Parkside Neighbourhood Group: Key Objections to the AEU Site Development

You can use these points below to help in preparing your reponses

The proposed 10-storey development is completely out of scale with the existing low-rise residential area, where most buildings are 1-2 storeys.
The Urban Context Report claims that the height aligns with the precinct’s built form, but this is misleading given the dominantly suburban character of Parkside.
The development will create an overpowering visual presence, dwarfing surrounding homes and significantly altering the skyline.
Such high-density construction is more suited to CBD areas rather than a heritage-adjacent residential suburb.
The bulk and massing of the structure will make it stand out negatively rather than blend into the existing built environment.

The architectural plans show that numerous balconies and windows will have direct views into private backyards and living spaces of homes on Porter and Montpelier Streets.
The developer claims that setbacks will mitigate privacy issues, but the proposed distances are too small given the height of the development.
Shadow diagrams indicate that significant portions of surrounding properties will be overshadowed for much of the morning and late afternoon.
Reduced natural light access will negatively affect existing homes, lowering their value and reducing quality of life for residents.
Outdoor areas and gardens will receive far less sunlight, impacting their functionality and vegetation growth.

Montpelier Street is narrow and residential—not designed to handle the expected increase in vehicle movements from the development.
The Transport Impact Assessment downplays congestion concerns, stating that traffic levels will remain “acceptable”, yet does not adequately address peak-hour volumes.
Council has raised concerns over the validity of traffic data, as the site was previously used for office space rather than high-density residential.
The increase in traffic will exacerbate existing bottlenecks, particularly at intersections such as Montpelier Street, Regent Street, and George Street.
Pedestrian and cyclist safety will be compromised, particularly given the proximity to schools and community spaces.
Emergency vehicle access could also be affected due to restricted manoeuvrability in narrow local streets.

The development only provides 196 car parks for 202 apartments plus commercial office space.
There is no dedicated visitor parking, meaning residents and guests will be forced to park on surrounding streets, which are already at capacity.
The developer’s reliance on bicycle parking and car-sharing as a way to reduce dependency on cars is speculative and untested.
Street parking in Parkside is already heavily used, particularly by commuters and local businesses, leaving little room for additional demand.
Overflow parking from the development will spill onto surrounding residential streets, frustrating existing residents and reducing access for locals.

The Planning Report claims that local services “have sufficient capacity”, yet no formal commitments from relevant authorities have been provided.
Water supply, sewage, and electricity infrastructure in Parkside was not designed for high-density residential development.
Public transport availability is limited, and bus services in the area are already overcrowded during peak periods.
Local schools and medical facilities are at risk of being overburdened, as the increased population will place pressure on enrolments and healthcare availability.
There is no clear strategy to ensure that existing infrastructure can sustain the additional residents, businesses, and traffic load.

The Acoustic Assessment predicts that noise will remain “within acceptable limits”, but fails to properly consider the impact of cumulative noise sources, including:
- Construction noise (potentially lasting years).
- Increased vehicle traffic and underground car park noise.
- Noise from communal areas, including gym, pool, and entertainment spaces.
Additional vehicle emissions will contribute to air pollution, impacting local air quality and public health.
The Sustainability Strategy Report does not sufficiently address long-term environmental impacts, such as increased carbon footprint from heating, cooling, and traffic.

The Heritage Impact Assessment recognises that the development contains a locally heritage-listed dwelling, but the scale of the new structure will completely overwhelm it.
The modern design and materials proposed do not align with the traditional architectural fabric of Parkside.
Claims that the development “enhances heritage character” are unfounded, as the large-scale design clashes significantly with nearby homes.
This sets a dangerous precedent for further inappropriate high-rise developments in historically significant suburbs.

The Arborist Report confirms that multiple trees will be removed to accommodate the development.
These trees provide essential shade, air purification, and biodiversity benefits—their removal will have long-term environmental consequences.
The Landscape Plan suggests replanting, but newly planted trees take decades to match the ecological value of mature trees.
Loss of urban greenery will reduce habitat for local wildlife, making Parkside less environmentally sustainable.

The scale and density of the proposal do not align with Parkside’s low-rise, residential character.
Significant negative impacts on privacy, overshadowing, traffic, and local infrastructure will harm the liveability of the area.
Parking shortages and increased congestion will disrupt the existing community.
The heritage character of Parkside will be irreversibly damaged by a dominant high-rise that does not belong in this area.
The proposal should be rejected or significantly modified to:
- Reduce height and density.
- Increase setbacks and privacy protections.
- Provide better traffic and parking solutions.
- Address environmental and heritage concerns.

Parkside Neighbourhood Group