Residents Slam Woolwich Marina Plan Over Harbour ‘Takeover’

Residents Slam Woolwich Marina Plan Over Harbour ‘Takeover’
Image: Woolwich Dock in 2019 Source: Wikimedia Commons / Photo by Nick-D

Plans to drastically expand a Woolwich Marina on Sydney Harbour have stirred fierce opposition from local residents, who argue the development would hand public waters to private owners and obstruct views of heritage-listed landmarks.

The controversial proposal, currently before the NSW Land and Environmental Court, seeks to increase the marina’s capacity from 45 to 79 berths, allowing private boats up to 25 metres long.

Plans for Woolwich luxury marina expansion spark community outcry

Over 700 people have signed a petition against the plan. Critics say the expansions would block views to and from Cockatoo Island and transform open water into a private docking zone, with what they describe as “a wall of boats,” according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

“We want to preserve this area for the Sydney community and beyond,” said Beverley Bennett, spokesperson for local group Save Our Shores.

Woolwich Marina sits near Kellys Bush, a bushland park listed on the State Heritage Register. It was famously where Australia’s first “green ban” in the 1970s, when union leader Jack Mundey joined residents in halting a housing development.

Bennett told SMH that the current campaign evokes that same spirit of activism.

“This is one of the most amazing parts of Sydney Harbour; the history, heritage, social activism, and natural environment is absolutely phenomenal,” she said. “There is no other country that would do this to a site of such significance.”

Hunters Hill Council rejects Woolwich Marina plan and faces $378K legal battle

An earlier $8.5 million proposal by Sydney-based Michael Fountain Architects was rejected by Hunters Hill Council and the Sydney North Planning Panel. That plan had sought permission for berthing even larger vessels up to 35 metres, including superyachts.

The updated design shifts the marina westward, removes ten swing moorings, and continues a ban on function or “party boats.” Still, lower north shore residents remain firmly opposed.

Hunters Hill Council received more than 500 submissions on the revised application, mostly in objection. The council is now defending its rejection in court, and calling on residents to help fund its $378,000 legal bill.

In June, the council told the court the luxury project would cause “unacceptable impacts on the character, amenity and use of the area by the public,” and result in the “effective alienation of a large portion of the Sydney Harbour for private benefit.”

Sailing Club voices concerns posed by dock for super-sized yachts

Other parties, including the Hunters Hill Sailing Club, echoed these concerns, saying the redevelopment “will have a substantial adverse impact on sailing and the recreational uses” of the harbour.

“[The] size of the vessels proposed is exponentially larger,” they said, noting some would be “larger than a Parramatta River Class ferry” and “longer than an articulated bus and higher than a double-decker bus.”

They also said the marina project would form a “270-metre largely continuous hard enclosure which protrudes into the harbour.”

The Hunters Hill Trust criticised the expansion for spreading across “a large strip of the historic Kelly’s Bush foreshore” and argued that mooring larger boats would “obliterate the open water and views.”

While potentially lucrative and appealing to boat owners, the trust argues it would be “affordable to only a select clientele.”

The club also warned of increased congestion and safety risks in the tight waterway between Woolwich, Cockatoo Island and Spectacle Island.

Woolwich resident Don Bonnitcha, a life member of the club, said the proposal would create “a completely unacceptable risk to the safety of the many young sailors in small dinghies who learn to sail and race at [the club].”

The NSW Land and Environment Court will hear the case from 4 to 17 September, including an on-site inspection.

Woolwich Marina operator, Idy Chan, has not yet publicly commented on the revised proposal.

Comments are closed.