I have no problems with the proposed rezoning from SP3 Tourist to R1 General Residential, or the proposal to include commercial premises as an additional permitted us.
I do believe the proposal to increase the permitted height to 21m to accommodate for 5 storeys is unnecessary to achieve the balance between commercial, residential, and affordable housing. The height is uncharacteristic for the area, and as the site for the building is higher than the surrounding area it would appear the more imposing. I acknowledge the need for apartments and affordable housing in the area, but believe that from a planning perspective, the council and developers can come up with better proposals than increasing the currently permitted height for a building to feature at an already elevated site.

Objection

I wish to lodge a submission objecting to key aspects of the proposed development at 4–8 Bells Boulevard, Kingscliff. My concerns relate to the proposed building height, parking provision, traffic impacts, affordable housing outcomes and the overall impact on the surrounding area.

This submission is not an objection to development in principle. Appropriate development can contribute positively to Kingscliff when it aligns with established planning controls and respects the character and capacity of the local environment. However, both the scale and intensity of this proposal go beyond what has historically been permitted or supported in this area and risks setting an undesirable precedent.

Current Height Limit in Kingscliff and the Salt Precinct

Under the Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2014, the maximum building height that applies to mixed-use and town centre areas in Kingscliff, including land within and adjacent to the Salt precinct, is 13.6 metres. This height limit reflects a deliberate planning intent to maintain a low-rise coastal village character consistent with the existing built form.

The proposal seeks approval for buildings of up to 18 metres, or five storeys. There is no precedent for development of this type and height within the Salt precinct or the surrounding Kingscliff area. Existing development has consistently complied with established height limits and built-form controls.

In addition, the current community has bought into the area, accepting and supportive of the current height limits. It is part of what makes this area such an attractive place to live and visit.

Excessive Building Height and Departure from Planning Controls

A five-storey development represents a clear departure from the established planning framework. The proposed height significantly exceeds the current height limit and is inconsistent with the scale and character of surrounding development.

While the height increase has been described as modest, an increase from 13.6 metres to 18 metres, or 32%, is substantial in planning terms and materially alters the bulk, scale and visual impact of the development.

Approving a development of this height would undermine the intent of the existing planning controls and weaken confidence in their ongoing application. The community needs to be able to depend on the upholding of planning controls.

Precedent and Cumulative Impact

Approval of this proposal would set a precedent for future developments seeking similar or greater height variations. Once such a precedent is established, it becomes increasingly difficult to resist further departures from the planning framework.

The cumulative impact of approving developments that exceed established height limits would fundamentally alter the character of the Salt precinct and Kingscliff over time, moving it away from the low-rise coastal village identity that has been carefully planned and maintained.

Parking Provision and Likely Shortfall

While the proposal includes basement parking, there is insufficient confidence that the number of spaces provided will adequately meet demand generated by residents, visitors, retail uses, staff and service vehicles.

Kingscliff already experiences pressure on on-street parking, particularly during peak periods. Any shortfall in on-site parking is likely to result in spill-over into surrounding residential streets, reducing amenity for existing residents and increasing congestion.

Traffic Impacts and Side Street Congestion

A development of this scale will generate increased traffic volumes, including private vehicles, deliveries, ride-share services and service vehicles. Bells Boulevard and surrounding streets are local roads designed for a coastal village environment and may not be suitable for intensified traffic levels.

Increased traffic is likely to impact pedestrian safety, cyclist movement, parking availability and overall neighbourhood amenity, particularly in nearby side streets.

Impact on Surrounding Character and Amenity

Taken together — 32% height increase above current planning limits, excessive height, parking pressure, traffic impacts — the proposal risks detracting from the existing character and amenity of the area. Rather than integrating sensitively with its surroundings, the scale of the development has the potential to overwhelm the existing built form and undermine the qualities that define the Salt precinct.

Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully object to the proposed development in its current form. I request that the height be reduced to align with the existing 13.6 metre limit, that parking and traffic impacts be more rigorously addressed, and that greater weight be given to the long-term character and liveability of Kingscliff and the Salt precinct.

The existing SP3 Tourist zoning should be maintained as the previous 2(t) Tourist zoning was a fundamental element of the original (circa 2004) development approval package for the whole of the Salt residential and tourist development . The subject site is situated prominently at the entry to the central village precinct of Salt, all of which is zoned SP3 Tourist. This precinct is largely developed with two tourist hotels. tourist apartments ,a small number of village style strip retail/ restaurant/ cafe tenancies, a surf club and and a central park area.
The SP3 (previously 2(t) ) zoning was originally sought by the developer of Salt to provide a mix of land uses in the whole development which mixed the already significant residential component with a tourist component which provided important tourist accomodation for the Tweed Coast, and which also provided operational employment opportunities in an area which has traditionally had relatively high rates of unemployment.
The subject site was up until fairly recently part of a larger 15,904m2 parcel of land which was originally all zoned 2(t) Tourist. The original master planning intent for the whole of this site was a lowrise apartment building which was to be exclusively for tourist accomodation.
In subsequent years, the Council has approved a two lot subdivision, and the larger lot (11,450m2), which now has a R1 General Residential zoning, has been approved for a small residential subdivision, which is now under construction.
The subject site occupies a prominent position at the major roundabout entry to the Salt Village development. It would be totally inappropriate , and totally out of character, to approve such a large scale group of commercial and apartment buildings at the entry to what is otherwise an existing lowrise village style cluster of hotel, apartment and retail/ restaurant /cafe buildings.
The application also seeks to obtain approval for buildings which significantly exceed the Council's 13.6 metre height limit. The proposed buildings have a maximum height of 21 metres.
All of the existing buildings in the Salt Village comply with the Council's building height limit. Accordingly, it would be totally inappropriate for a building situated on such a prominent corner site at the entry of the lowrise village to be so much higher than the existing buildings.
Building heights have been a contentious and hard fought issue in the Kingscliff area for many years. There would appear to be no planning merit at all for the significant building height concession which is fundamental to this particular application.
The subject site has a maximum floor space ratio of 2:1. The application states that the FSR for the proposed buildings is 1.92:1. This seems to be a relatively low FSR for the scale of the proposed development, and this calculation needs to be independently verified.
Against this background, it is my view that this application should be refused, the existing zoning should be maintained , and there should continue to be compliance with the Council's building height limit .

Alan & Michelle Celinski
110 Commercial Road
Teneriffe
QLD
4005
Owner of Apartment 5312, 9 Gunnamatta Avenue, Kingscliff

[email protected]
0432965753
4th February 2026
To:
The Assessing Officer
Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure

Application Name: Mixed Use Development Bells Boulevarde Kingscliff
Application Number: SSD-83069459
Subject: Objection to Exhibition of State Significant Development Application
Location: 4-8 Bells Boulevard
Proposed Increase From 3 to 5 Storeys and Associated Works
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally object to the Exhibition of State Significant Development application proposing an increase in the height of the proposed development at 4-8 Bells Boulevard unit complex from three (3) storeys 13.8m to five (5) storeys 18m, as well as the inclusion of facilities such as bin rooms and other utilities located directly opposite our investment property at 9 Gunnamatta Avenue
1. Non Compliance With Local Building Height Restrictions
The local planning scheme clearly limits building heights in this area to three storeys, a restriction that has been in place to preserve neighbourhood character, manage density, and protect the amenity of surrounding residences.
The proposal to extend the complex to five storeys represents a significant breach of these planning controls and sets an undesirable precedent for future developments. Allowing such a deviation would undermine the integrity of the established planning framework designed to provide certainty to residents and property owners.
2. Impact on Privacy, Amenity, and Visual Bulk
An increase to five storeys will materially impact the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties, including ours.
The additional height will create a dominating visual presence, overshadow adjoining properties, block out sunsets, increase cross viewing significantly and reduce natural light - all of which degrade the established character and diminish the enjoyment and value of nearby homes and holiday rentals. Visitors come to Kingscliff to enjoy the low density, relaxed living, not to see unit blocks dominate the skyline and stick out like a sore thumb. This proposed application will completely change the look and entry to the resorts and their amenities, resorts that have made Kingscliff the attractive location it has now become.
3. Inappropriate Placement of Bin/Waste Rooms Opposite Our Property
The proposal also includes the placement of communal bin rooms and waste storage areas directly across from our investment property.
This raises several concerns:
• Odour and hygiene issues, particularly during warmer months
• Increased noise, especially during early morning waste collection
• Reduced street appeal, negatively affecting property value and rental attractiveness
• Higher pest activity, such as rodents and insects, commonly associated with large multi unit waste facilities
Bin storage areas belong in discreet, well ventilated, and non intrusive locations, not directly opposite existing residences.
4. Traffic, Parking, and Safety Concerns
A development of five storeys will inevitably increase traffic volume and on street parking pressure. The local infrastructure was not designed to accommodate a development exceeding the prescribed height and density limits.
This poses risks to pedestrian safety and places avoidable strain on communal resources.
5. Request for the Application to Be Refused
Given the clear non compliance with local building restrictions, the detrimental impacts on neighbourhood amenity, and the inappropriate siting of waste facilities, I respectfully request that the Department refuse the development application in its current form.
I am not opposed to improvements or modernisation within the community, but such developments must align with established planning guidelines and respect the liveability of surrounding properties and existing owners.
Thank you for considering this objection. I am available to discuss these concerns further should you require additional information.
I can confirm we have made no reportable political donations in lthe last two years.
I acknowledge that we accept the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure disclaimer and declaration, and confirm that our submission does not contain offensive, threatening, defamatory or inappropriate content.
Yours faithfully,

Alan & Michelle Celinski

1. The proposed Bells Boulevard Stage 3 project is a fantastic step forward for Salt Village, and it has my full backing. We need more vibrant, integrated spaces like this, especially with the inclusion of affordable housing options to keep our community inclusive. It’s clear that the design respects Kingscliff’s coastal roots while providing the modern infrastructure we need.

2. Salt Village needs the permanent housing and upgraded amenities that Kingscliff Stage 3 provides. I particularly like the courtyard-focused design, which makes everyday neighborly interactions easy and natural. This project isn't just about buildings; it’s about creating a walkable, sustainable neighborhood that gets people out of their cars and into the community

The proposed increase to five storeys (21 m) departs from the established three‑storey (approx. 13.6 m) limit for the Salt precinct and would create an abrupt change in scale inconsistent with the village character.
Approval would set a precedent for further high‑rise development along the Tweed coast, undermining the Salt precinct’s intended role.
There is currently limited spare parking available in the Salt precinct.
Due to its proximity rezoning this particular site from tourist to residential will shift away from the Salt Village’s tourism focus, with negative consequences for visitor capacity, local businesses and the hotel’s viability.
The proposed affordable housing contribution is minimal relative to the development scale.

I object to the project on the following grounds.
Height.
The Tweed Shire Council has set the maximum height of buildings at 13.6 meters or three storeys. These building height limits were established through the Tweed Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014. These limits maintain coastal character and reflect the wishes of the local community. This project undermines the expectations of the local community, set as precedent for further height creep in the future and goes against the coastal character that has been achieved in the local area.

Wildlife.
The nearby beach, South Kingscliff Beach, is a known, active turtle nesting site. A conservative assessment of the buildings impact on this nesting site is essential.

The Super Fund owns an apartment 2206 / 2207 at 9 Gunnamatta Ave, Kingscliff.
The major obkections are
- changing the use from Tourist will affect the amenity for owners and guests at adjacent resorts.
- Not eneough parking - There is currently already not eneough parking in the Salt precinct. Changing the use so residents could have multiple cars plus visitors and the application does not even have eneough car spaces for 1 per lot. The retail area would also need so many more spaces , plus the 27 carparks for existing use at Salt
- Whilst developing further strain will be put on parking, noise pollution and dust and dirt from the development affecting our guests as well as our buildings

I strongly support this development. I am a local from Lennox Head and the opening of the Tweed Hospital has provided a cornerstone for community expansion and vibrancy.
This development is not greedy or overstated and reflects the growing needs of this fast expanding community. It reflects the Far North Coast ethos.
I believe it demonstrates the ability to maintain our lifestyle and expectations while managing the expected growth a new significant infrastructure project generates.
In a period of extreme housing crisis this provides capacity for workers to live and work within their community.
We need more of this.

Re Development SSD-83069459 - 4-8 bells Boulevard Kingscliff NSW
1. Concerns with Rezoning subject site from SP3 Tourist to R1 General Residential
2. Strongly Object to the Increase the permitted Height of Building Development standard for the site to a maximum of 21m
3. Strongly Object to Level 4 of the Residential Apartments (Medium Density) 63 Units and Two affordable Unit (for 15-year)
4. No objection to Residential Unit Levels 1-3 if they comply with Current Building
Heights limits
5. No objection to Ground Floor Mixed Use retail
6. No objection to basement parking
7. No objection to Row Housing (Terraces)
8. No objection Low Density Residential