Mixed use development - 100 Edinburgh Rd Castlecrag

This development is NOT suitable for the entrance to the Walter Burley Griffin heritage conservation area. It is a blatant disregard for this world renowned suburb of an iconic Architect and his Landscape Architect’s work. This OUTRAGEOUS MONSTROCiTY should be STOPPED. This is a blatant exploitation of new housing laws. An approved plan complementing the WBG suburb was approved recently and has been totally disregarded by these outrageous monolithic towers.

The original and current DA approval provides for a substantial increase in density without destroying the village feel of Castlecrag. A 12 story twin tower development is totally incompatible with this very small village centre.
The Edinburgh intersection with Eastern Valley Road is already complex and dealing with very heavy traffic loads. The location of this proposed development and vehicle access will simply add to these issues.
There is very limited public transport available.
The proposed development on this high location will cause significant shading issues.

I wish to formally object to the proposed development at 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag.

This proposal represents a dramatic and unjustified escalation in scale from what has previously been understood for the site. What appears to have evolved from a modest concept has now become two large towers reaching up to 12 storeys, and up to 14 storeys at the rear. This level of overdevelopment is entirely out of character with the surrounding built environment and would impose an overwhelming visual and physical presence on the neighbourhood.

The height, bulk, and density of the proposal are excessive and incompatible with Castlecrag’s established residential character. Buildings of this scale would dominate the skyline, significantly overshadow neighbouring properties, and erode the low-rise, community-oriented nature of the area.

The application proposes approximately 150 luxury apartments, yet includes only 10 so-called “affordable” units. This raises serious concerns about the social value of the development and whether it genuinely contributes to broader housing needs, rather than serving as a high-density, high-profit project with minimal community benefit.

Equally concerning is the apparent lack of meaningful consideration given to key planning constraints. There is insufficient evidence that the proposal adequately addresses heritage impacts, environmental considerations, or the significant infrastructure limitations of the site. In particular, the “one-lane-in, one-lane-out” access presents clear and unresolved risks in terms of traffic congestion, safety, and emergency access. These are fundamental issues that cannot be overlooked or deferred.

The cumulative impact of these shortcomings suggests a development that prioritises scale and yield over suitability, context, and community wellbeing.

This proposal, in its current form, would set a damaging precedent for overdevelopment in Castlecrag and would fundamentally alter the character and liveability of the area. It is not an appropriate or balanced response to the site or its surroundings.

I strongly urge the consent authority to reject this application or require substantial revisions that align with the scale, character, and infrastructure capacity of the local area.

Do not allow this proposal to become a lasting negative legacy for the community.

Castlecrag, through Burley Griffin, is a unique and prized community architecture. Those of us in the heritage area have made an effort to conform to Burley Griffin's vision and to not over develop our properties just for profit. They are low rise and in keeping with the landscape and the vision. Creating this monstrosity of a building that will overshadow large parts of the conservation area and materially change the nature of the heritage area is wrong and the government of NSW should know it is wrong. The government is here to protect the citizens of NSW from the avarice of developers. I would suggest they do their job.

Housing availability is a critical issue for young families. As someone who is 31 years old, raising a 1.5-year-old with another on the way, I view apartments as the most viable living option given the maintenance demands and high costs of traditional houses. It is clear from community consultations that the loudest opposition comes from a demographic that does not face the same financial barriers as my generation. This project is essential for those of us who understand that housing is crucial and seek affordable ways to remain in this community.

As someone in my early twenties, I’m increasingly aware of how rapidly housing costs are rising year by year. This makes the need for more housing not just important, but essential.

With changing lifestyles and priorities, apartments have become a practical and appealing option for young couples like myself — offering convenience, affordability, and a lower-maintenance way of living compared to traditional houses.

In a growing society, increasing housing supply is critical to ensuring accessibility and supporting the needs of future generations.

I grew up around the Castlecrag area , and many of my childhood memories are tied to this place. Unfortunately, like many others, the rising cost of living has meant that I can no longer afford to live here. This is why I support this new development.
The proposed building is important because it offers more diverse and attainable housing options for people who grew up locally but are now priced out of buying or renting traditional homes in the area. Communities need a mix of living options so people at different stages of life can continue to stay connected to where they belong. Providing smaller, more manageable homes allows people to reduce their living expenses without leaving the suburb they know, rather than being forced to move far away when their needs change.
This is particularly important for ageing residents. Many long‑term locals want to age in place, staying close to friends, family, services, and familiar surroundings. When there are no suitable housing options available locally, people are often forced to leave the area entirely as they get older. Developments like this help preserve community continuity by allowing older residents to remain connected to their support networks, while also freeing up larger homes for families who need them.
Respecting heritage is equally important. Castlecrag has a strong and distinctive character, and any new development should complement the existing fabric of the area. Thoughtful, well‑designed buildings can respond to the history and values of the suburb while still meeting contemporary housing needs. Growth and heritage do not have to be in conflict when development is approached with care and balance.
There is also a real need for more local employment opportunities. It doesn’t make sense that people can grow up in an area, build lifelong relationships there, and then be forced to work elsewhere, or eventually move away entirely, because they can no longer afford to live locally. Strong communities depend on a balance of housing, services, and employment, not just one type of resident or household.
This project helps support that balance. With the inclusion of retail and commercial spaces, young people will have access to local jobs where they can gain experience, learn practical skills, and earn an income close to home. These opportunities help them build independence and financial stability, making it more achievable for them to remain part of the community as they grow.
Overall, this development provides practical solutions to real challenges facing the area. It supports housing diversity, protects social connections, and strengthens community life. Most importantly, it helps ensure that people who have grown up in Castlecrag, and those who have contributed to it for decades, have the opportunity to stay connected to the place they call home.

I support the proposed Edinburgh Road development. Since the demolition of the old Quadrangle, the village has been without a strong commercial focal point. Bringing back a full-service supermarket alongside retail tenancies is essential to restoring the local centre’s economic strength. It will also help curb “escape expenditure,” where residents currently travel to Northbridge or Chatswood for everyday shopping needs.

This development will be beneficial to the ageing population and the younger generation within the proximity of Castlecrag/Northbridge. These types of developments provide a great option for my parents and even my self. My parents are not yet at the retirement age and do not lilke over 55's because of the dull aspects and the type of format of living. An upscale development will help people like myself ensure their parents can still stay local, close to us and have a secure life style.
Great project to approve and provide back to the ageing community and their families. Hope they put in great amenities and lifestyle products and services.

I support the proposed mixed‑use development incorporating a supermarket, ground‑floor shops, and residential apartments above. The development will provide convenient access to everyday services within walking distance, reducing the need for car travel and improving day‑to‑day livability for the local community. The inclusion of new housing above active retail uses is an efficient use of land and will contribute positively to housing choice and affordability in the area. Overall, the proposal will enhance the vibrancy, safety, and functionality of the neighbourhood by creating a well‑designed, active centre that meets both local shopping and residential needs.

I support the proposed residential and retail development in Castlecrag. The suburb needs a better mix of housing to suit different stages of life, and currently there are not enough modern apartments.
Providing higher-density housing in the village will allow people to downsize and stay in the area, while freeing up larger homes for families.
Overall, this development will help keep Castlecrag active, support the local economy, and ensure the suburb continues to grow in a practical and balanced way.

Mixed Use Development – 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag: SSD90134958
I acknowledge the critical need for increased housing supply across NSW and support well designed, well located development that responds appropriately to local context, infrastructure capacity and community expectations. Castlecrag residents have previously demonstrated this commitment by working constructively with a prior developer to achieve a mid rise (four storey) outcome at 100 Edinburgh Road. That proposal reflected years of genuine community engagement and represented Castlecrag’s agreed and proportional contribution to addressing housing need.
However, the current proposal for two 11 storey residential towers comprising approximately 150 dwellings at this site should not be approved. It is fundamentally inconsistent with the historic, environmental and infrastructure constraints of Castlecrag, and represents a significant departure from both community endorsed planning outcomes and the site’s heritage setting.

1. Irreversible Impact on an Internationally Significant Planned Suburb

Castlecrag is unique in Australia and internationally recognised as a model for environmentally responsive suburban planning by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin. The suburb was deliberately designed around principles of harmony with the natural landscape, low scale built form, shared open space and minimal visual dominance of buildings.
An 11 storey tower form, particularly in a two tower configuration,is wholly inconsistent with the Griffins’ vision and would permanently undermine the intended character of Castlecrag as a low scale, landscape dominated settlement. This concern is not speculative: at a community consultation I attended on 18 March, the project’s own heritage architect from Weir Phillips confirmed that the proposed tower design does not align with the Griffin planning philosophy.
Approving this development would represent a significant planning precedent and a lasting error in urban planning history by permitting a scale of development fundamentally at odds with one of Australia’s most important heritage landscapes.

2. Failure to Respect Established Community Consent and Social Licence

The former four storey scheme was the outcome of sustained and meaningful community engagement and received local acceptance precisely because it balanced housing delivery with respect for Castlecrag’s constraints and values. The current proposal represents a dramatic escalation in height, bulk and density without renewed community consent or justification based on changed local conditions.
Proceeding with a substantially intensified proposal through the State Significant Development pathway, rather than through renewed local planning processes, undermines confidence in participatory planning and disregards the established social licence achieved through previous negotiations.

3. Unacceptable Traffic, Access and Emergency Safety Risks

Castlecrag is a peninsular suburb with effectively a single vehicular access route via Eastern Valley Way, a constraint long acknowledged in planning and traffic documentation. Existing congestion is already acute during weekday school drop off and pick up periods, affecting residents’ daily movements and service access.
At the community consultation, the project’s traffic consultants acknowledged that traffic is a significant issue for the site and surrounding network. The addition of approximately 150 new dwellings at the commercial core will materially worsen congestion, increase delays, and raise legitimate concerns about emergency vehicle access and evacuation capability during peak periods or incidents.
While active transport is supported in principle, Castlecrag’s steep topography significantly limits cycling uptake. In practice, residents and future occupants rely on private vehicles or park and ride access to bus services. Increasing residential density at the village centre will exacerbate parking competition, local traffic circulation and pedestrian vehicle conflict rather than reduce car dependency.

4. Inconsistent with Strategic Planning Objectives for Well Located Density

The proposal does not align with the stated intent of State planning mechanisms to prioritise higher density in areas with strong transport accessibility and infrastructure capacity. The site is located over four kilometres from the nearest rail or metro station, and the development delivers a very limited proportion of affordable housing relative to scale.
As such, the proposal risks eroding public confidence in strategic housing reform by delivering density in a location that lacks the attributes typically used to justify high rise development.

Conclusion
Castlecrag has already demonstrated its willingness to contribute to NSW’s housing needs through a context appropriate, mid rise development outcome. There is no planning, heritage or infrastructure based justification for replacing that agreed approach with two 11 storey towers that would irreversibly damage a nationally and internationally significant planned suburb, increase congestion and safety risks, and disregard established community consent.
For these reasons, I respectfully submit that the Minister for Planning should reject the current proposal and require any future development at 100 Edinburgh Road to align with the previously supported mid rise scale, heritage context, and infrastructure constraints of Castlecrag.

I support the Edinburgh Road (Castlecrag village) development and ask that my submission be considered in favour of the proposal.
As a frequent visitor to the village, I have observed the lack of a strong commercial anchor. The inclusion of a full-line supermarket and retail tenancies will support the local economy and reduce the need for residents to travel elsewhere.
As an architect, I support the design approach, including the integration of greenery and the creation of an outdoor plaza, which will enhance the character of the area and provide a valuable community space.
Overall, the proposal will deliver clear benefits to the Castlecrag community.

I am writing to express my support for the new residential and retail project in Castlecrag. The development is of a very high standard of design, provides additional housing in addition to affordable housing. The proposal also provides much needed amenities by way of retail shops that replaces the previous shopping area - by providing this, it will help reduce the number of vehicle trips currently needed to attend to groceries outside of the suburb.

As a local resident of over 20 years I am concerned about the impact of this project to the character and history of Castlecrag.
I am also concerned about both lack of suitable infrastructure to support this level of development. The impact on getting in and out of castlecrag as well as affecting through traffic and the major intersection at Eastern Valley way and Edinburgh would likely make a dangerous intersection more problematic.
I see no problem with a 3-4 storey building and shops/ restaurants beneath but 13-15 storey would have significant detrimental local impact.

The project is an excessive height. Compared to the surrounding buildings which are low rise ground level or 2 levels this project would overwhelm the surroundings and would be out of keeping with the built environment of Castlecrag.
The narrow street into the suburb is already congested and I don't see how all the extra traffic that will be generated will be managed.
There are already two large supermarkets nearby in Northbridge and Chatswood so the large proposed supermarket is not necessary and will also attract more traffic.

Great development and this area deserves a new village and apartments. Look on line and you will see that there is not much supply around. I worry they by the time my children are old enough to buy a property, they will move away from the area andgiven there isn't much to offer around here right now. Castlecrag needs a renewal project like this. this whole area needs a refresh and the community is divided because they are scared of change. change can be a great thing if it serves it community well and is done well. We need more projects like this.

I object to the proposed State Significant Development at 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag on the basis that it will result in unacceptable impacts on residential amenity, local character and public safety. In particular, the proposal’s excessive size, height and scale, together with unresolved traffic and transport impacts, are fundamentally incompatible with the established character of Castlecrag and exceed the capacity of both the local environment and road network to reasonably accommodate development of this intensity.
Excessive Size, Height and Scale
• The proposal seeks approval for:
o Two 11 storey towers (48.96m high)
o A 4 storey podium
o 150 dwellings, compared to 38 dwellings previously approved
• This represents:
o A threefold increase in height
o A fourfold increase in density
o A dramatic escalation in bulk and mass
• Surrounding development is predominantly:
o 1–2 storey residential
o Low scale, bushland integrated and heritage sensitive housing
• The proposal is therefore grossly out of scale with the established and valued character of Castlecrag.
• The EIS accepts that the development will have a moderate visual impact due to:
o Its ridgeline location
o The lack of meaningful canopy screening
• In practical terms, the development will:
o Dominate the skyline
o Overwhelm nearby heritage areas, including the Griffin Heritage Conservation Area
o Permanently alter the scale and identity of Castlecrag
• The EIS acknowledges that:
o More than 15% of apartments fail minimum ADG solar access standards
o Overshadowing impacts occur to properties to the south
• These impacts cannot be justified by reference to previous approvals, as this proposal significantly escalates height, bulk and mass beyond what has already been approved.
• Approval would set a dangerous precedent, effectively signalling that high rise development is acceptable in Castlecrag.
• The size, height and scale of the proposal are fundamentally incompatible with the locality and result in unacceptable residential amenity impacts.

Traffic and Transport Impacts
• The site is located at the intersection of Edinburgh Road and Eastern Valley Way, a highly constrained and heavily trafficked location.
• The EIS itself confirms that:
o The Edinburgh Road / Eastern Valley Way intersection operates below acceptable levels of service
o Nearby intersections are already failing during peak periods
• Despite these known constraints, the proposal introduces:
o A fourfold increase in dwellings
o Significant additional retail and supermarket traffic
• This will result in:
o Increased vehicle movements
o Worsening congestion, queuing and delays
o Higher traffic noise and air pollution affecting nearby residents
• The proposal relies on mode shift assumptions that are unrealistic because:
o Castlecrag has no rail access
o Bus services operate on the same congested corridors
o No confirmed increase in public transport capacity has been secured
• Increasing parking supply would not resolve these impacts and would instead induce additional traffic, further worsening congestion.
• All vehicle access and servicing is concentrated on Edinburgh Road, creating:
o Pedestrian and cyclist safety risks
o Vehicle queuing back into traffic lanes
o Additional conflicts with buses and passing traffic
• The local road network cannot safely or reasonably support development of this scale and intensity, resulting in unacceptable amenity and public safety impacts.

Conclusion
For the reasons outlined above, the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site that will permanently erode the amenity, character and liveability of Castlecrag. The cumulative impacts of excessive height and scale, increased traffic generation and constrained access cannot be adequately mitigated through conditions or future management plans. I respectfully request that the consent authority refuse the application, or require a substantially reduced scheme that is consistent with the existing approval, surrounding built form and the capacity of local infrastructure, and that properly protects residential amenity.
Refusal or substantial reduction of this proposal is also clearly in the public interest, as it would protect established residential amenity, respect local character, ensure development remains proportionate to infrastructure capacity, and uphold community confidence in a fair, transparent and orderly planning system.

I am writing to object to the proposed development at 100 Edinburgh rd.

I have lived at the above address since the early 90s. In that time, I have seen congestion increase dramatically. The proposed development will add over 150 cars to the area. This will worsen congestion further.

There will be a significant impact of the extra traffic on the four-way intersection between Eastern Valley Way and Edinburgh Rd. This will lead to a traffic build up in all the surrounding areas. It will also make it dangerous with traffic jams on Eastern valley way as both the right and left turns onto Edinburgh Rd will become banked up with traffic.

The building itself will be far too high and will be visible for miles, much like the tower at Milsons Point. A development of this scale has no place in a suburban area. If this development is approved, it will set a dangerous precedent. What is next? Will another developer try and put up a multistorey tower at the local shops on High St?

The entire area that encompasses Willoughby, Northbridge, Castlecrag, and Middle Cove is beautiful and leafy. It is filled with old trees, small streets, and old bungalows. Castlecrag in particular is of great historical significance with the Griffin conservation zone and multiple heritage listed houses. A development like this will ruin this area completely.

The only one who will benefit is the developer who will try and make millions. The only reason Conquest is trying to build something this large is to maximise profits. There is nothing in their proposal that will be good for the area, contrary to their marketing. This site should not be a State Significant Development. Council, which has strict controls, needs to be in charge to ensure appropriate development. There is little social benefit either, with only ten affordable apartments. The remaining 140 will cost millions and will no doubt be sold on the overseas market due to the restrictions on buying existing properties.

This development cannot go ahead and needs to be withdrawn as a State Significant Development. Council’s controls should not be overridden. They are strictly enforced throughout the suburb and this site should be no different. The original low-rise development that was approved is the only development that is appropriate for the site. Change and development are inevitable. However, it should not be allowed to destroy an entire community for the sake of multinational profits and state legislation that allows development at all costs.

Henry Naguit.

RE: Objection to State Significant Development Proposal – 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag (The Quadrangle)
I am writing to formally register my strongest possible objection to the proposed 11-storey redevelopment of the Quadrangle site at 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag.
While our Government is rightly committed to addressing the housing crisis and delivering more homes for NSW, this particular proposal represents a complete failure of the "planning with the community" principle. It is an overreach that prioritizes developer profit over sensible, transport-oriented development.
My objections are cantered on the following core issues:
1. Rejection of "Towers in the Suburbs"
This proposal, featuring two 11-storey towers, is a gross departure from the four-storey mixed-use plan previously approved. Castlecrag is not a designated high-growth precinct, nor is it supported by a rail or metro link. This is not the "gentle density" or "well-located housing" our planning reforms envision; it is an isolated high-rise island that creates a dangerous precedent for suburban Sydney.
2. Disregard for Heritage and Local Character
Castlecrag is a jewel in Sydney’s architectural crown, designed by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin with a clear vision of "landscape first." These towers would loom over the Griffin Heritage Conservation Area, overshadowing historic residences and permanently scarring the aesthetic of a suburb that is of national heritage significance.
3. Failure of the SSD Pathway
The use of the State Significant Development (SSD) pathway for this site feels like an attempt to bypass local planning controls and silence the community. Good planning should be a partnership between the State, local government, and residents. This proposal, however, feels like a "top-down" imposition that ignores the unique topography and infrastructure constraints of the Lower North Shore.
4. Infrastructure and Traffic Impacts
Edinburgh Road is already a notorious bottleneck. Adding hundreds of new residents without a corresponding investment in heavy rail or significant bus upgrades is a recipe for gridlock. Furthermore, the loss of existing retail space threatens the viability of our local "high street" economy, which is the backbone of our community.
Conclusion
Labor stands for fairness and for communities that work for everyone. This proposal is not fair to the people of Castlecrag. We need more housing, but it must be the right housing in the right places. 100 Edinburgh Road is the wrong place for 11 storeys.
I urge you to listen to the thousands of residents who have voiced their concerns and ensure that any development on this site is scaled back to a height that respects the heritage and the capacity of our local infrastructure.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Muller
28 The Bulwark
Castlecrag NSW 2068