UNDERSTAND THE CASE
Start with the strongest concerns. Open the supporting drawings only when you want more detail.
STRENGTH OF POSITION
Refusal is possible, but not guaranteed. Focus effort on the issues the City must assess.
The applicant describes a 2,743 square metre building reaching up to about 12 metres. Policy 4.5 requires the impact of height, bulk, scale and siting to be addressed.
Ask: Ask for a much lower and smaller design, supported by verified streetscape views from nearby homes.
The proposal replaces an open recreation area with a large enclosed commercial building beside homes.
Ask: Ask the City to assess the full effect on residential amenity, not height alone.
A07 shows a noon winter-solstice shadow. That single labelled time does not show the duration of shadow through the day or quantify added shadow for each property.
Ask: Ask the City to identify the affected gardens, windows and outdoor areas, and whether redesign could reduce the impact.
The proposed hours run from 6 am to 10 pm every day. The City requested acoustic work, but the applicant asks to provide a full assessment later.
Ask: Ask the City to obtain and assess the noise report before it makes a decision.
The proposal adds five stated bays. The applicant relies on a theoretical bowling-capacity comparison despite describing the existing greens as infrequently used.
Ask: Ask for a study of actual use, booking changeovers, concurrent activities, parking spillover and pedestrian conflicts.
A04 proposes a 2 metre planting strip and 6 metre green-wall rigging. The screening should not be treated as if it removes the building's underlying height and bulk.
Ask: Ask the City to assess the building before assuming mature plants will screen it.
Policy 4.5 identifies wind impacts as a matter to address for buildings over 6 metres that require Council approval. The City should identify the information it relies on for this issue.
Ask: Ask the City to confirm whether the available information is adequate and to require suitable expert evidence if it is not.
Nearby bedrooms and homes may face an extended period of noise, vibration, dust, deliveries and worker parking.
Ask: Ask for a detailed Construction Management Plan with clear hours, controls, notice and complaint procedures.
THE CENTRAL CASE
Meeting a maximum height does not prove that the building's bulk, scale and relationship with nearby homes are acceptable.
The applicant says extra height is needed for indoor padel. That does not show that this building suits this residential location.
The City should understand likely noise at nearby homes before it decides whether the proposal is acceptable.
APPLICANT'S OWN DRAWINGS
The drawings do not prove that the proposal must be refused. They connect each concern to a fact shown in the applicant's own plans.
What it shows: The development summary says the proposal seeks approval for a purpose-built indoor padel centre with three singles courts and six doubles courts.
Why it matters: It helps residents identify the proposed form and street interface. It is an illustration, not proof that the impact is acceptable.
Does the final built form match this presentation, including the visible height, materials and screening?
What it shows: Drawing A04 labels a 2 metre wide landscaping strip and green-wall rigging fixed vertically to a wall at a height of 6 metres.
Why it matters: Landscaping may soften its appearance, but it cannot remove the underlying bulk.
What will residents see when the building opens, before the climbing plants mature?
What it shows: The applicant states that parking across the site would rise from 146 bays to 151 bays, a net increase of five.
Why it matters: This stated count should be tested against realistic peak use across the wider site.
How will the site handle realistic peak padel bookings alongside other activities without spillover into nearby streets?
What it shows: The development summary says court-clearance requirements result in an overall building height of up to about 12 metres above natural ground level.
Why it matters: This is the strongest visual reference for the height, bulk and residential interface concern.
Does this height and building mass produce an acceptable relationship with the nearby low-rise homes?
Page links may open at the start of the PDF on some phones. The page number is shown on every evidence card.