Skip to main content

State Significant Development

Determination

Waterloo Metro Quarter OSD - Central Precinct Detailed Design SSDA

City of Sydney

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

Design and construction of the Central Precinct comprising residential use, retail and a child care facility.

Attachments & Resources

Notice of Exhibition (1)

Notice of Exhibition_05112020_082032

Response to Submissions (26)

Request RTS_14122020_045548
Response to Submissions Report_Central_Final
Appendix A Amended Architectural Plans
Appendix B_Supplementary Architectural Report
Appendix C Landscape Response Letter
Appendix D_Amended Landscape Plans
Appendix E_Supplementary Landscape Report
Appendix F Amended Design Integrity Report
Appendix G_Amended Design Guidelines
Appendix H_Wind Impact Assessment
Appendix I_Technical Memo on Natural Ventilation a
Appendix I_Technical Memo on Natural Ventilation b
Appendix J_Technical Memo on Acoustic
Appendix L Public Benefit Advice
Appendix K_Technical Memo on Flux Acoustic
Appendix O_ESD Technical Memo
Appendix N_Supplementary Overshadowing Assessment
Appendix M_Supplementary Solar Access Assessment
Appendix U_Supplementary Childcare Design Memo
Appendix T_Childcare Lift Design Memo
Appendix V_Technical Memo on Rooftop Wind
Appendix S_Technical Memo on Flood Risk DPIE
Appendix P_Supplementary Traffic & Parking
Appendix R_Technical Memo on Waste Management
Appendix Q_Technical Memo on Botany Rd Changes
Appendix S_Technical Memo on Flood Risk CoS

Agency Advice (2)

Waterloo OSD Central Precinct - SSD 10439 RtS
TfNSW_WMQ_OSD_Central Building Stage 2 (SSD-10439)

Additional Information (8)

Draft Conditions - Waterloo Central Precinct
Department's Request for Additional Information
Applicant's response - RWDI memo April 2021
RFI Request for Additional Information_01092021_062549
Applicant's response - Solar Presentation
Applicant's response - Solar Design Statement
Applicant's response - Cover Letter
Applicant's response - RWDI memo

Determination (4)

Stamped Plans
Notice of Decision
Development Consent
Assessment Report

Post-determination Notices (1)

Notice of Determination

Approved Documents

There are no post approval documents available

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

There are no inspections for this project.

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.

Submissions

Filters
Showing 1 - 20 of 24 submissions
Name Withheld
Support
SYDNEY , New South Wales
Message
Considering how convenient the apartments above St Leonards station are, I support the construction of more homes over railway stations.
Name Withheld
Object
REDFERN , New South Wales
Message
I just hate the design of the building! The bricks chosen are horrible and I'm extremely worried the building will age quickly. The arch is awful! Who on earth came up with this design. Zero taste! Why haven't the designers and architects referenced the heritage buildings down the road? Redfern is filled with heritage architecture. This building is a monstrosity. I feel sorry for the people who might have to live in it.
I'm concerned with the lack of green space. COVID lockdowns have already demonstrated how much residents value their local recreation spots. Redfern Park was filled to capacity when people were forced to stay home. Increasing the density in the area is only going to place more pressure on our limited, green resources. We need more parks not more apartment blocks. Please include more green space in these plans.
I'm also extremely concerned about the Government selling off public land to fund this development. Why can't we use some of this land for recreation space? I don't believe that the green space that's already in the Waterloo Estate has been counted as green space.
Finally, I see no plans for cultural space in any of the developments. Please can you include space for the arts? We don't need yet another childcare provider. The city is full of them! What we need is space for our artists.
Elizabeth Bushby
Object
ALEXANDRIA , New South Wales
Message
The project should be considered as a whole with the northern and southern developments. I support the affordable housing but there should be more. The building height is too tall with too many apartments. There is density is too high. There will not be enough parking and the local streets which are already congested will become more congested. If this proceeds all parking should be time limited because we already have a lot of commuters, workers from from the eveleigh development taking up the already limited parking. Buckland street/Wyndham st due to westconnex and the associated street closures will become even busier - consideration should be given to making it one way or blocking it in the middle to prevent the additional influx of traffic and parking. This area has a strong local community and the additional 3 developments will be too large and too densely populated. A mix of lower rise apartments/town houses with more green space would be preferable - the city of Sydney proposal is more in line with the community and local area. Please do not make this development as large as it is.
ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY
Comment
Sydney , New South Wales
Message
Based on the information provided, the proposal does not constitute a Scheduled Activity under Schedule 1 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act). At this stage, the EPA does not consider that the proposal will require an Environment Protection Licence (EPL) under the POEO Act.

As an advisory note, the development will be located in the vicinity of tunnels containing operational rail lines, for which the EPA has a regulatory responsibility. The consent should include acceptable vibration and ground borne noise limits for spaces within the development drawn from the EPA’s Rail Infrastructure Noise Guideline (EPA, 2013) and Assessing Vibration: A Technical Guideline (DECC, 2006).

As the applicant is a private developer and not a NSW public authority, the EPA would not be the appropriate regulatory authority under the POEO Act for the environmental performance of the OSD project.

The EPA has no comment on EIS.
Alexander Payne
Support
ALEXANDRIA , New South Wales
Message
Building height is too high but otherwise good.
Name Withheld
Object
ALEXANDRIA , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Biodiversity and Conservation Division
Comment
PARRAMATTA , New South Wales
Message
Please find attached EES response
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Counterpoint Community Services Inc
Comment
WATERLOO , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Waterloo Public Housing Action Group
Object
WATERLOO , New South Wales
Message
"We object to the project on the basis that the design does not meet the original target of 700 new homes to be delivered by the Metro Quarter development. The project proposes only 220 homes, a 69% reduction in the total number of homes, and a reduction in the number of affordable housing proposed from 140 to 24.
This is grossly inadequate to meet the affordable housing needs of the area for a redevelopment of this scale and significance on public land. We also object to the classification of the 2000 square metre Childcare Centre to be considered a community facility, as will not be publicly accessible and for the benefit of the commuity of all ages & income levels. When excluding the Childcare Centre as a community facility, only 332sqm of the promised 600sqm of community facilities have been proposed, a 45% reduction.
We propose that this project be rejected and a new the original housing & community facility targets in line with the community's vision be adhered to.
Grant Donohue
Object
WATERLOO , New South Wales
Message
Project ruins the character of Waterloo & also to rip up heavy rail system is illogical .
Lorraine Byrnes
Object
WATERLOO , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Shelter NSW
Object
SYDNEY , New South Wales
Message
Shelter NSW cannot support this development in its current form. Shelter NSW recommends that a greater number of social and affordable dwellings are delivered by this proposal and that any student housing be required to be genuinely affordable.
Attachments
REDWatch
Object
REDFERN , New South Wales
Message
The REDWatch submission is attached
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
ALEXANDRIA , New South Wales
Message
I would like to object to the Waterloo Metro Quarter OSD - Central Building. As a long term,
owner occupier of a single storey heritage terrace on Wyndham Street, I would like to highlight the below reasons:
- The Solar Access Reports clearly indicates significant shadowing of the Alexandria Park
Heritage Conservation Area in Winter Solstice 9am-11am (sun diagram excludes period
between sunrise and 9am) and Equinox 9am-10am (sun diagram excludes period between
sunrise and 9am). This would result in:
o Significant detrimental effects on heritage east-west facing, adjoining terraces with
loss of crucial morning sunlight for significant periods of the year.
o Significant detrimental effects on heritage value of Alexandria Park that provides
civic and visual focus for the Alexandria Park Heritage Conservation Area.
- Views from the Eastern boundary of the Alexandria Park Heritage Conservation Area and Alexandria Park would be significantly impacted. The reasoning of design excellence is flawed. The loss of crucial access to sky views from these areas would damage vital heritage value for the area that is protected by the NSW Office of Environment & Heritage.
Department of Transport
Comment
Chippendale , New South Wales
Message
A copy of the TfNSW response letter is attached.
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
WATERLOO , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
City of Sydney
Object
SYDNEY , New South Wales
Message
Dear Russell

Please find attached the City's consolidated response to the Waterloo OSD SSD applications.

Regards
David Zabell
Attachments
Sydney Metro Corridor Protection
Comment
SYDNEY , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Sydney Water
Comment
PARRAMATTA , New South Wales
Message
Attachments

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSD-10439
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Residential & Commercial
Local Government Areas
City of Sydney
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Director

Contact Planner

Name
Russell Hand