News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Wollongong council slams public housing proposal 

Wollongong council slams public housing proposal

24 Nov, 2009 02:46 PM
Plans for 58 public housing units in two apartment buildings on Market St have been labelled an "overdevelopment" in a scathing submission by Wollongong City Council.

Housing NSW is proposing to build two eight-storey apartment blocks for seniors and disabled tenants on a site occupied by a single-level house.

Neighbourhood Forum 5 and the Save Market Street group are opposing the development, which is being pushed through under the Federal Government's Nation Building and Jobs Plan.

  • EDITORIAL: Government's plan for Market St fails the test

    The development will be assessed by the NSW Infrastructure Co-ordinator General and is not required to comply with state or council planning regulations.

    Eighteen months after the State Government sacked the council, the planning tables have turned, with the council now attempting to defend the city from overdevelopment by the State Government.

    In a submission sent to Housing NSW consultants and obtained by the Mercury, the council's general manager David Farmer has criticised the proposal on everything from height and density to insufficient parking, setbacks, a lack of open space and waste storage.

    At least 10 other community submissions have been lodged.

    "Council does not support the proposal as submitted," Mr Farmer wrote.

    Under normal circumstances, Mr Farmer said the proposal would be considered in an open forum through the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel.

    Housing NSW defended the plan, saying the site already has development consent for a similar building of the same height. It has ordered a review of setbacks and parking in response to public concerns.

    But Mr Farmer noted that at 27.6m high, the building exceeds the site's 24m limit. The floor space ratio is also greater than the 2.5:1 permitted.

    The building provides just 11 car spots - or one space for every five units - compared to the 63 resident spaces and six visitor spaces required by the council's development control plan.

  • "The offsite impacts generated by a reduction of parking numbers is significant and ... cannot be supported by council," Mr Farmer wrote.

    The council also suggests the proposal does not contain sufficient communal and private open space.

    The 2.5m setbacks from the boundaries are not sufficient and "will have a significant impact on the privacy and amenity of adjoining properties", Mr Farmer said.

    Public submissions closed on Friday but Wollongong MP Noreen Hay said yesterday she would ask Housing Minister David Borger for an extension of time.

    "I support in principle the provision of social housing in the CBD for seniors," she said.

    "But I can guarantee that any feedback from the community will get strong consideration from the department, the minister's office and NSW planning experts.

    "This development needs to fit in with the expectations of the community."

    Print
    Increase Text Size
    Decrease Text Size
    Page:
    1

    comments


    Date: Newest first | Oldest first
    MP Noreen Hay is quite right when she said: "This development needs to fit in with the expectations of the community." To put 2 blocks of 58 units in place of one family house begs the question: How big[or small] are these units? The blocks of 'bedsitters' built by the DOH over the years have proved unsatisfactory and some have been converted into one bedroom units. If the powers that be have not yet realised that putting a lot of welfare dependent people together is a disaster, they are never going to learn. Look at the problems in Warrawong. Theheight suggests to me that these are 3 storey buildings. Walk up? or with lifts? After all these are supposed to be for the aged and disabled. All power to the prescinst c/tee to scale down this outrageous development.
    Posted by Fergie, 24/11/2009 7:02:02 AM
    What are people trying to achieve for Wollongong? If they are trying to run it into the ground, they are doing a great job.
    Posted by marina, 24/11/2009 7:03:22 AM
    What is Sharon Bird, the Federal MP, doing about the gross over development at Market St? It is the Rudd Government which is sponsoring the project and running over local and State planning laws and regulations.
    Posted by Shaun Prince, 24/11/2009 8:49:09 AM
    Wouldn't the money be better spent shipping these people off to some far flung regions of NSW? Doesn't Wollongong have enough troubles with these lower socio-economic people. Lets put them out the back of Dubbo and sell the block of land to a nice white collar family with 2 children and a small puppy.
    Posted by Peter S, 24/11/2009 8:57:28 AM
    So the nice end of Wollongong is finally going to get a taste of what Warrawong, berkeley and bellambi and other "not nice" suburbs have had to put up with for decades. Now you will know what its like to see your suburb run into the ground. Maybe a needle exchange at Balgownie would be the next charm for the region..
    Posted by Jack Ratepayer, 24/11/2009 9:17:45 AM
    The Mercury picked up the Irony. In most cases a Residential Flat buildings of this scale, nature, inconsistency- whether for seniors, public housing or straight residential would have to go through the Design Review panel, IHAP, and be determined by the JRPP (depending on cost). It also requires the Dept of Planning's Concurrence under the IREP1 (height) etc. This application would and should be refused under normal circumstances. The New affordable Housing SEPP (its bonus's) and Kevs Nation Building ironically allows a separate Govt agency to have little to no regard to established planning princples (such as the SEPP 55). It also eliminates any appeal rights. Housing NSW in the past has developed some of the most disatrous housing estates/developments. So why would you trust them now? 11 car spaces - ridiculous (what about bikes/storage, no communal or open space, invasive setbacks to adjoining development, how is waste goign to be managed on this site?. Not good, not in the short or long term. I'm all for public housing - it is desparately needed, but it has to be consistent and observe adjoinig and surrounding development. Good luck Council. This is worth a fight.
    Posted by john Doe, 24/11/2009 9:23:37 AM
    I agree with you peter s, well said.
    Posted by movemout, 24/11/2009 11:04:51 AM
    Some tenants will look after any place they live in be it their own, private rental or public housing. Some tenants seem to trash public housing property most of the times because they can get away with it. Well, unless we throw the trash out and mark it: NEVER TO BE RENTED PUBLIC HOUSING eventually will create new breed of public housing tenants, that reluctantly or not see the need to care for public property. Otherwise it is always the same story: public housing brings drug addicts, dealers, prostitution and inevitably place is trashed, smashed finally made not suitable for accommodation, then we fix it from taxpayers money and let it deteriorate again. And that’s why any public housing development is seen as horror story in the making!
    Posted by Barry, 24/11/2009 11:39:39 AM
    Yeah let's move 'em out into central Australia and put a fence around 'em. Then we can forget all about the old and disabled people who make our lives so difficult
    Posted by rab, 24/11/2009 12:00:23 PM
    There is a need for public housing for families and singles who do the RIGHT thing but cannot afford to get into the private renting market- plenty who end up homeless or in unsuitable accomodation. I agree with Barry, it is time public housing got rid of the trash (junkies, people who do no take care and misuse the residences etc) and give the genuinely needy a fair go.
    Posted by anon, 24/11/2009 6:56:50 PM
    1 | 2  |  next >

    post a comment


    Screen name  *
    Email address  *
    Remember me?
    Comment  *
     
    We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
    The single-level house at 34 Market St, Wollongong, is meant to make way for two eight-storey public housing apartment blocks. Picture: SYLVIA LIBER
    The single-level house at 34 Market St, Wollongong, is meant to make way for two eight-storey public housing apartment blocks. Picture: SYLVIA LIBER

    Most popular articles

    Lift your interest rate with an IMB Term Deposit
     
    GPT GROUP WILL 14.3.10
     
     
     
    Illawarra Mercury Drive
     SEND...
     SAVE...
     SHARE...