Dear Major Projects,
I attach my submission/objection in relation to SSD‑80626208.
Yours faithfully,
David Liebhold

Good evening

Yet again, another proposed development that gives rise to a net loss of affordable housing and a gain of too many car spaces for a building in a major transport hub. These features run directly counter to the NSW Government's intent of building more affordable housing.

I understand that the developer would demolish two existing low-rise buildings that currently contain 106 dwellings (including 50 studios), and replace them with a just 65 dwellings (24 two-bedroom and 41 three-bedroom apartments). Only two of these are proposed to be Affordable Housing in perpetuity.

There are no studio or one-bedroom apartments proposed at all. That means fewer smaller, more attainable homes in a location that is exceptionally well-served by public transport, including a major train station and bus interchange.

The proposal also increases basement excavation from three to five levels, delivering 140 car spaces (including 118 for residents), along with motorcycle and bicycle parking. For a site located right next to a major transport hub, this level of car parking is excessive and sends the wrong signal about how the area should function. I would like to see modelled the likely impact on the existing infrastructure.

Kind regards

I am the owner of 31 Cameron Street Edgecliff where I have resided for some three decades. I want to register a strong objection to the proposed development at 8-10 New McLean Street. While not objecting to a sympathetic redevelopment or upgrade of the site, the proposed plans indicate a gross overkill that would change the entire nature of the locale irrevocably. All this while failing a number of criteria that should prevent such over-development taking place. I am aware that you will have correspondence outlining such concerns in detail. Rather than bog the department down with repetitive argument let me state simply and clearly why this development application should - for a number of compelling reasons - be denied:

1. It is completely inappropriate for the area
2. It overwhelms local infrastructure
3. It fails the 'no net loss of dwellings' test, with no provision for genuinely affordable units
4. Construction breaches acceptable noise and vibration levels
5. Entails removal of 50% of the sites trees and overshadowing of Trumper Park
6. Unacceptable traffic congestion with no plan for alleviating it
7. Unpleasant local environmental change with the introduction of overshadowing and the creation of wind tunnels.
Yours sincerely,
Bani McSpedden

Refer to the Council Staff submission and annexures.