I live two blocks west of North Street.   The scale of this development is out of scale with the existing local community in which it will be located - largely town houses, stand alone houses and semi detached homes.   Prior to Inner West Council's revised development plan this site was approved for 5 stories.   This seemed fair and reasonable given the corner of the existing building on William and North is four stories.  Under the current Inner West development plan the limit is 6 stories if additional social housing is included.

Eleven stories is not acceptable. 

North St is a narrow street and most residents do not have access to off street parking.  The proposed building will overshadow most existing homes in North St from northern and eastern sun light.  North St is an extremely narrow street and this development will place extreme pressure on already limited parking spaces and road access which currently is not designed for two way traffic. 
The proposed building is not required to provide parking for all units and William St is a busy thorough fare, also with limited parking. 

The proposed development is a 5 - 10 minute walk to the light rail and bus services to the city such as the 440 on Norton St. 
The light rail already runs at capacity in peak hour.   Increased public transport would be required to support potentially additional 300 - 400 residents in this area. 

It is expected that the children's playground on the corner of William and North St will be blocked from eastern sunlight as could the childcare centre further along William St, making these locations less attractive and healthy for use by children. 
I support the steps taken by Inner West Council to increase density.  11 stories is simply too large and sits outside the carefully developed planning framework approved by the council.

This project is not compliant with many of the Inner West Local Environmental Plan Controls as well as other Development Control Plan guidelines. Supporting documentation obfuscates key controls such as floor space ratio, building height and solar access.

The proposal to rezone this site is not in keeping with the existing character of the neighbourhood and will negatively impact many residents in the area. Further investigation should be undertaken to ensure solar access is preserved to surrounding dwellings. The submitted documentation for shadow diagrams is too small to be able to sensibly assessed and is potentially misleading.

The proposal to increase the floor space ratio from 0.5:1 to 3.1:1 greatly undermines the low to medium density residential nature of the neighbourhood and is not in keeping with state planning legislation. Neighbouring adaptive re-use warehouse developments demonstrate the kind of precedent that this development should be working towards - retaining the facade and not exceeding the height of existing walls. The scale of this development is something to be expected in a Transport-Oriented Development site, not R1 General Residential. The neighbouring Allen Estate is also a good example of the kind of development that can be achieved without egregiously exceeding planning controls.

Separately from planning controls, construction of this development will place undue strain on surrounding small streets, limited on-street parking, bus and bicycle access.

While I do not object to this site being redeveloped for housing, the proposed developments to date - including those previously proposed and denied via Council and the Land and Environment Court - do not provide the right balance between dwellings and the existing residential neighbourhood. Approving this development through the SSDA pathway will undermine local residents' faith in all levels of planning controls that are designed to preserve our neighbourhoods and local amenity.

KEY OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT 40–76 WILLIAM STREET, LEICHHARDT

The proposed buildings are far too high and bulky for this location and are out of character with the surrounding neighbourhood.

The excessive height will significantly reduce sunlight to neighbouring homes, leaving many residents with darker living spaces and a reduced quality of life.

Many homeowners have invested substantial amounts of money into purchasing and maintaining their properties, often paying a premium for natural light, open outlooks and the established character of Leichhardt.

The loss of sunlight is not a minor issue. Natural light is essential for wellbeing, comfort, mental health and the enjoyment of one's home.

Reduced access to sunlight and open space may also negatively affect property values and the liveability of surrounding homes.

Existing residents should not be expected to bear the long-term impacts of an oversized development that prioritises maximising apartment numbers over community amenity.

Many local families have spent years, and in some cases decades, building their lives in Leichhardt because of its unique lifestyle, sense of community and village character.

Families should not be forced to accept significant overshadowing, reduced privacy, increased noise and a dramatic change to their living environment in order to accommodate a development that is clearly out of scale with the area.

Good planning should balance the need for additional housing with the protection of existing residents and their quality of life. This proposal fails to achieve that balance.

The height and bulk of the buildings will create permanent impacts on neighbouring properties that cannot be reversed once construction is complete.

The proposal does not appear to adequately address the impact of increased traffic on the surrounding road network.

Has a comprehensive traffic simulation been undertaken to assess the impact of more than 200 new apartments relying primarily on a limited number of local streets?

Existing residents already experience congestion in the area, and the addition of hundreds of new residents and vehicles is likely to place further pressure on local roads, parking and pedestrian safety.

The proposal raises concerns about the capacity of local infrastructure, including roads, public transport, schools, health services and community facilities.

The ongoing uncertainty surrounding this development is already creating significant stress and anxiety for local residents and families.

The potential loss of sunlight, privacy, outlook and neighbourhood character may have long-term impacts on residents' wellbeing and mental health.

People choose to live in Leichhardt because of its lifestyle, community atmosphere, heritage character and relatively peaceful residential environment. This proposal threatens those qualities.

The interests and concerns of existing residents appear to have been overlooked in favour of maximising development potential.

The scale of the proposal is excessive and does not represent appropriate or responsible planning for the area.


CLOSING STATEMENT

For all of the above reasons, I strongly object to this proposal and respectfully request that the Department refuse the application in its current form. The long-term impacts on residents, neighbourhood character, local infrastructure, traffic, safety, wellbeing and amenity far outweigh the limited public benefits claimed by the applicant. A development of this scale is not an appropriate outcome for Leichhardt and should not proceed without substantial reductions in height, bulk and density.

Public transport can’t sustain the current Leichhardt population. Light rail is overcrowded and you often have to wait for next light rail it is so bad. The traffic trying to get out of Norton street is already a nightmare and even worse since the rozelle interchange. Adding another 200+ apartments will add to the disaster.

I own a property directly adjacent to the proposed development and strongly object to this application. I share the concerns expressed by many local residents that a 200+ unit apartment complex will place significant additional pressure on an area that is already struggling with traffic congestion, limited parking, and pedestrian safety. The proposed nine-storey building is also out of character with the existing streetscape, which is predominantly made up of low-rise terrace-style homes, and would fundamentally alter the character and amenity of the neighbourhood.
Of particular concern is the scale and density of the development. Introducing more than 200 additional dwellings into this location will substantially increase the local population and intensify demand on roads, parking, and public infrastructure. The surrounding streets already experience gridlock during morning and evening peak periods, and this proposal is likely to exacerbate these existing issues, resulting in longer travel times, reduced safety for pedestrians, and a diminished quality of life for current residents.

My first point is that the people proposing, designing, building, approving and permitting this development are all unaffected by it and are disinterested in the comments and concerns of those who are affected by it. This is a development for developers and their enablers. It is too big and overcrowds an already high density suburb. Bringing hundreds more cars will further choke the narrow streets around the suburb. There is no space for hundreds of new residents on already at capacity public transport and public infrastructure such as schools and hospitals. Cloaking it as having value because it has 5% affordable housing is an insult because all those in the affordable housing will be kicked out onto the streets after 15 years have elapsed. The development will then have 0% affordable housing after 15 yrs of those residents having to use the "poor door" and living as second class residents of a luxurious apartment block. To propose a taller and larger building after a smaller project had already been rejected suggests that these developers have an "in" with the bureaucrats and politicians. Rather than crash land this huge development in our suburb start planning with the local community FIRST and you might get something that helps everyone across the suburb and all people who want to live here.

This part of Leichhardt has no significant public transport infrastructure to support the additional population and traffic that will be caused by the project. Buses to and from the city are already at capacity and the light rail doesn’t provide an alternate option given the length of time it takes to get to the city and the small carriages (the amount of people waiting for the city bus outside Lilyfield light rail is clearly an indicator of this). Furthermore, the significant height of the building is out of sync with the entire area and will significantly overshadow the surrounding streets and not be integrated into the streetscape.

please refer to attached submission and photo