In general, the vital pedestrian bridge should be key to the development of both sides of the wharf with its direct (not an awkward ramped connection) to Market Street footpaths should be a priority with the road ways on the east city side lowered to facilitate this. This has the additional benefit of allowing the connection of Cockle Bay to the city over the roadways without other poor pedestrian connections such as the one near the old IMAX theatre.

Per the attached document, which also suggests improvements to the Harbourside development, lowering the tower to adopt a wider footprint, with a maximum height of 6 stories, and removing the proposed connection into the span of Pyrmont Bridge should be priorities.

While redevelopment of the Harbourside centre can help improve the area, the proposed plan to incorporate a narrow, high storey residential tower and infiltrate the heritage listed Pyrmont bridge are poor aspects of the design.

The proposed raise rear section (or which appears to be this) is a better way to overpass the light rail and connect to the hotels and apartments behind the current Harbourside shopping centre. The parking garage, and the awkward series of pedestrian ramps from the garage, Novotel and poor overpass to Harbourside centre could all be removed if the garage connected into different levels of the new development overpassing the light rail sheltered underneath.

I am happy to discuss all aspects of my improvements if contacted.

There is no question that Cockle Bay Wharf is in need of redevelopment, but to book-end Pyrmont Bridge with high-rise residential towers is too much!

Apart from the destruction of the architectural and heritage history of Pyrmont Bridge and the important historical role it played as the main avenue for goods and services flowing into Market Street, additional high-rise so close to the waters of Cockle Bay will severely impact the enjoyment of many tourists, workers and current residents.

See attachment

We believe the inclusion of the tower will adversely affect the amenity
of Cockle bay. The tower is too close to the water, and will have the
effect of closing in the space around the bay. The view corridor into
Cockle Bay from Market and Kent Street will be adversely affected.
Cockle Bay currently enjoys an open environment which is shared by
areas outside the Bay. The inclusion of the tower will dominate the
area, remove view corridors to the Bay and sky. The effect of this
dominating tower will be to remove the openness the bay and make it
opressive.

We have been living in Astoria Tower for many years and would like to share the views with the future generation, although this will not be possible with the proposed building in the way. With the current construction of Meriton's new building next door, it has already blocked off one side of the apartment for privacy, this leaves limited privacy in the apartment which is the area facing Darling Harbour. Although the position of the proposed building will impede with the rest of the privacy our apartment has to offer, meaning our lives will become like birds in a cage; zero privacy, with many eyes constantly surveying our actions. Also this would mean a lack of natural light and a significant loss of views to the harbour, ultimately hampering our wellbeing. Even though plans and documents said there should be sufficient views for us, this is not true and instead is very inadequate. Furthermore, the harbour is a tourist/entertainment district, with the newly proposed building the significance of the harbour will be lost as well as its dominance against the heritage Pyrmont Bridge. So in order to manage these issues, there should be a height limit, similar to the height of the current Cockle Bay Wharf site. Also, the building design is too bulky and should be narrowed down. Furthermore, because the new building will be commercial, it will create even more traffic on Sussex St, which is already a bustling street full of cars especially during peak hours. This will create further noise pollution that will continue to irritate us. In addition, it does not only affect us but also the childcare centre located at Darling Park, affecting the wellbeing of the children. Moreover, our opinion on the amended proposal is very negative, and would highly suggest that the proposed building to be removed from the plans. If not, a height limit similar to the current Cockle Bay Wharf site should be placed or the building should be moved to an entirely different location, such as towards The Ribbon which is being constructed or the new commercial zone at Barangaroo. If this high rise is successful, it would mean many more applications to develop more high rises around the harbour and eventually mean the loss of the harbour's symbol.

I strongly object this proposal, as currently the waterfront precinct has been overcrowded with tall buildings. Water front areas should be kept away from too many high rise, as this will significantly blocking the view, airways, and access to direct sunlight from the water.
Furthermore this will significantly reduce the value of properties surrounding the precinct, as it will only be even more crowded than it currently is. Therefore I strongly oppose this plan.