I don't object to this project in it's entirety, but the proposed 36 storey tower is totally out of proportion to the surrounding buildings and environment and a ghastly blight on the surrounding skyline. I'm fully in support of affordable housing but this proposed monstrosity of a suicide tower is totally incongrous with the surrounding Waterloo community. The design of the building is also appalling with crammed accommodation most without open balconies. It resembles the hideous public housing towers of the 60's and 70's which I thought we were trying to get rid of.
I live at 147/804 Bourke St Waterloo and was shocked to see this proposal slip under the radar when the original plans for that site had a sensible height restriction which incorporated a village atmosphere rather than a high rise nightmare.
I have spoken to dozens of locals about this 36 storey tower and every single one of them says how inappropriate it is for the area to have this extremely tall building towering over our community. One said the architect has developed this idea in a
vacuum with no consideration of the surrounding environment . Another called it tomorrow's suicide tower. Please go back to the drawing board.

I object to Proposed Building Development!

I wish to lodge a formal objection to the proposed building project on the grounds that it is incompatible with the character, capacity, and wellbeing of the local area.

1. Excessive Building Height and Visual Impact

The proposed building is significantly taller than surrounding structures and does not align with the established local aesthetic. The height will dominate the streetscape, overshadow existing homes, and detract from the cohesive architectural character that defines our neighbourhood. Allowing a building of this scale sets a concerning precedent for future overdevelopment.

2. Increased Traffic and Infrastructure Strain

The scale and density of the development will inevitably generate substantial additional traffic. Our local roads are already under pressure, and further congestion will reduce safety, increase travel times, and negatively affect residents. The current infrastructure is not designed to support the projected increase in vehicle movements, parking demand, and service requirements.

3. Negative Impact on Community Amenity and Green Space

The development threatens to diminish local green space, a core element of community wellbeing. These areas provide essential recreational, social, and environmental value. Any reduction in green space or natural habitat will detract from the liveability of the neighbourhood and undermine efforts to preserve community identity and environmental quality.

4. Detrimental Effect on Overall Community Character

The combined impacts of excessive height, increased density, and higher traffic volumes risk permanently altering the character of the community. Residents value the area’s current scale, balance of built and natural spaces, and sense of cohesion. The proposed development is inconsistent with these qualities and would erode what makes this area unique.

I object on the following basis:
1) A Direct negative impact to solar access to units in 2 Lachlan Street, 4 Lachlan Street, 6 Lachlan Street and 5 Potter Street, Waterloo, specifically close to the Winter Solstice (21st of June each year) that is not considered;
2) There does not appear to be any analysis / assessment of the solar access impact on 2 Lachlan Street, 4 Lachlan Street, 6 Lachlan Street and 5 Potter Street, Waterloo on the Solar access report (E3 Architectural Design Report A2 Solar Access) - why has this not been considered or completed?
3) A 36-storey building is out of character with the current building heights and will detract from the existing building elevation / skyline ;
4)The current infrastructure (only buses (304)) does not allow for further population density in an area that is already one of the highest densities in Australia. The Metro has opened up, however that is closer to Redfern than the population hub where this development is proposed in Waterloo.
5) Increased Wind Tunnels;
6) There is insufficient green-space for the proposed residents - the existing pedestrian access to Moore Park could not accommodate large groups walking or attempting to cross major arterial routes.
7) The building detracts significantly from the current and proposed building form.

We wish to lodge an objection to SSD 80441462 at 881–885 Bourke Street.
The proposed 19-storey tower on Young Street is inappropriate for a site immediately adjoining a small residential building and will cause unacceptable impacts on existing homes. Our key concerns are

• Loss of sunlight: The height and massing would significantly overshadow nearby residences, particularly in winter, resulting in an unreasonable reduction in amenity.
• Privacy impacts: Balconies and habitable rooms directly face existing windows with insufficient setback or screening, creating constant overlooking.
• Excessive height and bulk: The proposal departs substantially from the previously communicated 7-storey expectation for this precinct and concentrates massing toward the residential boundary, creating an inequitable outcome.
• Amenity impacts: The orientation of balconies and active areas toward neighbouring homes will increase noise, visual intrusion, and general disruption.
We request that the Department require major redesign, including reduced height and massing along Young Street, before the application proceeds.
Yours faithfully,
Concerned residents of 1 Danks Street

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at 881–885 Bourke Street due to a number of significant and material impacts it will have on my property at 1 Danks Street and the wider residential and commercial community.

1. Loss of Sunlight & Excessive Overshadowing

The proposed building envelope appears to substantially reduce natural light to multiple areas of our property, including:
• Walkways and internal courtyards
• Front-facing bedrooms
• Private roof terraces
• Ground-floor and lower-level commercial premises

Reduced sunlight will negatively affect residential amenity, energy efficiency, and the overall quality of life for occupants. For commercial spaces, the loss of daylight reduces functionality, tenant attractiveness, and long-term value.

2. Significant Privacy Impacts

The height, bulk, and orientation of the proposed development create direct sightlines into living spaces, bedrooms, and private outdoor areas of units within 1 Danks Street. This represents an unacceptable loss of privacy and materially diminishes the enjoyment and use of these spaces.

3. Window Access & Maintenance Concerns

The development’s proximity raises serious concerns regarding ongoing window cleaning and façade maintenance for our building. Any future obstruction of access to essential maintenance creates safety, compliance, and strata-level cost implications, and must be addressed as part of a compliant design that allows for ongoing upkeep of neighbouring properties.

4. Impact on Commercial Lots

Commercial tenancies rely heavily on natural light for visibility, customer appeal, and occupational comfort. The proposed overshadowing and enclosure will directly affect business viability and the economic attractiveness of these spaces.

5. Cumulative Impact on the Amenity of 1 Danks Street

Taken together—loss of sunlight, overshadowing, loss of privacy, and compromised maintenance access—the proposal materially and unreasonably diminishes the amenity, value, and long-term usability of properties within 1 Danks Street. The scale and design of the development are incompatible with the surrounding context and do not adequately respect the established residential and mixed-use character of the area.

I strongly object to the proposal and height of the building and proposed number of units for the Waterloo Mixed Use Development 881-885 Bourke Street. The height of this tower is close to the 40 story ‘skyscraper’ definition and is totally disproportionate to the other surrounding towers in Waterloo central and Waterloo north area. In comparison Cameo is the tallest tower in the Meriton precinct at 16 storeys. Aria building is 13 storeys, and Toyota is only around 6-8. It will tower over and block sun light and view of the sky for surrounding apartments. it would dominate and be seen by surrounding properties, as well privacy issues with units looking into yards in the surrounding precinct.

A building of this scale would normally be at a major intersection in major cities such as Wolli Creek, or Green Square or Waterloo Metro area where there is infrastructure. As an example, the Infinity Building at Green Square train station which is 60m tall - half the size. The proposed location is not a major intersection, and it does not have the infrastructure to support 850 dwelling. The transport system barely manages with buses at full capacity, and the Green Square and Waterloo train station is too far away for commuters. It would put strain on other infrastructure in the area such as parking and access to health care etc. It would also be complex to build and be disruptive to residents.

A tall building of this type and scale in this location in Waterloo seems completely ad hoc and out of step with the careful considered NSW Government planning of the Waterloo area (and Green Square urban planning).

Please see attached letter

I would like to express my concerns regarding the proposed mixed-purpose development next to our apartment building. While I fully understand the need for affordable and social housing within the community, this particular project raises several practical issues that may negatively impact the safety, livability, and long-term sustainability of the area.

Firstly, our neighbourhood is already experiencing significant congestion. The road network is narrow, traffic conditions are poor during peak hours, and public transport capacity is frequently strained. Introducing a large-scale development with additional residential units and mixed-use facilities will place further pressure on infrastructure that is already unable to meet current demand.

Secondly, there is already a high concentration of government housing in this area. Research and past planning guidelines generally recommend avoiding excessive clustering of social-housing sites, as it can lead to social imbalance, reduced community cohesion, and increased management challenges. A more even distribution across the broader region would be more sustainable and fair to both existing residents and incoming tenants.

Safety and local amenity are also important considerations. With more high-density housing and limited open space, the project may contribute to overcrowding and create conditions that are difficult to supervise and maintain. Residents have seen an increase in disturbances and property-related incidents over the past few years, and further intensification without appropriate support services may worsen these issues.

Finally, the proposal appears to have limited transparency regarding essential supporting measures—such as increased policing, social-service staffing, traffic upgrades, parking solutions, and community facilities. Without a clear and enforceable plan to address these issues, it is difficult to support a project of such scale.

For these reasons, I respectfully request that the planning authority reconsider the scale, location, and design of the development, or explore alternative sites with better infrastructure capacity and a more balanced social-housing distribution.