Controversial Mt Annan proposal undergoes ‘significant amendments’
Development plans for Mt Annan’s most controversial site have received “significant amendments” and are expected to be placed public exhibition this week.
Development plans for Mt Annan’s most controversial site have received “significant amendments” and are expected to be placed public exhibition this week.
A proposal by Queensland-based developer Sunland Group to build 143 terrace homes at 1-5 Main St, Mt Annan — previously refused by Camden Council — had been in dispute in the NSW Land and Environment Court since last year.
Negotiations between Sunland Group and Camden Council has since led to modifications of the original proposal, including a reduction in the number of houses.
Sunland Group managing director Sahba Abedian said the 5.5ha site’s location, opposite Mt Annan Marketplace, provided a rare opportunity to deliver affordable housing.
“Sunland Group has been consulting with Camden Council throughout the planning process to conceive an urban design of a size and scale respectful to its surroundings,” Mr Abedian said.
“In response to council’s feedback, we have adopted some significant amendments to the overall design including an alternative internal road layout, reduced dwellings, and increased visitor parking.”
The previous application was for 143 terrace homes, to be known as Montaine Residences.
The Chronicle understands there are now 139 proposed dwellings on the amended plans.
Mr Abedian said the central location was well suited for affordable housing.
“The site’s location on the doorstep of major local infrastructure, including two shopping centres, presents a unique opportunity to deliver affordable residential housing with unparalleled levels of quality, amenity and connectivity,” he said.
“The amended design will now go through the formal public notification period.”
IN OTHER NEWS
An application from a different developer in 2014 to build nine four-storey apartment buildings on the site resulted in 564 objections to Camden Council.
Residents have previously opposed the Sunland Group proposal due to traffic concerns and its potential impact on the area’s character.