the potential of the site. This proposal represents an important opportunity to renew Eastlakes in a considered and well-planned way.
The redevelopment will provide additional housing, including affordable housing, in an established area with access to transport, shops and essential services. At a time of significant housing pressure, well-located areas such as Eastlakes must be allowed to evolve and contribute to the needs of a growing population.
A renewed shopping centre will also improve the quality and range of local retail, services and community amenities. It will support employment, strengthen the local economy and create a more active, accessible and welcoming centre for existing and future residents. Renewal of the site will also allow for modern infrastructure, improved accessibility and better public spaces that the previous centre could not provide.
Importantly, this is also a matter of intergenerational fairness. Like other members of the Eastlakes community, my family and I relied on and valued the services, infrastructure and amenity Eastlakes has provided, while also contributing to the community over many years. This experience reinforces my belief that the same opportunity should now be extended to younger people, families and future residents.
Eastlakes should be allowed to evolve through new housing, improved facilities and modern infrastructure. Planning decisions should, of course, be considerate of the needs of current residents. In my view, this redevelopment will enhance the services, amenity and infrastructure available to them, while also meeting the needs of younger people, families and future residents seeking access to well-located housing and community facilities. Progress should not be opposed simply for the sake of preserving the status quo.
Traffic impacts are a manageable part of urban renewal. They should not be treated as a reason to prevent development that will deliver substantial and lasting benefits to the wider community.
Development will bring change, but that change can be managed thoughtfully. Eastlakes needs considered renewal, greater housing choice and modern community infrastructure. This proposal provides an important opportunity to deliver those benefits for existing residents, families and generations to come.
I therefore support the application and encourage the Department to approve the redevelopment.
Thank you for your consideration.
Magali Rigaudias
Object
Magali Rigaudias
Object
EASTLAKES
,
New South Wales
Message
DRAFT SUBMISSION
Submission Objecting to SSD-90572458 – Eastlakes Mixed Use Development (19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes)
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Warm regards
Magali Rigaudias
Submission Objecting to SSD-90572458 – Eastlakes Mixed Use Development (19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes)
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Warm regards
Magali Rigaudias
Marina Simoes Varanda
Object
Marina Simoes Varanda
Object
Eastlakes
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Marina Simoes Varanda
Eastlakes Resident
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Marina Simoes Varanda
Eastlakes Resident
Helen Gounaris
Object
Helen Gounaris
Object
MAROUBRA
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission Objecting to SSD-90572458 – Eastlakes Mixed Use Development (19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes)
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Helen Gounaris for Elly Koutras
5 Macquarie Street
Rosebery NSW 2018
Eastlakes Resident
I object to the proposed development at 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support additional housing in appropriate locations, this proposal represents a significant increase in scale beyond the previously approved development. The application seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared to the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres. It also increases the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1 and the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 dwellings.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposal is substantially larger than the approved development and is out of character with the surrounding Eastlakes area.
2. Traffic and Congestion – The developer’s own assessment predicts an increase of approximately 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Local roads, particularly Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Amenity – The proposal acknowledges increased shadow impacts on neighbouring properties and Jack Mundey Reserve. Residents and park users should not bear the cost of excessive overdevelopment.
4. Insufficient Open Space and Landscaping – Despite the scale of the project, deep soil planting is limited to only 595m² (3.3% of the site area), which is inadequate for a development of this size.
5. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities without corresponding infrastructure upgrades.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form or require significant reductions in height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is considered.
Yours faithfully,
Helen Gounaris for Elly Koutras
5 Macquarie Street
Rosebery NSW 2018
Eastlakes Resident
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Eastlakes
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission Objecting to SSD-90572458 – Eastlakes Mixed Use Development (19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes)
I object to the proposed State Significant Development application for 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support the delivery of additional housing in well-planned locations, this proposal represents a substantial and unjustified intensification of the previously approved development. The application seeks to increase building heights from the approved 7–12 storeys (up to 40.8 metres) to as much as 18 storeys (62.9 metres), increase the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1, and almost double the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 apartments.
The proposal is excessive in scale and fails to achieve an appropriate balance between housing growth and the protection of the amenity, character and infrastructure capacity of the surrounding community.
My key concerns are as follows:
1. Excessive Height, Scale and Bulk
The proposed development significantly exceeds the scale of the approved scheme and is inconsistent with the established and emerging character of Eastlakes. The dramatic increase in height and density will create an overbearing built form that is out of proportion with the surrounding neighbourhood and sets an undesirable precedent for future development.
2. Increased Traffic and Road Congestion
The applicant’s own traffic assessment forecasts an additional approximately 246 vehicle trips during the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips during the afternoon peak compared with the approved development. Local roads, including Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion and delays. The proposal will further worsen traffic conditions, increase travel times and reduce road safety for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Residential Amenity
The proposal will increase overshadowing of neighbouring properties and public open space, including Jack Mundey Reserve. Greater building heights will reduce access to sunlight, diminish the enjoyment of public spaces and adversely affect the amenity of nearby residents. These impacts are unreasonable given the significant increase in development intensity.
4. Inadequate Landscaping and Open Space
Despite the substantial increase in density, the proposal provides only 595 square metres of deep soil planting, representing approximately 3.3% of the site area. This is insufficient for a development of this magnitude and undermines opportunities for meaningful tree canopy, landscaping, urban cooling and biodiversity. The limited provision of green space is inconsistent with creating a liveable, sustainable urban environment.
5. Unacceptable Pressure on Local Infrastructure and Services
The proposed increase of hundreds of additional apartments will place significant additional demand on local infrastructure, including roads, public transport, schools, healthcare services, parks and community facilities. The application does not demonstrate that these essential services have the capacity to accommodate such a substantial increase in population, nor does it provide commensurate infrastructure upgrades to offset these impacts.
Conclusion
This proposal goes well beyond what has previously been approved and represents overdevelopment of the site. The significant increases in height, density and floor space will have unacceptable impacts on traffic, local infrastructure, public open space and the amenity of surrounding residents.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form. If approval is contemplated, the proposal should first be substantially amended to reduce its height, density, traffic impacts and overall scale to a level that is more appropriate for the Eastlakes locality.
I object to the proposed State Significant Development application for 19A Evans Avenue, Eastlakes.
While I support the delivery of additional housing in well-planned locations, this proposal represents a substantial and unjustified intensification of the previously approved development. The application seeks to increase building heights from the approved 7–12 storeys (up to 40.8 metres) to as much as 18 storeys (62.9 metres), increase the floor space ratio from 2.11:1 to 5.29:1, and almost double the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877 apartments.
The proposal is excessive in scale and fails to achieve an appropriate balance between housing growth and the protection of the amenity, character and infrastructure capacity of the surrounding community.
My key concerns are as follows:
1. Excessive Height, Scale and Bulk
The proposed development significantly exceeds the scale of the approved scheme and is inconsistent with the established and emerging character of Eastlakes. The dramatic increase in height and density will create an overbearing built form that is out of proportion with the surrounding neighbourhood and sets an undesirable precedent for future development.
2. Increased Traffic and Road Congestion
The applicant’s own traffic assessment forecasts an additional approximately 246 vehicle trips during the morning peak and 332 vehicle trips during the afternoon peak compared with the approved development. Local roads, including Evans Avenue, Gardeners Road and surrounding intersections, already experience congestion and delays. The proposal will further worsen traffic conditions, increase travel times and reduce road safety for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Residential Amenity
The proposal will increase overshadowing of neighbouring properties and public open space, including Jack Mundey Reserve. Greater building heights will reduce access to sunlight, diminish the enjoyment of public spaces and adversely affect the amenity of nearby residents. These impacts are unreasonable given the significant increase in development intensity.
4. Inadequate Landscaping and Open Space
Despite the substantial increase in density, the proposal provides only 595 square metres of deep soil planting, representing approximately 3.3% of the site area. This is insufficient for a development of this magnitude and undermines opportunities for meaningful tree canopy, landscaping, urban cooling and biodiversity. The limited provision of green space is inconsistent with creating a liveable, sustainable urban environment.
5. Unacceptable Pressure on Local Infrastructure and Services
The proposed increase of hundreds of additional apartments will place significant additional demand on local infrastructure, including roads, public transport, schools, healthcare services, parks and community facilities. The application does not demonstrate that these essential services have the capacity to accommodate such a substantial increase in population, nor does it provide commensurate infrastructure upgrades to offset these impacts.
Conclusion
This proposal goes well beyond what has previously been approved and represents overdevelopment of the site. The significant increases in height, density and floor space will have unacceptable impacts on traffic, local infrastructure, public open space and the amenity of surrounding residents.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form. If approval is contemplated, the proposal should first be substantially amended to reduce its height, density, traffic impacts and overall scale to a level that is more appropriate for the Eastlakes locality.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
EASTLAKES
,
New South Wales
Message
To whom it may concern,
I am an Eastlakes resident living directly opposite the proposed development, with my apartment facing the site. As someone who will be directly affected every day by this project, I STRONGLY object to the application in its current form.
While I support the need for more housing (I’m a first home buyer myself), this proposal is a substantial increase in scale compared to what was previously approved. It seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared with the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres, and increases the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877. This level of overdevelopment will have significant impacts on nearby residents like myself and decreased livability in a beloved suburb of Eastlakes.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposed buildings are far taller and denser than the previously approved development and are out of character with Eastlakes. Living directly opposite the site, I will be confronted by an overwhelming building mass that will permanently change the character of the area.
2. Traffic and Access – Evans Avenue is already busy, particularly during peak hours. The developer’s own assessment predicts an additional 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 in the afternoon peak. As my apartment and car park entry are directly opposite the development, I am extremely concerned that entering and exiting my building’s driveway will become increasingly difficult and unsafe due to the additional traffic.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Sunlight – The increased height will result in greater overshadowing of surrounding properties. My apartment directly faces the site, and I am concerned about the loss of natural sunlight and the impact this will have on my home’s liveability and overall amenity.
4. Loss of Privacy – With buildings up to 18 storeys directly opposite my home, there will be a significant loss of privacy. Residents in the new towers will have direct views into neighbouring apartments that currently do not exist, substantially affecting the enjoyment of my home.
5. Noise and Amenity – The increased density and traffic will inevitably result in more vehicle noise, delivery vehicles, servicing, and general activity. Living directly opposite the development means I will bear the brunt of these impacts on a daily basis.
6. Insufficient Landscaping and Open Space – Despite the significant increase in density, deep soil planting accounts for only 595m² (3.3% of the site area). This is inadequate for a development of this scale and does little to offset its environmental and visual impacts.
7. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities, without corresponding infrastructure improvements.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse this application in its current form or require significant reductions in the height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is granted. The current proposal places an unfair burden on existing residents and prioritises development intensity over the amenity and liveability of the surrounding community.
Yours faithfully,
The Grand Eastlakes Resident
I am an Eastlakes resident living directly opposite the proposed development, with my apartment facing the site. As someone who will be directly affected every day by this project, I STRONGLY object to the application in its current form.
While I support the need for more housing (I’m a first home buyer myself), this proposal is a substantial increase in scale compared to what was previously approved. It seeks buildings of up to 18 storeys and 62.9 metres in height, compared with the existing approval of 7–12 storeys and 40.8 metres, and increases the number of dwellings from 425 to between 736 and 877. This level of overdevelopment will have significant impacts on nearby residents like myself and decreased livability in a beloved suburb of Eastlakes.
My concerns include:
1. Excessive Height and Bulk – The proposed buildings are far taller and denser than the previously approved development and are out of character with Eastlakes. Living directly opposite the site, I will be confronted by an overwhelming building mass that will permanently change the character of the area.
2. Traffic and Access – Evans Avenue is already busy, particularly during peak hours. The developer’s own assessment predicts an additional 246 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 332 in the afternoon peak. As my apartment and car park entry are directly opposite the development, I am extremely concerned that entering and exiting my building’s driveway will become increasingly difficult and unsafe due to the additional traffic.
3. Overshadowing and Loss of Sunlight – The increased height will result in greater overshadowing of surrounding properties. My apartment directly faces the site, and I am concerned about the loss of natural sunlight and the impact this will have on my home’s liveability and overall amenity.
4. Loss of Privacy – With buildings up to 18 storeys directly opposite my home, there will be a significant loss of privacy. Residents in the new towers will have direct views into neighbouring apartments that currently do not exist, substantially affecting the enjoyment of my home.
5. Noise and Amenity – The increased density and traffic will inevitably result in more vehicle noise, delivery vehicles, servicing, and general activity. Living directly opposite the development means I will bear the brunt of these impacts on a daily basis.
6. Insufficient Landscaping and Open Space – Despite the significant increase in density, deep soil planting accounts for only 595m² (3.3% of the site area). This is inadequate for a development of this scale and does little to offset its environmental and visual impacts.
7. Pressure on Local Infrastructure – Hundreds of additional apartments will place further strain on local roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities, without corresponding infrastructure improvements.
I respectfully request that the Department refuse this application in its current form or require significant reductions in the height, density and traffic impacts before any approval is granted. The current proposal places an unfair burden on existing residents and prioritises development intensity over the amenity and liveability of the surrounding community.
Yours faithfully,
The Grand Eastlakes Resident
Name Withheld
Comment
Name Withheld
Comment
EASTLAKES
,
New South Wales
Message
Bus Errors.
1. There is now an additional bus route, 301, operating infrequently through Eastlakes about six times a day, but not on Sundays. It goes from Rosebery to Eastgardens via Eastlakes and Mascot. If this service started at Green Square, about 3 km before Rosebery, & operated every 30 minutes during shopping hours, its huge population would have a quick access to the Eastlakes Shopping Centre, (ESC) especially to a full-size Woolworths. There is no such supermarket anywhere near it and this would be a great selling point in attracting many more customers to our new ESC.
2. The shortest gap between two 303 buses is 15 minutes, not 5 as shown in your bus survey. Also, there are hardly any customers on the 303 between the UNSW and the Prince of Wales Hospital. They could easily change from the 303 to the very regular 358 at the the common bus stop located at the corner of Tunstall Avenue and Gardeners Rad, Eastlakes. It also stops at the 303's terminus at the hospital and goes to it via the Randwick Shopping Centre, which the 303 does not do..
Then, the 303 could be diverted left into Anzac Parade at the corner of Day Avenue and re-routed so it continues along Anzac Parade to the city via Taylor Square. The present Light Rail and existing bus service along Anzac Parade between Kingsford and the city can hardly cope now. In about 3 years time, there will be at least 12 high-rise blocks of units (say, up to 16 storeys) along Anzac Parade between Kingsford and Moore Park. Public transport to the city will not be able to cope. Therefore, this diverted 303 route would be a real boon to residents in the area. It would also give them a direct bus service to the ESC.
My point is that there is no major shopping centre in that locality with a full-size supermarket, let alone Woolworths. Our new ESC's Woolworths, would surely benefit from having this direct bus service. I understand, at least some, of these blocks have, or will not have, parking facilities, so a direct bus service, i.e. the 303, to Eastlakes would be a great asset for them.
As far as I can tell, there is no full-size Woolworths north at least to Surry Hills, east to Randwick, south to Maroubra Junction & west to Botany Road at the Mascot shops. Eastgardens, Mascot Train Station & Bondi Junction do have such a facility. So the new one at ESC will be centrally located to cater for far more customers than just those from Eastlakes. Yes, there are numerous Coles supermarkets in the eastern suburbs but almost no Woolworths.
Traffic congestion around the new ESC.
The "Rat Run" during morning peak hours can stretch back from the corner of Barber Avenue and St Helena Parade to the corner of Racecourse Place & Gardeners Road; also from Coward Street, along Maloney Street to Gardeners Road, especially between Mondays & Thursdays. Since timing at both these intersections has been changed, it can currently take 5 minutes, or longer, enter Gardeners Road or to cross it.
To lessen the traffic congestion in Evans Avenue outside the ESC, I suggest a two-lane road tunnel or, at least, a pedestrian underpass below Evans Avenue between the two sides of the ESC. This would eleviate shoppers having to exit one side of the ESC, drive a a couple of metres and then enter the other side. Local traffic would therefore flow much more smoothly in this facility.
Thank you for reading my comments.
1. There is now an additional bus route, 301, operating infrequently through Eastlakes about six times a day, but not on Sundays. It goes from Rosebery to Eastgardens via Eastlakes and Mascot. If this service started at Green Square, about 3 km before Rosebery, & operated every 30 minutes during shopping hours, its huge population would have a quick access to the Eastlakes Shopping Centre, (ESC) especially to a full-size Woolworths. There is no such supermarket anywhere near it and this would be a great selling point in attracting many more customers to our new ESC.
2. The shortest gap between two 303 buses is 15 minutes, not 5 as shown in your bus survey. Also, there are hardly any customers on the 303 between the UNSW and the Prince of Wales Hospital. They could easily change from the 303 to the very regular 358 at the the common bus stop located at the corner of Tunstall Avenue and Gardeners Rad, Eastlakes. It also stops at the 303's terminus at the hospital and goes to it via the Randwick Shopping Centre, which the 303 does not do..
Then, the 303 could be diverted left into Anzac Parade at the corner of Day Avenue and re-routed so it continues along Anzac Parade to the city via Taylor Square. The present Light Rail and existing bus service along Anzac Parade between Kingsford and the city can hardly cope now. In about 3 years time, there will be at least 12 high-rise blocks of units (say, up to 16 storeys) along Anzac Parade between Kingsford and Moore Park. Public transport to the city will not be able to cope. Therefore, this diverted 303 route would be a real boon to residents in the area. It would also give them a direct bus service to the ESC.
My point is that there is no major shopping centre in that locality with a full-size supermarket, let alone Woolworths. Our new ESC's Woolworths, would surely benefit from having this direct bus service. I understand, at least some, of these blocks have, or will not have, parking facilities, so a direct bus service, i.e. the 303, to Eastlakes would be a great asset for them.
As far as I can tell, there is no full-size Woolworths north at least to Surry Hills, east to Randwick, south to Maroubra Junction & west to Botany Road at the Mascot shops. Eastgardens, Mascot Train Station & Bondi Junction do have such a facility. So the new one at ESC will be centrally located to cater for far more customers than just those from Eastlakes. Yes, there are numerous Coles supermarkets in the eastern suburbs but almost no Woolworths.
Traffic congestion around the new ESC.
The "Rat Run" during morning peak hours can stretch back from the corner of Barber Avenue and St Helena Parade to the corner of Racecourse Place & Gardeners Road; also from Coward Street, along Maloney Street to Gardeners Road, especially between Mondays & Thursdays. Since timing at both these intersections has been changed, it can currently take 5 minutes, or longer, enter Gardeners Road or to cross it.
To lessen the traffic congestion in Evans Avenue outside the ESC, I suggest a two-lane road tunnel or, at least, a pedestrian underpass below Evans Avenue between the two sides of the ESC. This would eleviate shoppers having to exit one side of the ESC, drive a a couple of metres and then enter the other side. Local traffic would therefore flow much more smoothly in this facility.
Thank you for reading my comments.