I am submitting this objection to the proposed development at 4-8 Bells Boulevard as a regular visitor to the area who will shortly become a Kingscliff resident.
I am particularly concerned on 4 counts:
1. The proposed height and mass of the building relative to its location
2. The proportion of affordable units
3. The dubious benefit of incorporating so many retail units
4. The very limited window for submission of objections.

In addition, I am very concerned that approval of this proposal will establish a precedent for future developments in the Kingscliff area and thus effectively supersede the existing, carefully protected height regulations.

1. Proposed height and mass
The sheer size and height of the building, as viewed from the entry to SALT Village will overly dominate the area and significantly take away from its present 'coastal' character. It will, in effect, become the major building in the locale and be seen as primarily residential as opposed to Peppers and Mantra, which presently define the area as primarily a tourist resort.
Much emphasis is placed on the building's role as a transition from the typically 2-storey buildings of Phase 1 &2 to the larger buildings of Peppers and Mantra Hotels. However, it will actually be a dramatic step-up in height from 2 to 5 storeys and will mask the hotel buildings as viewed from ground level from the South. The majority of both the Mantra and Peppers buildings being less than 20 metre roof height as indicated in Figure 40 of the Environmental Impact Statement.
It is recognised that the 13.6 metre roof height option, described in Section 4.17 of the Statement is in many ways sub-optimal but restricting the height of the building to 3 rising to 4 storeys would make for a far more meaningful and attractive transition.

2. The proportion of affordable units
Much is made in the E.I.S of the inclusion of 2 affordable units. While the inclusion of affordable units is laudable and may provide an argument for positive consideration of other aspects of the proposal, a total of just 2 units is really immaterial. There should be at least 6 - or say 10% of the total - for them to be taken into serious consideration.

3. The dubious benefit of incorporating so many retail units
I am far from convinced of the merit of including 10 retail units along Bells Boulevard and Gunnamatta Avenue. Not only does this, of itself, conflict with the proposed R1 zoning and require special permission, it is very uncertain whether sufficient suitable tenants could be found for such spaces. In addition, while specific parking has been allowed for in the basement level of the proposed building, it is highly likely that customers would prefer to find space at street level. This will add to the shortage that is already very evident, at peak times, adjacent to the retail strip behind Mantra. Any legal or other parking on Bells Boulevard or Gunnamatta Avenue will considerably disrupt traffic flow due to the comparative narrowness of these streets.

4. The very limited window for submission of objections
The Environmental Impact Statement describes a seemingly full programme of consultation taking place during June/July 2025. However, that is not peak period for tourism so individuals such as myself would not necessarily be aware of the proposal. Additionally, I understand that at the meeting of local residents, the building discussed was described as a modest increase from the 13.6 metre height restriction to 18 metres as opposed to the 21 metres now proposed. Very little publicity has been given to the proposed change of zoning and change of building height. The Exhibition window of 2 weeks has made it extremely difficult to alert people to these highly significant changes. As a minimum, additional submission time should be allowed for proper consultation with those affected by the proposals, particularly local residents and regular visitors.

The height limit of this proposal exceeds the local limits and is not inline with the rest of the community,

Dear Sir/Madam
I would like to express my objection to this proposed development based on the following issues.
Firstly, I object to the height of Stage 3 of this development as it exceeds the Kingscliff height restrictions, and such a change will do nothing to enhance the aesthetics of this area and the township of Kingscliff. It will in fact have the opposite affect being detrimental to the surrounding local environment. As well, in the stage 3 development their is an anomaly. Tweed Council have indicated that the number of units do not correspond with the higher number of units the applicant has indicated in their documents. This should 'ring alarm bells' , that may indicate a future amendment to this proposal. ie - a sixth level
Secondly, the proposal does not appear to cater for sufficient parking and garbage collection. Where will the bins be placed for each of the residences and apartment living ? As Gunnamatta Ave is narrow and will probably be used for excess parking. When this occurs where will the bins be placed for collection ? Gunnamatta Ave will be untrafficable.
Finally, the Bush Stone - curlew being an endangered species can locate itself randomly throughout the salt precinct and surrounding areas. My concerns are with this development, it will push these endangered species into areas that aren't suitable for them and will impact on their existence.
I appreciate your time in this matter and the points of concerns we have raised.
Regards
Rebecca and William Langdon

I wish to object to the project as a local resident impacted by this development. I have no objection to the redevelopment of the site only the proposed scope.
The building height proposed is at odds with local council height restrictions and would exceed the height of the current local businesses (Peppers and Mantra). I note the recent construction of the property adjacent to Coles Casuarina. This resulted in four levels. Five levels are now sought which would provide a precedent for even greater heights in the future.
The proposal would add significantly to local vehicular traffic. While there are a significant parking spaces, these would, I believe, become overwhelmed with additional car traffic by the unit residents and holiday rentals. This I believe will cause increased parking in and around on local streets. Traffic on Casuarina Way will be impacted, particularly at the round-a-bout on Bells Boulevard.
The project gives an impression of a cramped development. I am unclear of the benefits of the provision of retail outlets at this site. There are a number of locations around where similar retail outlets have been created , but are long time vacant.
I am amazed that this is a SSD, it appears an overdevelopment based on profit rather than easing residential shortfalls.

I own a lot in the Class 3 residential apartment building located at 9 Gunnamatta Ave Kingscliff registered as Strata Plan 73905.
I object to the proposal to increase the height limit from 3 to 5 storeys.
The original DA consents of 23April 2003 for the Salt Beach Precinct envisaged that the site in question could be developed for Class 2 residential apartments, with a 3 storey height limitation .
1. The proposed development would severely impact the vista to the west of SP 73905 and add to the already existing destruction of local nesting native birds and wildlife.
2. Parking is already a serious problem in the outside parking areas of Mantra at Salt and also the surrounding streets, in
particular Barrel Street.
3. The lack of availability for parking at SP 73905 is negatively affecting access to owners and guests.
4. Any increase in traffic from the proposed development will cause impediments to flow of traffic into and out
of Salt. What traffic mitigation is planned for all the additional vehicles and consequent congestion inthe Salt precinct.

The zone height limits for the Kingscliff region was addressed again only a few years ago and this submission greatly exceeds it. All of the surrounding commercial properties are 3 story buildings, this one not only wants to go another two stories, but it is situated on the highest ground in the immediate area meaning it will be seen from all directions far away. If this is approved then that opens the door for all commercial properties to be of similar height, and there is a great amount of redevelopment happening in this town. Of course I understand the developers want to maximise their profits but the rules were in place well before they acquired the property. Furthermore this is very close to residential properties who I'm sure don't want to see a massively high development overlooking their properties. There is no reason this development should exceed the height limit in such a beautiful regional area. It is not in keeping with the existing environment.

We have resided in beautiful Salt for twenty years. As with development we have noticed many changes some of which improve this community and others which don’t. But we continue to love the ambience, the location and not living in the crowded Gold Coast. The proposal to increase the building height to 21m will be a precedent which gives the green light for future high rises and the resulting crowded skyline. There should be no five stories! Ever! That land has been left waiting for the political and economic climate to present as flexible in removing the height restriction to maximise the return for the developers. The community doesn’t win nor does our Tweed Valley.

I strongly support the proposed Stage 3 development at Bells Boulevard. This is a thoughtful, well-designed mixed-use precinct that will bring long-overdue vitality to Salt Village while respecting Kingscliff’s coastal character.

The proposal delivers much-needed housing diversity, including affordable housing, through the proposed MU1 zoning. The mix of 1, 2, and 3-bedroom apartments will allow a broader range of people to live and work locally, supporting a more inclusive and sustainable community. The modest and well-considered building height increase is reasonable given the significant community benefits and the way heights are carefully stepped across the site to minimise impacts.

The design prioritises community outcomes, with a central courtyard, shared spaces, wellness areas, and active lifestyle facilities that encourage social connection and healthy living. Public realm improvements, greenery, bike parking, and strong street engagement will create a welcoming, walkable environment that reduces car dependence and enhances everyday life.

Importantly, this project activates a long-vacant site with high-quality urban design, supports local employment, and strengthens nearby businesses. It strikes the right balance between progress and preservation, delivering thoughtful density while maintaining the village feel.

Overall, this is exactly the kind of vibrant, community-focused development Salt Village needs, and I fully support it.

Project will bring issue with having too many people around and have a negative impact on surrounding businesses.

I don’t agree with a 5 story building.
Currently we don’t have enough parking and the traffic increase would be considerable