“Council accepts that additional housing is required to accommodate population growth and that construction brings economic activity to the area; however, the form and location of this development was not supported,” a council spokeswoman said. ‘Lack of infrastructure’ The council's concerns are echoed by residents such as Kerry Coomes, who said the original approval of the development and ongoing modifications - such as adding 244 more apartments (including 12 for affordable housing) - raised questions about the planning system. “The developers don’t seem to care about the impacts on the community and the lack of infrastructure and in the end it is the state government that will pay for extra schools, roads and medical services,” she said. Cronulla Sharks chairman Dino Mezzatesta said the club was happy with the "returns we’ve made to date, which have exceeded initial expectations". Credit:Wolter Peeters

“The Planning Department does not really care about residents and many of us feel that community consultation is just ‘tick-a-box’ process”. Ms Coomes said she was concerned about the "negative impacts" on local lifestyle and amenity, noting that residents had moved to the area because it was low-density: “People bought in the area because it did not have inner-city, high rise like Wolli Creek and Bondi Junction.” The developer is not happy either following the rejection of a proposed $1 million playground by the Independent Planning Commission. “This was the centrepiece of our community infrastructure, and a first for the Sutherland Shire so we’re working through an appeal process,” Mr Fairfax said. “It would be a tremendous benefit for the whole community and something worth fighting for.” Changing plans

The development of land surrounding the Sharks’ stadium at Woolooware has undergone a number of changes since the proposal was approved in 2012 following more than 4800 public submissions. Besides traffic congestion and the size of the development, its proximity to wetlands protected by the international Ramsar treaty was also raised as an issue by opponents. The developer has defended changes made to its Cronulla Sharks development since it was approved in 2012. Credit:Craig Golding “Although there is a parkland buffer between the wetland and the development, council did express concerns about the impact of more intense development within close proximity,” the council spokeswoman said. “Impacts on endangered fauna from light spill, noise, increased movement of people and vehicles, as well as having tall buildings in close proximity were highlighted for assessment.”

More than 800 residents have moved into the first two stages of the development, according to Capital Bluestone, which lodged its latest modification with the council on August 13. A change approved earlier this year by the IPC, despite objections by the council, increased the number of apartments to 880. The original plan was for 636 dwellings. “Council did express concerns about traffic impacts,” the council spokeswoman said. “These concerns related to the broader road network and are therefore difficult for the developer to ameliorate. "For this reason council’s preference was not to allow additional residential dwellings on the site.” A spokesman for the NSW Department of Planning and Environment said that the development had been subject to rigorous community consultation and assessment by the IPC.

“The modifications to the original concept plan were approved by the IPC and the commission was satisfied that the modifications did not fundamentally change the essential nature of the development,” he said. “The IPC supported the department’s assessment of issues and agreed there was sufficient capacity to accommodate the increase in housing without causing adverse impacts on the immediate surrounding area.” ‘Refined and improved’ Mr Fairfax said the Cronulla Sharks development, which won an award last month from the property developer's lobby group, had been “refined and improved” over time as the developer learnt more about the area. The next stage under construction involves more apartments, the hotel, shops and new Sharks club facilities. But Ms Coomes said: “The government should not allow a developer to keep adding more and more units or increase the size of any development once it has been approved. It is just so unfair on the community.”