More than 200 residents have lodged objections over a proposal to significantly increase building heights and the number of apartments surrounding the Shell Cove boat harbour.
The changes to the major Shellharbour development were revealed in September, and include a 26 per cent increase in the number of homes in the boat harbour precinct – on top of an already approved 1238 dwellings.
Increased building heights would take the hotel – which will also be moved to a new site at the northern edge of the harbour – from nine-storeys to 11-storeys high, and bump up many of the apartment buildings from four to six storeys.
The Shell Cove developers, Frasers and Shellharbour council, also proposed an additional permit for serviced and residential apartments within in the hotel building.
In submissions to NSW Planning, a number of current and future Shell Cove residents said they were concerned about the affect changes would have on their lifestyle and views.
For instance, Baulkham Hills residents Lissa Tjagunovs said she was sold a new home with a “coastal” and low key feel.
“If we had known that you could change the plans at any time quietly without gaining opinions of current residents and those who have purchased land, I would have thought twice about buying,” she wrote.
Summing up many of the submissions, Shell Cove residents Chris and Cathy Miller said the changes were “basically a completely new plan” and have questioned whether this increase in density was planned all along.
“The proposal to increase the number of dwellings, their height and the number of streets, while decreasing the total area of public spaces and walkways will, I believe, have a limiting effect on people's enjoyment and use of the marina precinct,” they wrote in their objection.
“One wonders whether this has all been decided anyway given that the sign on Harbour Boulevarde just north of the proposed town centre already has the hotel at 11 storeys.”
One group of 13 residents has engaged Hones Lawyers to object on their behalf, writing that the proposed modification “cannot be lawfully approved” as the information within application “is so grossly inadequate”.
Focusing on “view loss”, the lawyers also said there was a lack of basic information about the affect the changes would have on views outside of overlooking the project area.