All recent comments on applications from North Sydney Council, NSW

I object to this. The street is not the place for a motel and can you imagine how bad the noise will carry if this is set as 24 hours - the poor residents above! It's a quiet residential neighbourhood so let's be sensible and keep it this way instead of appeasing greedy developers.

Here we go again. DA number 12.

This is not an area for a motel, this is high residential. The design of 13 Eden street does not accommodate a 24 hour operation on the ground floor. The central courtyard is a void where any minor noise is heightened by the design. As a resident that faces the courtyard I hear everything. Doors, conversations, walking on the tiled floor, I can imagine what a 24/7 operation would be like, unbearable.

The stress and mental health that goes along with every DA is a factor in our lives now.

Amanda

This is a residential area. Motels, which generally are accessible 24x7, are not appropriate for this predominantly residential. There's plenty of vacant office space with suitable off street parking in the North Sydney CBD for such a development.

If per chance you don't see the light on this matter then scrap the name of Eden Street and replace it with Hell Drive.

WE CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL FAR EXCEEDS WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR THIS AREA. NEUTRAL BAY HAS SEEN SEVERAL OLDER BUILDINGS DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED BY VERY MODERN BUILDINGS, MANY OF WHICH ARE PARTIALLY EMPTY, WITHOUT CONTRIBUTING IN ANY WAY TO COMMUNITY LIFE AND THE VALUES IN WHAT HAS BEEN A STRONG, ENJOYABLE, FAMILY, CONVIVIAL AREA. ONE GREAT PROBLEM IS THAT, WITH ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT, THERE WILL BE MORE CAR SPACES AND CARS ON THE STREETS, WHICH ARE ALREADY UNDER PRESSURE FROM TRAFFIC, BUSES AND OTHER TRANSPORT. SUCH DEVELOPMENTS DO NOTHING FOR OUR ENVIRONMENT, RATHER THAN FILLING UP ANOTHER HIGH RISE SPACE AND DESTROY THE FABRIC OF THE VILLAGE LIFE STYLE.

We've had enough of works along Thrupp St. It's been too disruptive, noisy, and a barrier to daily life in constantly having the street blocked off, and not having access to and from residence. It makes this proposed development beyond reasonable esp given that Thrupp St is a narrow thorough fare.

There's just too much development in this area over what feels like years.

Please oppose the demolition of this pre-war flat. We must protect our heritage - not spurn it. I urge you to reject this proposal.

Please oppose the demolition of these old buildings. Why not use them as a facade? Please ensure that the design respects the heritage.

STOP PATHWAYS building multi-storey aged care facilities. This is not the way we should treat the people that have tirelessly looked after us growing up. They deserve open spaces to roam freely. Haven’t we learnt from covid, that high rise blocks are a death trap?

In a municipality that is required by the NSW Government to increase the resident population by 15,000 in the next decade there are several ways to achieve that before the state government takes over planning approvals in North Sydney.

One way is to build massive towers like those that have gone up at Crows Nest (with many more to come there over the Metro Station) North Sydney and Milsons Point. Experience demonstrates that the open outdoor space available for current and anticipated residents falls way short of the standards recommended and significantly under the average open space across Greater Metropolitan Sydney. For instance, between the Harbour and North Sydney Oval there is more indoor seating than there is outdoor space/seating.

Another way to accept another 15,000 residents is to allow current residents to add small units on top of their existing garages; many of which would have a small outdoor area for these new residents.

Spreading the load, and therefore the impact, across the whole of the municipality will protect much of the village nature that characterises many suburbs in the municipality and at the same time provides less impact on the outdoor open areas that currently exist.

The alternative? Massive high rise apartment blocks like the 37 storey building in Crows Nest and the approved 55 storey building in North Sydney. Overshadowing of properties throughout the municipality; creating wind tunnels like those that currently occur around the North Sydney CBD; grossly overcrowding some local open air outdoor spaces in areas such as Crows Nest, North Sydney itself and Milsons Point. Sharing the impact of accommodating 15,000 more residents across the municipality will more likely deliver the commUNITY we need. So no more of the NIMBY whining, the reality is change here is inevitable and we need to embrace it. If we don't that governments will take control and we ALL know what property developers want (and seem to be getting at the moment) and how they support political parties to get it.

No 'Mascot Towers, or Opal Buildings. No more NIMBY guff. Embrace the change that is up us and CONTROL if for everyone in the commUNITY.

We have real and recent experience with a rooftop deck. Two matters need to be considered: noise and privacy. Noise travels freely from such a deck, as anyone knows with roofing work nearby. Further, the timing of such noise tends to be when people are at home (ie. evenings and weekends). Our neighbour has a part-enclosed rooftop deck and the family has parties which sometimes continue into the night. From our house it seems as though they in the next room.

Lastly, a rooftop deck means rooftop views, so if you value the privacy of your garden then this can make you unhappy.

These rooftop decks may seem a nice idea for one owner but in practice can make several neighbouring owners upset. Not a good idea in such a dense suburb.

I would support North Sydney Council approving all applications of this nature on the basis of no major impact on neighbours. To me it is one way to grow the population of the municipality without having to revert to multi-storey apartment blocks that have been visually polluting Milsons Point, North Sydney, Lavender Bay, Crows Nest and Neutral Bay. Concentrating the government mandated population increases in multi-storey towers in areas in the municipality with very limited outdoor facilities is a journey to systemic problems for the commUNITY.

Between the harbour and North Sydney Oval there is more under cover seating than there is outdoor seating. Where will our growing population exercise, play, 'breathe' and just lay about enjoying nature in the outdoors. Spreading the increases mandated by government through out the municipality will be fast, easy and effective for maintaining the current village nature of much of the municipality. London Mews grew out of the conversion of stables into living quarters as the population grew. It is seen by architects and planners in the UK as one of the best features of the population growth in Greater London in the 19th Century.

30 years or more ago there were approx. 7 out approx. 50 multi-storey buildings overlooking Lavender Bay were residential with the balance being erected commercial buildings. The council and state government planed to join the emerging commercial area of Milsons Point to that of North Sydney and demolish the balance of residential properties between Milsons Point, McMahons Point and North Sydney, including Lavender Bay. Without going into detail, suffice it to say, these plans were abandoned when the National Trust and the Building Labourers Federation classified/invoked building bans to protect the residential nature of the area. Now we find the commercial buildings in Milsons Point and North Sydney are no longer viable for commercial use and conversions have seen most of the commercial building, particularly in Milsons Point, converted to apartment. Unfortunately moving thousands and thousands of people into these apartment blocks has seen an inability of the local outdoor environment to handle the 'outdoor' needs of these residents effectively. London Mews type developments, such as this one and others in the surrounding areas, spreads the population increases across the municipality. This needs to happen across the whole of the municipality.

Sorry, but due to the HIGH number of residential buildings in the vicinity of this location any operations inside the standard hours for such operations must be complied with, regardless of ANY sound testing results. We all know how sound travels particularly within this residential high rise precinct and we must continue to support the status quo.

This development is becoming intolerable for the residents. We were having to work at home and the demolition was registering 70 decibels inside and 80 if the windows were opened.

The developers were granted extended hours on the basis that the noise levels would be lower during construction but at present they are registering 60+ inside the apartment and 70+ outside.

We pass by 1 Bank Lane often and frankly it has been a dump for years. As locals we are delighted to see a family willing to make it a home. I would be very keen to see the approved structure at 1 Bank Lane in line with the principles in the Burra Charter. The Charter does not prohibit removal of non-listed items though it is important the proposed structure is in line with, or enhance, the heritage character of the Union/Thomas St conservation area. In addition to conservation considerations. I also highly recommend council to consider sustainability principles, e.g. energy efficiency. We are big supporters of the sustainability initiatives by North Sydney Council and would love to see something big and permanent like a build/reno included as part of the sustainability drive.

It is a conservation area and as such demolition seems a step too far.

IF, and ONLY IF, a specialist conservation architect and certified heritage builder can attest that the current house cannot be saved and is therefore uninhabitable, then an alternative is to rebuild in the EXACTLY same style and with the SAME materials to protect the heritage nature of the vicinity.

The application to demolish a conservation item should not proceed. The Council have carefully marked out houses that represent the history of the neighbourhood. If the demolition is approved, I will apply to have my house demolished as well so I can accomodate a more modern house and parking at 5 Bank St North Sydney

Have to question the appropriateness of a garage door ("enclose existing carport") at the front of this property which is within a heritage conservation area.

Garages and garage doors were not typical of the times within the period in which the heritage housing in this area of North Sydney were constructed. Even though last century around 3 properties, within the area of this conservation order (Lavender, Walker and Arthur Streets), used or built car storage facilities at the front of their properties, I do not think it appropriate to further degrade the heritage nature of conservation area with the change at the front of the subject property. Particularly as the subject property already has off street parking facilities in the laneway at the rear.

Other residents have used the rear of their properties for carparking. To now permit the erection of further non heritage items in this area will simply degrade, not only this current conservation area, but all conservation areas in the NSC area.

How can this be approved when it's WAY over the ratio allowed of 10.2% according to their own documents?

Obviously, with all the applications arising in Eden Street, we have the equivalent of local government 'vexatious [litigators] applicants'.

Clearly council will need to end the misery, stress and strain they seem to CONTINUALLY put residents through with manifestly inappropriate, non-compliant applications. Far be it for the commUNITY to educate council but there are processes, within the Local Government legislation, practices and procedures for council's to reject such application AT THE LODGEMENT STAGE. Council also has the right, within its prerogative, to charge an applicant for wasting council's time - it isn't a free service it offers to developers/non-resident/businesses! Or are such practices not exercised because of an apparent party-political bias on council? We know you are there, and just because the council elections have been delayed for 12 months, please don't think this commUNITY will not remember your failure to serve the commUNITY interest.

Now please stop wasting everyone's time and stressing our commUNITY (you remember what they are, don't you?). We've chosen to live in this residential commUNITY not in a 24x7 business precinct. How many times do you need to be told?

I object to the 24 houts operating lodged by the applicant. This is a quiet residential area

This is a residential area ! The poor residents of this street have had to put with so many issues , brothels and other dodgy businesses. For heaven’s sake exercise some common sense and deny this application !!

Can see no reason for a 24/7 business to be operating in this primarily residential area, The application is strongly opposed.

I object this application give the street is already congested as the street is so small. The area has gone through multiple developments over the year so the residents deserve some peace. Nsc should look at how to improve eden precinct amenities and close the questionable massage operation in the area.