Mixed use development with affordable housing - 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon

RESPONSE TO THE EXHIBITION OF NSW STATE SIGNIFICANT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT SSD 101444458
THE POSITIVES:
I am a very close neighbour to this development proposal but in the main, I am supporting SSD 101444458. The smaller footprint and the top setbacks are a plus compared to the last DA approval; the taller building will probably be controversial but it will be hard to justify objections on this feature; The extra "community space" is a big plus (but more on this under); The affordable dwelling proposal of 39 apartments is a very big plus (but more on this under). The increase in the "community" space is also a big plus (but more on this under). The new landscaping will be appreciated by the local community (but more on this under). The establishment of an ALDI store will be strongly supported by the local community .
THE NEGATIVES: (more detail on these under): Traffic movement on the Pacific Highway, in the vicinity of the Gordon Centre and the new development has the potential to be chaotic. Parking in the wide area around the new development is already is already at capacity and the new development as presented will only add to the problem. The suggestion that the development may have up to 39 affordable housing units is highly unlikely to be met. Much more needs liaison needs to occur between the developers, the Gordon Centre and the Roads and and Maritime Service (RMS) to resolve issues of mutual concern, but there does not appear to be much evidence of this.
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT:
The really big issue is the traffic management in the vicinity of the Pacific Highway, Dumaresq St, Radford Plc, and the exit from the Gordon Centre parking station. The potential traffic demand in this vicinity and from predictable future increases due to the TOD implementation in the area could stymy this development altogether as a similar issue in Rawson Street, Epping did for the 47 story buildings proposed by developers for the Epping CBD during the governments so called "Activation" project). Neither the government or developers where prepared to deal with the access infrastructure problem in Epping and the issues have not been resolved. The sites remain undeveloped. The material in the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) prepared for this project is voluminous, but it does not provide any long term solutions. The conclusions in the TIA appears to be just that the RMS may provide some improvement to traffic flow along the highway at some time in the future and that congestion in the vicinity of the development can be resolved by establishing a rat run through back streets to the west. It appears that the authors of the TIA have never visited the suburb as they didn't even know that two of the proposed back streets, Beans Farm and Hansen streets, were already in place. It would appear that without coordination with the owner of the Gordon Centre opposite, and the RMS there will be no resolution of the traffic issues. There is no indication that this is a priority issue for any of the parties at this stage. There is no basis for an approval to be given for the development application until there is a more substantive plan to overcome the traffic issues.
PARKING:
All the street parking in the vicinity of the development is already occupied most days by people using the rail system, shopping in the CBD, and people in the surrounding housing developments with inadequate on-site property parking. I was not able to determine how much parking is available in the proposed building for visitors, trades people, removalists. Provision of off street parking for these users is critical. My apartment next door to the proposed development has 66 units and 20 visitor parking bays. Has the provision of visitor parking been dealt with?
AFFORDABLE HOUSING:
It is unclear in the documentation provided by the developer how many affordable housing units will be provided, however based on the information in my letter from DPHI there could be 39. According to the developer in their application there may be up to 25% of total GFA available for this purpose. On this basis, and a total floor space available of 19,917 square metres, there would be only 127 square metres per unit. The Affordable Housing and Feasibility Assessment does not support the 25% of floor space approach on the basis that it would not be economically viable. I believe that the DPHI should push for the higher floor space on this site as it is a classic location on which a high standard for the TOD could be achieved with its close access to public transport.
SOCIAL ISSUES (community space):
The developer has clearly increased the "community use" space component on level 1 in their application , however this looks like a deception without defining the proportion of space available to the residents only and the area available to the general public. The plans showing the "community use" areas should have different colouring to avoid confusion over what are resident only and public areas. I suspect that the space available to the general public has been greatly diminished on what was offered in the in the last DA. The loss of space appears to be in the NE corner of level 1. It appears in the new DA, that the space is now taken up with stairs and lifts. This is a retrograde step, as the area in the NE corner should include a wide entry to the Pacific Highway, an attractive spacious setting and a prominent cafe to encourage its use and viability as it did in the earlier DA.
LANDSCAPING:
The landscaping report provided by the PDS design studio and PBD architects is to my mind a big improvement on Councils concept for the previous DA. The only issue I have with landscaping in the new DA is in relation to the stair access proposed between the Councils office block and the new development. My view is that this proposal should be discarded and the area landscaped with trees to to improve privacy for the residents of the new block . This component of the development is a very big imposition on the developer as it would cost a lot of money for no benefit to the developer or the community. This money could be better spent by the developer in maximising the affordable housing component or the area available for social interaction between the residents and the general public. Council already has stair access between the highway and Radford Place on the other side of it's office block which has a much more pleasant setting than the new proposal and achieves the same objectives. The new stairway proposed would be very unattractive to residents of the new building and to the general public because it will be a wind tunnel in southerly winds, very steep, a hazard to older and disabled people and probably a security hazard at night. I assume that there will continue to be a footpath on the Dumaresq Street side of the new building which will provide a much more desirable access route than the new stairway proposal as it has a more moderate slope, safe surface, no stairs, easy access to the Dumaresq entrance to ALDI and the access between the Pacific Highway and Radford place.

I object to the proposed height of the development. The proposal advises at 28 storey development. This is excessively tall and unsuitable for the suburb of Gordon. There are no other properties within the suburb of Gordon of this height. 28 storeys is excessively tall and will block larger amounts of light, look inappropriate in the area and and there are not suitable amenities within the suburb to accommodate a much larger population associated with the proposed number of dwellings. A more suitable amount of stories would be around 8 to 18 Stories which is in keeping with other tall buildings within the suburb

Submission for SSD-101444458 – Objection
Proposed Shop-Top Housing with Affordable Housing
810 Pacific Highway, Gordon

I am a long-term resident of Ku-ring-gai and have lived in the area with my family for more than ten years. During this time, we have come to deeply appreciate the character of our community. Ku-ring-gai is known for its tranquil living environment, relatively low-density skyline, human-scale town centres, and its distinctive leafy landscape supported by extensive parks and tree canopy. These qualities create a highly liveable environment and provide residents with a welcome retreat from the intensity of Sydney CBD.

While I recognise the importance of increasing housing supply and supporting affordable housing initiatives, I respectfully object to the proposed development at 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon (SSD-101444458). Based on the exhibited documentation, the proposal represents a dramatic increase in building volume compared with the previously approved development application (DA0610/17) and a substantial departure from the existing urban character of Gordon and the wider Ku-ring-gai area.

Importantly, the previously approved development for this site (DA0610/17) already provides a reasonable planning outcome that aligns with the current planning controls and the intended planning envelope for Gordon town centre. In my view, that approved scheme represents a more appropriate balance between redevelopment, housing supply, and protection of the surrounding urban character.

My key concerns regarding the current proposal are outlined below.
________________________________________
1. Dramatic Increase in Building Volume and Further Departure from Planning Controls
The Environmental Impact Statement indicates that the proposal significantly increases the scale of development and depart, slightly but further, from the controls under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (KLEP) 2015.
The approved development DA0610/17 permitted:
• approximately 7 storeys (27.4 metres) in height
• a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3:1 (approximately 7,071 m²)
The current proposal seeks approval for:
• 28 storeys (approximately 97.2 metres)
• FSR of approximately 8.84:1 (approximately 20,836 m²)
This represents an increase of roughly 70 metres in building height and almost three times the previously approved floor space.
The proposal also seeks variations to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) and Clause 4.4 (Floor Space Ratio) of the KLEP through provisions of the Housing SEPP. Given that a compliant redevelopment has already been approved, there appears to be limited strategic justification for such an extreme increase in height and density.
________________________________________
2. Risk of Setting an Unintended Planning Precedent
Approving a development of this scale may establish an unintended planning precedent for future proposals seeking similar variations to height and density controls within Ku-ring-gai.
A building approaching 100 metres in height would likely become the tallest structure in the municipality. Such approval could create expectations for further high-rise developments of comparable scale along the Pacific Highway corridor. Over time, this could significantly alter the skyline and urban form of Gordon in ways that were not originally envisaged in the local planning framework and may undermine the integrity of existing development standards.
________________________________________
3. Lack of Appropriate Height Transition
Another important concern relates to the lack of appropriate height transition between the proposed tower and surrounding development.
Good planning practice typically requires tall buildings to transition gradually to lower-scale built form to minimise visual dominance and protect neighbourhood amenity. The proposed 28-storey tower represents a dramatic shift in scale compared with nearby buildings and surrounding residential areas. Without appropriate stepping or transition, the development risks appearing out of scale with the surrounding context and visually overwhelming within the local streetscape.
________________________________________
4. Impact on the Character of Ku-ring-gai
Ku-ring-gai has long been recognised for its distinctive suburban character, extensive tree canopy, and relatively low- to medium-scale built form. Strategic planning documents consistently emphasise maintaining the municipality’s green, leafy character and human-scale environment while accommodating growth in appropriate locations.
The proposed development, due to its extreme height and density relative to surrounding buildings, risks undermining this established character. The introduction of skyscraper-scale buildings may gradually erode the qualities that make Ku-ring-gai unique among metropolitan Sydney local government areas.
________________________________________
5. Bulk, Streetscape and Visual Impact
Beyond height alone, the overall bulk and massing of the proposed building raise further concerns. A 28-storey development with an FSR approaching 9:1 represents a substantial increase in building mass compared with the surrounding context.
Without exceptional architectural design, appropriate setbacks, and strong building articulation, such a development risks creating excessive bulk and massing that may dominate the streetscape and adversely affect the visual character of Gordon town centre.
________________________________________
6. Overshadowing and Environmental Impacts
Buildings approaching 100 metres in height have the potential to generate substantial overshadowing impacts on surrounding streets, neighbouring properties, and public spaces. Solar access is a key component of residential amenity and public domain quality, and extended shadowing may have adverse impacts on local amenity.
Ku-ring-gai is also widely recognised for its strong urban tree canopy and environmental character. Large podium-style developments may reduce opportunities for meaningful tree planting and contribute to urban heat island effects. Any development of this scale should clearly demonstrate how it will maintain or enhance the existing urban canopy and landscape character.
________________________________________
7. Traffic and Infrastructure Capacity
The Traffic Impact Assessment concludes that the development is supportable from a traffic and parking perspective. However, the proposal appears to meet only the minimum parking requirements under the relevant Council Development Control Plan and Housing SEPP.
Given the scale of the development—including approximately 180 residential units and new retail uses such as a supermarket—the project may generate substantial additional traffic movements. Gordon town centre already experiences congestion during peak periods along Pacific Highway and surrounding local streets. The proposed increase in density may place additional pressure on local infrastructure and transport networks.
________________________________________
Conclusion
Ku-ring-gai is widely valued for its balance of natural landscape, leafy suburban character and high quality of life. While housing supply and affordable housing are important policy objectives, development proposals should respect the established planning framework and the long-term strategic vision for the area.
Given that a previously approved development (DA0610/17) already provides a reasonable and compliant redevelopment outcome for the site, the current proposal represents an unnecessary and excessive increase in both height and density. Overall, the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site, resulting in excessive scale, bulk and density relative to the surrounding urban context.

For the reasons outlined above—including the significant exceedance of planning controls, precedent risks, lack of appropriate height transition, excessive bulk and massing, and potential impacts on local amenity and infrastructure—I respectfully submit my objection to SSD-101444458 and request that the proposal be carefully reconsidered.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this submission.

I strongly support his proposal and have some commentary to provide.
1. I strongly support this proposal as it is close to public transportation and shops. We need more housing supply as we are in a housing crisis. As per https://grattan.edu.au/report/more-homes-better-cities/ "Allowing more housing in established suburbs would mean cheaper housing in all suburbs."
2. The provision of affordable housing is good to see
3. It is excellent to see an all electric building

To Whom It May Concern,
Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure

Re: Objection to SSD-101444458 – Shop Top Housing with Affordable Housing, 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon NSW

I am writing as a local resident to formally object to the above State Significant Development Application, currently on exhibition until Thursday 19 March 2026.

While I acknowledge the importance of increasing housing supply across Sydney, I have serious concerns regarding the scale and impacts of this proposal at 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon. I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application or require substantial modifications for the following reasons.

1. Excessive Height and Inconsistent Scale

The proposed 28-storey tower is significantly out of scale with the existing and approved built form within Gordon. Current and recently proposed developments in the Gordon town centre are generally in the range of approximately 7 to 10 storeys, making a 28-storey structure a dramatic and disproportionate increase in height.

Such a building would dominate the skyline and create an inappropriate visual impact along the Pacific Highway corridor. Approving a tower of this magnitude risks setting a precedent for further high-rise developments that would fundamentally alter the character of Gordon, which is traditionally characterised by low- to medium-density development surrounding its town centre.

2. Overdevelopment of the Site

The proposal to accommodate 180 residential apartments together with a large-format supermarket and associated commercial uses on a single site represents a level of intensity that appears excessive for this location.

While the Pacific Highway corridor may support some increase in density, the scale of this proposal far exceeds what is currently established or planned in the surrounding area. Such concentration of development raises concerns regarding cumulative impacts on traffic, pedestrian movement, and local infrastructure within the Gordon town centre.

3. Concerns Regarding Basement Car Parking Feasibility

The proposal includes six levels of basement parking for 269 vehicles. I have significant doubts about the feasibility and safety of this element and request that the Department subject it to rigorous independent scrutiny. My concerns include:
• The site’s proximity to the Pacific Highway and the rail corridor raises serious geotechnical risks associated with deep excavation adjacent to existing infrastructure and neighbouring properties;
• Gordon’s geology and potential groundwater conditions may make six levels of basement excavation extremely complex, with risks of ground movement and damage to adjoining structures;
• I request that the Department require full disclosure and independent review of all geotechnical reports and construction methodology before any approval is granted, and that the impacts on neighbouring properties from deep excavation be thoroughly assessed.

4. Impact on Local Amenity

The proposed height and bulk of the development would likely create significant impacts on surrounding properties and public spaces, including:
• Overshadowing of neighbouring buildings and nearby public areas within the Gordon town centre;
• Loss of privacy for surrounding residents due to overlooking from upper-level apartments;
• Increased visual bulk that would alter the character and streetscape of the Gordon centre;
• Additional pressure on local infrastructure, including roads, transport services, parks, and community facilities.

Pacific Highway already experiences heavy traffic volumes, particularly during peak commuting hours. Introducing a development of this scale would further increase traffic movements and place additional strain on the local road network and surrounding intersections.

5. Protection of Gordon’s Established Character

Gordon is a well-established suburb valued for its balance between a convenient transport hub and a liveable residential environment. While moderate density around the town centre may be appropriate, a development of this height and scale risks undermining the established character and liveability of the area.

Planning outcomes should aim to integrate new housing sensitively into the existing urban context rather than introducing a development that is dramatically larger than surrounding buildings.

For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Department either refuse this application outright or require substantial reductions in building height and overall density, together with a thorough independent review of the basement construction proposal, to ensure any future development is consistent with the existing neighbourhood character and safe for surrounding infrastructure and properties.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Yours sincerely,
Tam

1）Gordon's infrastructure cannot support such a density of homes-- The transportation, shopping malls, restaurants, and sports facilities will be overcrowded. It is equivalent to seriously disrupting the normal life of the current and future residents.
2) Such a tall building looks very abrupt in Gordon, and it is incompatible with the surrounding environment of low-rise buildings, and if such a tall building is built, it will permanently destroy the landscape and environmental form here.

The proposed 28 storey building on the ridge of the suburb will tower over the rest of the buildings in the Gordon commercial hub. I am not against development of Gordon but the area is not able to support such monstrosity of a project in terms of traffic, schools and open spaces. The existing infrastructure cannot cope with the influx of people and the location of the proposed 28 storey at the corner of Dumeresq and Pacific highway will contribute to the existing traffic jams.

Please consider a reduction to the height of the building.

If this development is approved. The traffic light at the corner of Dumaresq Street and Pacific Hwy need to be revised, so that there is enough time for cars to turn right from Dumaresq Street to Pacific Hwy. During the peak time, it can be congested due to slow pedestrians crossing, only 3-4 cars are able to make a turn.

I can foresee this corner can becomes bottleneck when cars coming out from this new development and Woolies opposite, all trying to turn right to Pacific Hwy.

I support the project. I believe it will significantly increase housing availability and affordability in the area. I would like to see the number of storeys significantly increased.

I believe this building, with its height, will stop winter sunlight to existing properties in Dumaresq Street. Thereby affecting most residents.
Has infrastructure been thought about, such as sewerage, road access, electricity grid. Dumaresq Street is parked out every day by people who already live in the street and only have one parking spot in their building but have two cars in the family. As this building is intended to be built on the ridge has any consideration been given to run off down Dumaresq Street. It is already at capacity with properties having water courses which flood during heavy rain.
As for new residents using public transport, whoever wrote that does not live in this area. An extremely large number of children up to year 12 students get driven to pre-school, primary school and high school. All driven in large SUVs. There will be an extra 269 cars coming out of that proposed building multiple times a day.
Please be realistic. people with young children will not use public transport,
Thank you.

I am concerned about the traffic impact of this development and how traffic can safely move through the intersection of Dumaresq Street and Pacific Highway and Park Ave and Pacific Highway.
Currently if you want to turn left from Dumaresq St onto Pacific Hwy there is only room for 6 cars to turn onto Pacific Highway as the lights at Pacific Highway at Park Ave turn red so cars cant get through. When you introduce all the additional traffic coming out of Radford Place it is going to get extremely congested and unsafe as people will block the intersections. In addition you have the traffic coming out of the Gordon Centre carpark.
The same applies when you are trying to turn right from Pacific Highway into Dumaresq Street there is only room for a few cars in the turning lane and the green arrow is only on for a very short time so again cars run the red light to get through.
On street parking is also an issue already and this will only increase further. I hope there is consideration being given to managing cars who currently ignore the parking restrictions. It can be very difficult now getting in/out of your driveway safely.
Even though people choose to live close to public transport everyone still has a car so 118 new apartments and an Aldi supermarket are going to increase the traffic volumes on the intersection and off street parking considerably.
Also, during this development stage what is being done to control the large truck movements and noise levels once they start moving the large amounts of dirt they are going to have excavate for 6 levels plus all the building materials being delivered on the site and the noise levels as they excavate the site The development of 14 townhouses further down the street is already problematic with excavation of the site now well into its 5th month of loud noises and truck movements up and down the street so hate to think what this development will be like in terms of noise and truck movements. And has there been consideration given to where all the workers will park their cars?
Development is fine and understand it is needed but the sites being chosen are already very busy and hundreds of additional apartments will make the local area a traffic gridlock.

I am very concerned that the proposed project is completely out of scale with the existing suburb and that it will have a very detrimental effect on my privacy and access to sunlight.

Good afternoon
I find I must object to this project. I have been living in the Killara / Gordon area since 1993 and very much understand the dynamics around this area. Gordon infrastructure cannot cope with the construction of a 28 storey development let alone with the additional multi storey developments planned in the immediate area. This proposed building is on the corner of Pacific Highway and Dumaresq Street and there is already heavy traffic congestion as this is the only street with two lanes where left and right turn is permitted. I also believe the planned developments will de-value the homes in the area. I do understand the location needs to be developed but I believe a building of say up to 10 storeys would be better suited. Apart from a train station there is very little else in Gordon to support such a structure unlike Chatswood (interchange) and Macquaire Park (interchange, university and hospital) where there are developments of this size. Also I don't understand how an open space in a building can offer recreation area for its residents - there are no 'permanent' parks or recreation areas on that side of Gordon. I do hope my concerns are taken into consideration on this matter. Many thanks, Anna Gerardis

The building is too high and infrastructure in the area will not support the population growth

To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing in response to the exhibition notice regarding the proposed Shop Top Housing development, including affordable housing, at 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon (SSD-101444458). As a nearby resident, I wish to formally register my objection to this proposal.
In recent years, Gordon has experienced a substantial level of high-density development. While the need to address housing supply is acknowledged, the scale and pace of recent developments are already placing significant and visible pressure on local infrastructure, road networks, parking availability, and community services. Residents are increasingly concerned that development approvals are being granted without sufficient regard for the cumulative impacts on the local area. The Pacific Highway corridor is already heavily congested for much of the day, and further large-scale residential development will inevitably increase traffic volumes and place additional strain on surrounding streets and intersections. Parking pressures in the town centre and adjacent residential streets are already evident, and additional population density will only exacerbate these issues. The impact of successive projects is gradually eroding the amenity of the neighbourhood and placing an unfair burden on existing residents. While I recognise the importance of providing additional housing, this objective should not come at the expense of reasonable planning outcomes, adequate infrastructure capacity, and the long-term liveability of established communities. At present, it is difficult to see how further dense development in this location can be justified given the already significant pressures on local infrastructure and traffic conditions. For these reasons, I strongly urge the Department to reject this proposal, or at the very least require substantial reconsideration and reduction in scale. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback during the exhibition period.