The accounted for number of car parks is insufficient for the size of the project. It is unreasonable and unrealistic to not account for every apartment to have a car spot. Occupants having a car would be the exception, not the rule.
The surrounding roads are not equipped for street parking.
Further, the planned height of the buildings is much too high for the area. It is a suburban area after all. 13 storey unit blocks do not go with terrace houses.
This development is not Marrickville nor should it be.

I strongly object to SSD-76927247 - The Timberyards by RTL Co.
As a resident in the local area, I have significant concerns especially in regard to parking issues.
Recently Wicks Park development was approved, this is directly opposite on Victoria Road. The area is minimal compared to what is proposed for The Timber Yards. We have been impacted by this development from when building works began, no parking for residents due to the huge number of workers, now issues continue as there is insufficient parking for the residents who live there, let alone their visitors who park in adjacent streets.
I refer to the Environmental Impact Statement
3.13.3 Carparking The development proposes a total of 278 carparking spaces, which includes 238 residential spaces (including 22 equipped with a car share vehicle), 33 retail spaces and 7 RTL Co staff parking spaces.
How can this minute amount of parking accommodate the 1,188 dwellings considering that most people own at least 1 car? Where will all these people park? Yes, not everyone has a car, but the majority do. This is insufficient.
Also, the bulk and scale of the proposed development facing Sydenham Rd. Consideration needs to be taken on the overshadowing and privacy of those residents whose properties are directly opposite (as the design breaches the 3-storey height limit to build 8 storeys) as well as privacy for those who reside in Frampton Avenue.
There also seems to be an insufficient amount of housing for larger families. The development only has allowed 40 x 3-bedroom dwellings from the 1,188.
More appropriate planning is needed regarding the increase of 1,188 households. Marrickville Metro shopping Centre is overcrowded as it is. There are insufficient medical practices, childcare facilities. How will local primary and high schools cope with the additional numbers?
Please take into consideration what the residents are requesting. This proposal has many things that will further develop Marrickville into a more vibrant precinct, but consideration needs to be taken regarding the negative the impacts on residents who already live here.
Thank you.

The building at 8 storeys high is not in keeping with the surroundings. I recognise the need for medium density developments but this is too much. If it was under 4 floors it would be ok.

I am writing to formally lodge my objection to the proposed development at The Timberyards by RTL Co. This development poses significant concerns for the local community and I urge the council to reject this proposal for the following reasons:
1. Exceeding Legal Height Restrictions & Overshadowing
The proposed development exceeds the legally permitted height limit, resulting in an excessive overshadowing of surrounding residential properties. This infringement will severely impact natural light access and the general livability of affected homes, contravening existing planning regulations.
2. Proximity to Primary School & Safety Risks
The proposed residential and delivery driveways are located on Farr Street, a major pedestrian thoroughfare for children walking to the nearby primary school. The increased traffic, including heavy vehicles making deliveries, creates a serious safety hazard for young students and their families, increasing the likelihood of accidents.
3. Incompatibility with Local Character & Inadequate Buffering
The design of the development fails to harmonise with the established character of the local community. The absence of an appropriate buffer between the development and nearby residences will significantly impact privacy, aesthetics and the overall residential atmosphere. The scale and density of this project are entirely out of place in this area.
4. Traffic Congestion & Parking Deficiency
The addition of 1,188 apartments will place an unsustainable burden on the existing road network. The proposed allocation of only 240 car spaces for over 1,000 apartments is grossly inadequate, forcing additional vehicles onto surrounding streets where parking is already limited. Residents and visitors will struggle to find parking, further exacerbating congestion and frustration for the existing community.
5. Insufficient Infrastructure to Support High-Density Living
Unlike cities such as Tokyo and London, our community lacks the developed public transport infrastructure necessary to support high-density populations. Without substantial investment in transport, road and essential services including medical, school and childcare facilities , this development will place undue strain on public amenities, emergency services and local facilities.
Given these serious concerns, I strongly urge the council to reject this development proposal in its current form. The wellbeing and safety of existing residents, particularly school children, must be prioritised profit and an over an ill-conceived high-density project that disregards the character and capacity of our community.
I appreciate your consideration of this objection and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Amanda Beveridge (local resident)

I totally reject this proposal as a total over stretch of developer flex. It does not address any concerns of the local area and will only serve to reduce the quality of life in the neighbourhood.
There is little affordable housing. Less than 10% of these units are set aside for Affordable Housing. This plan does not provide enough housing for low-income residents. In today's climate we need more housing assistance.

The design does not suit the character of the neighbourhood and it it too high. The Sydenham Road block is 8 storeys high. The legal maximum is 3 storeys.
This increased height significantly impacts the existing homes on surrounding roads by overshadowing, creating wind tunnels and reducing privacy in existing homes being overlooked by this monstrosity.

Parking in the area will become impossible. There are 1,188 units being built, with only 216 parking spaces planned. Where are the other 972 households park? This is ridiculous! I know it is close to public transport but people who can afford to buy here will have a car. It is naive to say otherwise. The number of parking spots must be increased.

The numbers of apartments with less than two bedrooms is ridiculous. This doesn't address the middle housing gap so prevalent in the Inner West see article https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/the-sydney-suburbs-excluded-from-missing-middle-housing-plan-20250226-p5lfa8.html
Of the 1,188 units coming, there are only 40 3-bedroom units and 275 2-bedroom units. This plan does not offer housing for families who desperately need it. More 3 and 4 bedroom apartments are needed to support families.

I do hope that the council will see fit to block this development in its current form. It needs to be only up to 6 stories and design d to step back appropriately from the roads. There needs to be more multi bedroom apartments and much more parking.

This submission supports the proposed Marrickville Timberyards development. The development would provide 1,200 new residential units in a high-demand area. Marrickville is experiencing significant housing demand, and this additional supply would contribute to addressing housing affordability challenges in the region. Increasing housing supply in areas of high demand is consistent with established economic principles for improving affordability.

The development is located approximately 10 minutes walking distance from Sydenham Metro station and approximately 7 minutes from shops on Marrickville Road. The development also includes a substantial number of bicycle parking spaces, providing residents with options that prioritise active and public transport. The emphasis on non-car transport options would contribute to reduced car emissions, supporting climate change mitigation objectives and improving air quality.

Marrickville Public School is presently below its capacity. The proposed development would help increase enrolments, ensuring efficient use of existing public infrastructure.

The development includes retail space, affordable housing and public space contributions. These elements would deliver additional economic and social benefits to the local community beyond the direct housing supply benefits. Furthermore, the development features high-quality design elements that would be visually appealing and integrate effectively with the surrounding area.

The Marrickville Timberyards development would deliver significant economic and social benefits through increased housing supply, appropriate transport connections, utilisation of existing educational infrastructure, community contributions, and quality design. For these reasons, the development warrants support.

While it's unlikely that I personally won't be able to live in this exact region given that it is currently more financially feasible as a student to continue living with my parents, since I'm still a resident of Sydney I would like to see and encourage the proliferation of healthy urban developments such as this in shaping the character and liveliness of my city as a whole.

The planned development is well-located and the increased density will benefit the surrounding area and beyond. In addition to allowing for new integrated retail and commercial spaces, nearby existing businesses will see increased patronage. Proximity to these shops and services, as well as Sydenham and Marrickville station will encourage forms of transport other than driving, including cycling, walking, and public transit which will result in lower emissions that would result from having potential residents live far from services and amenities by which the only reasonable means of transport would be by private vehicle. These are the features of accessibility that make this area an excellent location for development and urban densification.

In comparison to traditionally detached housing, this form of residence makes for a much more efficient use of land space. If the corresponding number of detached houses were to be built on new land, it would result in a footprint many times greater than the space taken up by the development. Swathes of land would have to be cleared, infrastructure would have to stretch further, and again, potential residents would likely find themselves having only the option of driving in order to get anywhere.

The height of this project is proportionally not in keeping with the area and the nearby streets and particularly across on the road on Sydenham Rd and the street perpendicular, Frampton Av. Parking on these streets is already over subscribed and with so few parking spaces in the new development the local streets will be even more congested and therefore unsafe for pedestrians and more importantly the elderly and children in the area. A ratio of only one car space to six apartments is extremely short sighted. There should be at least one parking spot for every apartment and anything less is simply poor planning. There is a huge and inaccurate assumption that the new owners/tenants will not have vehicles. This is an irresponsible assumption . The local schools and child care centres are overcrowded. How is the council preparing for over an additional 1188 apartments without the infrastructure and facilities? The walkway along Sydenham Rd to Sydenham Metro and Train Station is in disrepair and you want over an additional 1000 families committed to using it as they can not own a car. This whole development is unrealistic and without consideration for current and future residents.

I am a very nearby resident living on Sydenham Road, with two young children. I am concerned about an influx of parked vehicles driving competition for parking in the area. I note that there are proposed to be almost 1,000 more apartments at the new development than there will be parking spaces. I use my car to get to daycare, supermarkets and child activities, and so I worry about regularly being forced to park my car hundreds of metres away.

If this development goes ahead without major adjustments to the parking deficit, I would ask government to provide parking security to the existing residents of Sydenham Road and other streets with a permit system, similar to what currently exists for residents of Frampton Street and Garners Avenue.

Marrickville is in high demand, and this will add to housing supply and improve affordability. The location is ripe for renewal and is in close proximity to both public transport and shops. The project also adds affordable housing and a diverse mix of housing options, which is perfect for young people. It is an excellent project for a rather bleak part of Marrickville.