To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to formally object,that is strongly object, to the proposed increases in building height and density for the Bourke Street North apartments (from 12 to 31 storeys) and the Young Street tower (from 21 to 38 storeys).

These amendments would increase the number of residential units from 347 to 580—an additional 233 dwellings—while providing only 20 additional parking spaces. This imbalance raises serious concerns about infrastructure capacity and the cumulative impacts on local residents.

This proposal must also be considered alongside the adjacent development at 881–885 Bourke Street (SSD-80441462), which includes a proposed 38-storey building. When combined with other nearby developments, the cumulative effect is estimated to introduce approximately 4,000 new apartments and up to 8,000 additional residents into the area.

The impact of this level of densification is already being felt:

*Parking congestion has significantly worsened. It is increasingly difficult to find on-street parking anywhere near my home, often requiring multiple circuits of surrounding streets to secure a space.
*Public transport capacity is insufficient. Buses are frequently at capacity and pass stops without picking up passengers, including myself, making reliable travel difficult, particularly during peak hours.
*Community facilities are under strain. Booking exercise sessions at the local sports centre has become increasingly difficult, with classes filling well in advance or facilities being so crowded as to be essentially untenable for easy access and usage. This is particular evident with lane swimming
*Daily life disruptions are increasing. I now avoid scheduling early morning appointments due to unreliable transport access.

These issues demonstrate that the current and proposed scale of development is outpacing the capacity of local infrastructure and services.

While I recognise the importance of increasing housing supply, it must be balanced with appropriate investment in infrastructure and a commitment to maintaining liveability. The current proposals do not adequately address these concerns and risk significantly diminishing the quality of life for existing and future residents.

I urge the Committee to reconsider the proposed increases in height and density, and to ensure that any development is aligned with infrastructure capacity, transport availability, and community amenity.

Yours sincerely,
Roger Graham

I object to this proposal as the area is already too conjested . We have no parking in the area . Too many units already . This will affect sunlight coming into my property

I'm the owner of the apartment at 6 Lachlan St, Waterloo NSW 2017,
which is located on the block across the road from the 903-921 Bourke
Street development site.

I have received a message from Mayor Moor regarding the change to
application SSD-95997711, specifically the increase in the number of
storeys in the building and a significant increase in the number of
apartments from 376 to 581.

As a resident of this area, I'm strongly opposed to such a change to
the development plan and believe it diminishes the local amenity and
poses significant threats to all residents of the new development and
neighbourhood.

The development site is surrounded by only secondary roads, and these
existing two-lane roads are already very busy with the current number
of residents. Adding a significant number of cars and commuters will
make the situation worse, leading to traffic blockage. Street parking
will become a nightmare, increase violations, and pose a safety
threat. Additionally, the area doesn't have enough schools and
childcare centres to accommodate the new families. Other amenities,
like shops and grocery stores, are already busy with the existing
number of residents, and the new development doesn't address these
problems. Local bus stops and buses are busy during rush hours.
Another problem is the lack of public community spaces, which are
insufficient for the increased number of residents.

While the existing buildings maintained a balance between houses and
public community areas, the new development offers significant density
growth and very few shared common spaces.

I strongly object to the change in the development plan and hope the
project stays unchanged with the previously planned 376 apartments.

I am writing to register my objection to the project - the details of my objection are fully outlined in the attached PDF.

Submission Objecting to State Significant Development Application SSD-95997711

I am writing to object to the proposed amendment to the approved mixed‑use development at 903–921 Bourke Street, Waterloo.
The amended proposal seeks to significantly increase the height and density of the development beyond what was originally approved and beyond the established planning controls. In particular, the two tallest towers are proposed to increase in height by approximately 81% and 158%. These increases represent a substantial escalation in scale that cannot reasonably be characterised as a minor modification.
The proposed height increases raise serious overshadowing concerns, with likely adverse impacts on surrounding residential areas, streets, and public spaces, including areas proximate to the Waterloo Heritage Conservation Area. The loss of sunlight and increased visual dominance are inconsistent with good urban design principles and established expectations under the original approval.
The amended tower heights would also result in excessive visual bulk, creating a development that dominates the surrounding built environment and fails to provide an appropriate transition in scale. In addition, the increased height and bulk raise concerns regarding loss of privacy for nearby residents due to additional overlooking.
The site’s adjacency to the Waterloo Heritage Conservation Area further heightens concern. The proposed increases fail to demonstrate a sensitive response to the scale and character of the heritage area and risk diminishing its setting and significance, contrary to heritage conservation objectives.
Despite the scale of the additional height and density sought, the amendment does not demonstrate a commensurate increase in public or community benefit that would justify the increased impacts. The uplift appears to primarily benefit the proponent, while the surrounding community bears the consequences.
For these reasons, the proposed amendment represents an unacceptable increase in scale, resulting in adverse amenity and heritage impacts and an outcome inconsistent with the intent of the original approval. I respectfully request that the amendment not be approved.

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed major changes to the development plans for the former Water Board site (903-921 Bourke Street, Waterloo).
The proposed increase in height—from 12 to 30 storeys on Bourke St, and from 21 to 37 storeys on Young St—is excessive. This represents a ~67% increase in building scale, which is a fundamental departure from the originally approved concept.
My key concerns as a local resident include:
Visual Impact & Neighbourhood Character: The proposed height is drastically out of scale with the surrounding Waterloo precinct.
Overshadowing: Towers of this magnitude (30-37 storeys) will significantly reduce solar access to neighbouring homes and public spaces.
Infrastructure Strain: A 67% increase in density will place unmanageable pressure on local traffic, parking, and public transport, which are already at capacity.
Wind Impacts: Increasing height to 37 storeys poses a risk of severe wind tunnel effects at street level, impacting pedestrian safety and comfort.
If council approves this, terrible precedents will be set evading proper precinct planning & the entire area of Waterloo will suffer forever.
The creation of three separate lots facilitates future staged State Significant Development (SSD) modifications or sales of individual parcels, deliberately evading comprehensive precinct-wide assessment of traffic, servicing and amenity impacts required under Danks South planning controls.

I am the owner of Unit 202, 17–19 Danks Street, Waterloo, located immediately adjacent to the proposed development site. I wish to register my objection to the amended application seeking to increase the number of apartments from 376 to 580 and the maximum building height from 65m to 126m.

Excessive height and incompatibility with existing built form

The proposed increase to 126m is entirely out of character with the surrounding Danks Street precinct. Existing residential buildings in the immediate area, including mine, are predominantly low-to-mid-rise. A tower of this scale would create significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties, private open spaces, and the public domain — particularly during winter months when sun access is already limited. The proposal has not adequately demonstrated compliance with the solar access provisions of the Apartment Design Guide, and I request that detailed shadow analysis be made publicly available for the amended envelope.

Inadequate public transport infrastructure

The site is over 1km from the nearest metro station, with no direct, high-frequency rail connection within comfortable walking distance. The existing bus network along Bourke Street and Botany Road is already at or near capacity during peak periods. Approving a 54% increase in dwelling numbers without a commensurate commitment to public transport upgrades would place an unreasonable burden on existing infrastructure and is inconsistent with the principle that density should follow transport investment, not precede it.

Traffic and parking impacts

The surrounding road network — particularly Danks Street, Bourke Street, and the Lachlan Street intersection — already experiences significant congestion during morning and evening peaks. An additional 204 apartments will generate substantial vehicle movements regardless of any reduced parking ratios applied to the development. The cumulative effect of this project alongside other approved and under-construction developments in Waterloo and Green Square has not been adequately assessed. I request that an updated Traffic Impact Assessment be prepared that accounts for all committed development in the precinct, not just this site in isolation.

I am the owner of Unit 202, 17–19 Danks Street, Waterloo, located immediately adjacent to the proposed development site. I wish to register my objection to the amended application seeking to increase the number of apartments from 376 to 580 and the maximum building height from 65m to 126m.

Excessive height and incompatibility with existing built form

The proposed increase to 126m is entirely out of character with the surrounding Danks Street precinct. Existing residential buildings in the immediate area, including mine, are predominantly lower-to-mid-rise. A tower of this scale would create significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties, private open spaces, and the public domain — particularly during winter months when sun access is already limited. The proposal has not adequately demonstrated compliance with the solar access provisions of the Apartment Design Guide, and I request that detailed shadow analysis be made publicly available for the amended envelope.

Inadequate public transport infrastructure

The site is over 1km from the nearest metro station, with no direct, high-frequency rail connection within comfortable walking distance. The existing bus network along Bourke Street and Botany Road is already at or near capacity during peak periods. Approving a 54% increase in dwelling numbers without a commensurate commitment to public transport upgrades would place an unreasonable burden on existing infrastructure and is inconsistent with the principle that density should follow transport investment, not precede it.

Traffic and parking impacts

The surrounding road network — particularly Danks Street, Bourke Street, and the Lachlan Street intersection — already experiences significant congestion during morning and evening peaks. An additional 204 apartments will generate substantial vehicle movements regardless of any reduced parking ratios applied to the development. The cumulative effect of this project alongside other approved and under-construction developments in Waterloo and Green Square has not been adequately assessed. I request that an updated Traffic Impact Assessment be prepared that accounts for all committed development in the precinct, not just this site in isolation.

I am writing as a local resident of Waterloo to formally object to the proposed changes to the development at 903–921 Bourke Street.

The plan to increase the height of the Bourke Street North building from 12 to 30 storeys, along with the Young Street Tower from 21 to 37 storeys, is a significant and unreasonable shift from what was originally approved by the City of Sydney. Such a substantial increase in height would dramatically change the scale and density of the project, as well as its impact on the surrounding area.

I have serious concerns about how these changes would affect both current residents and the wider community.

To begin with, the increased density would place additional pressure on infrastructure that is already struggling to cope. Local roads are congested, parking is limited, and public transport services are often overcrowded. Introducing a large number of additional residents would only intensify these existing issues.

There are also concerns about whether community facilities can support this level of growth. Access to schools, open green spaces, and recreational amenities is already limited, and there is no clear plan for how these services would meet the needs of a significantly larger population.

Overshadowing is another major issue. Buildings of this height would likely reduce sunlight to nearby homes and public areas, which would negatively affect living conditions and the usability of shared spaces.

In addition, developments of this scale can create strong wind tunnel effects at street level, potentially impacting pedestrian safety and comfort. The visual presence of towers of this size would also be out of character with the existing neighbourhood.

The construction phase is also a concern, as it would result in ongoing disruption due to noise, increased truck movements, and general construction activity in an area that is already heavily impacted by development.

For these reasons, I strongly oppose the proposed amendments.