Mixed use development including in-fill affordable housing - Five Ways, Crows Nest

See attachment summarising the aspects of the development I object to.

Overall I support this project, especially with providing different housing options for those who want to live in our area.

The concern I have is the over-reliance on parking development, this area is for Transit Oriented Development (TOD), yet 7 basement levels will be excavated to store vehicles. This is a cost that owners will need to pay over their lifetimes through their purchase price and strata payments for a depreciating asset. We need to focus on the excellent aspects of the area such as a town center literally across the road, Metro 300m down the road and Heavy Rail around 800m away.

The triangle area already has gridlocked traffic during the weekend. We need to induce demand for active modes of transit rather than the automobile.

Pathways should also be improved for the local areas to ensure there is sufficient space for pedestrians to share the road. Any short cut lanes or turning lanes needs to be modified to ensure pedestrian safety.

Time and time again we approve these new developments but we need to balance green space or third places for our neighbours.

Please see attached submission

While I am supportive of the need to provide additional housing - and particularly affordable housing in the Crows Nest area, there are a number of items in this proposal that require changing in order to provide ongoing affordable housing and limit unsustainable car usage. Please see uploaded submission for more details.

I support Wollstonecraft Precinct’s report and objections, though not a member of that precinct. Their report to you is thorough and in great depth. My reasoning:
. Greedy developer, not listening to a Council that understands its constituents, applying for over maximum height allowance, it seems
. No space provided for the community
. The start of an unfriendly, overshadowed corridor like St Leonards
. Existing foliage and buildings will give little screening, the site is on highest part of Crows Nest, and will be seen from tens of kilometres away
. Both Falcon and Alexander Streets, already heavy with traffic
. Affordable housing must be in perpetuity

Please approve a building with less storeys, less imposing and not destructive to Crows Nest, I know this is not The Dept’s guide lines, however the site itself, with its elevated position should be taken into consideration.
With regard to responses, people I’ve spoken with said what’s the point? It will go ahead anyway. A rather sad view of our NSW Government

As stated previously, I object to the height of this project and to the number of parking spaces planned. Other cities have limited the number of parking spaces in new buildings and in Sydney where public transport, especially with the new Metro, is more than adequate, the need for cars in the building space and the subsequent congestion of local roads, there should be no need for so many. (If any.)
In addition, my wife and I received FOUR copies of your letter on expensive paper. Totally unnecessary.

I object to the development because the project exceeds the existing capacity of the Crows Nest village precinct. The height of the proposed tower overshadows the surrounding lanes/streets/houses (Hayberry and Emmett Lanes and Streets) and impacts operation of solar roof panels as well as daylight hours for gardens to grow (including the knock-on effects to insects, native wildlife etc.) Traffic in Crows Nest village is already congested with insufficient parking for people visiting restaurants on Willoughby Road. The inconvenience to residents due to the construction and traffic diversion will be significant, including dust and associated air pollution from the construction. This is likely to last years. Finally, there is INSUFFICIENT open and green space to recreate for the increased density whilst protecting biodiversity. NSW DEP claims to be increasing housing to accommodate critical service workers around transport infrastructure. The upshot will be significantly more household junk and waste diverted to landfill due to a % of transient occupants, more cars, more air pollution and increased heat sink.

I strongly support the project. This is subject to some small issues discussed below.
Crows Nest and North Sydney are privileged suburbs when it comes to transport infrastructure. Already supported by a large number of bus routes and heavy rail ( in the case of Crows Nest, a short walk to St Leonard’s Station) supplemented by the recently opened Metro which is a game changer. Access to schools is easy, private, public, selective and Catholic all within a kilometre or two.
More housing, which is needed, is sensibly accommodated by developments such as the one proposed. The development will replace unsightly and for many years vacant shops and will introduce many more people to the Crows Nest shopping precinct which will be of enormous support to the very many small businesses.
I am not at all concerned by the height of the proposed development. It makes sense for developments to be this size along the highway and close to it.
Traffic from extra vehicles is just part of city life. Those who complain about the extra cars should drive along the major arterial roads in peak hour to see what gridlock traffic is like. Traffic has to be managed as best it can and local residents learn when is best to go to or avoid the Crows Nest shopping precinct. There is no road near Crows Nest which, in my experience of living nearly 30 years in North Sydney, experiences anywhere close to the traffic congestion along Military Road from Neutral Bay to Mosman at most times of the day.
My issues are twofold. First I think it is critical that developments like the one proposed have architectural merit. The local council some years ago approved residential apartments along the highway at North Sydney that are devoid of any architectural merit. The Council should not be involved in setting the standards for design with major developments like the one proposed.
Next, there is a trend to limit car parking in developments such as this. Again the local council is a big advocate for this limitation.I do not understand this. I think every apartment should have one car parking space and 3+bedroom apartments should have two. In addition there should be visitor parking equal in number to 10% of the development’s total number of car parks and 5% more for disabled parking. The reality is visitors could not park close to this development because of the timed parking requirements in the Crows Nest shopping precinct. Failing to provide visitor and disabled parking can lead to serious isolation issues for some residents, depending on their circumstances.

See uploaded PDF file

I am writing to object to the proposed height increase outlined in the Amendment Report for the Five Ways, Crows Nest development (SSD-66826207). This development has undergone multiple height amendments that far exceed the original approvals, and these revisions are causing substantial negative impacts on the community, local property values, and environmental livability. It is crucial that a limit be set on further height amendments to protect the integrity of the planning process and the interests of the Crows Nest community.

1. Multiple Height Amendments Beyond the Original Approval
The original height limit, as approved under Plan Finalisation Report - PP-2021-7451, set the maximum building height at 58.5 meters, with an additional 2 meters for rooftop plant and lift overruns, for a total permissible height of 60.5 meters. This limit was the result of extensive consultation with the community, balancing the need for development with concerns about the building scale and neighborhood character.

However, the height was later increased to 78.65 meters, and now, the current amendment seeks a further increase to 80.305 meters. This represents a substantial 19.805-meter increase over the original approval. This continuous request for height increases erodes public trust and sets a damaging precedent. The repeated height amendments far exceed the community’s expectations and the framework established under the original North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013.

2. Negative Impact on Property Values
One of the most concerning consequences of this excessive height increase is the potential devaluation of properties in the surrounding area. The introduction of additional high-density housing, as planned in this development, risks oversaturating the local real estate market, potentially driving down property values for existing homes. The shadowing effects caused by a building of this scale will also reduce the attractiveness and livability of adjacent properties.

Homeowners have already voiced significant concerns about overshadowing, which will intensify as the height increases. With reduced natural light and greater shadowing, properties will become less appealing to potential buyers and may see diminished value. As detailed in the public submissions during the original consultation process, 50% of the community submissions cited concerns about overshadowing effects. The increased shadowing from an 80.305-meter building will only exacerbate these issues, affecting both residential and public spaces.

3. Impact on Neighborhood Character and Livability
The Crows Nest area is defined by a balance between mid-rise and low-rise buildings. Increasing the height to 80.305 meters will create a structure that is visually out of proportion to the surrounding neighborhood. The original planning approval, which set the height limit at 60.5 meters, was designed to respect the existing urban fabric. However, the proposed amendments go far beyond this, undermining the character of the neighborhood.

This excessive height is inconsistent with the St Leonards and Crows Nest 2036 Plan, which aimed to achieve a balanced transition between higher-density zones and adjacent lower-density residential areas. The increase to 80.305 meters will result in a building that towers over its surroundings, disrupting this planned transition and negatively affecting the overall urban environment.

4. Environmental Amenity and Shadowing Impacts
The shadow analysis in the Amendment Report raises significant concerns about overshadowing, particularly on nearby properties and public spaces. The report asserts compliance with solar access guidelines, but in reality, the increased height will cause significant overshadowing, especially during morning hours. This will notably affect properties along Pacific Highway and the surrounding areas.

Furthermore, North Sydney Girls High School is set to experience increased overshadowing after 2:30 pm, an issue already identified in earlier assessments. Such overshadowing diminishes the quality of public and residential spaces by reducing natural light, making properties less desirable and decreasing their overall value. These impacts will directly contradict the sustainability goals and livability standards previously outlined in the development's early planning phases.

5. Cross Ventilation Concerns
The ventilation system proposed for the development relies heavily on a single-vent system for cross ventilation, which raises concerns about the adequacy of airflow in the building, especially on higher floors. While the amendment report claims that 92.2% of apartments up to Level 9 meet acceptable cross-ventilation standards, there is still a 7.8% gap, indicating that some apartments do not achieve this standard.

The lack of proper ventilation in a high-density residential tower can lead to serious environmental quality and health issues. The further increase in height only exacerbates these ventilation concerns, particularly as taller buildings tend to trap more heat and air circulation issues are magnified in such high-rise environments.

6. Inadequate Open Space Provisions
The reduction in communal open space from 1,754 square meters to 1,696 square meters is unjustified, particularly given the increased height and density proposed. In a high-density development, communal spaces are critical for ensuring residents have access to outdoor areas, which improves their well-being and enhances the overall livability of the development.

By increasing the height and density while simultaneously reducing communal space, the proposal compromises the quality of life for future residents. It is especially concerning that these reductions are being proposed despite the significant increase in the scale of the project. Adequate open space is essential in such developments, and this aspect should not be compromised, particularly in a dense urban environment like Crows Nest.

7. Contradiction with Initial Planning Approval and Community Expectations
The original Gateway Determination Report and the accompanying approvals under the North Sydney LEP 2013, Map Amendment No. 6, established a clear height limit of 60.5 meters, which would allow for a 16-storey development that balanced the need for growth with maintaining the character of the area. However, the continued amendments to this height contradict the vision set out in this plan and the expectations set during community consultation.

The increase to 80.305 meters would allow for a building that far exceeds the intended 16-storey limit, further eroding the balance between urban growth and neighborhood preservation. The height increases approved and proposed in this amendment are in direct conflict with the vision originally laid out for this development. Moreover, this continuous push for amendments disrespects the feedback from community members, with 76% of public objections in the original planning consultation citing building height as a primary concern.

Conclusion
The ongoing and repeated requests for height amendments must be stopped. The proposed increase to 80.305 meters is unjustified and undermines the integrity of the planning process. It is essential to enforce the original approved height limit of 60.5 meters to protect the character of Crows Nest, maintain property values, and uphold the community’s expectations.

I strongly urge the Department to reject this amendment and place a firm limit on future height revisions for this development. Protecting the livability, character, and sustainability of Crows Nest must be prioritized over unchecked development.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and trust that the Department will uphold the original planning decisions.

SSD-66826207 – Five Ways, Crows Nest
State Significant Development Site

I object to this proposal for the following reasons:

• It is not consistent with the recently developed TOD guidelines for Crows Nest.
• The Affordable Housing included in this proposal is not in perpetuity and does not truly address the need for such housing. I find the description of the project as 'In-fill Affordable Housing' is misleading.
• The height of the building and amount of parking provided remains excessive.
• The solar impact on the residences opposite on Pacific Highway will further significantly increase overshadowing and reduce sunlight due to the height increase over and above the 2036 plan .

The development will house about 350 residents and will add more demand for open and recreational space which is already almost non-existent within walking distance.

I would like to see the height of this building reduced, with the community receiving more public amentiy from this development or financial contribution to public amenity and open space in the community.

I support the detailed analysis provided by the Wollstonecraft Precinct.

Please refer to the attached objection

I would like to reiterate my support for this project.

While I am disappointed the revised project reduces the number of dwellings, and in my view unnecessarily increases the number of "affordable" dwellings, the proposal remains a needed development to meet the city-wide need for more housing supply.

As my initial submission stated - this is the perfect location for increased density. The Metro is now open, it's time to start building the housing to accompany it.

The department needs to get this moving.

WE LIVE IN HAYBERRY STREET AND HAVE STAYED IN TOUCH WITH THE CHANGES TO THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. EACH TIME IT HAS BEEN AMENDED, THE SIZE AND SCALE HAS GROWN. THE IMPACT ACROSS MANY ASPECTS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE SIGNIFICANT AND DETRIMENTAL. THE SHADOW DIAGRAMS UNDER-ESTIMATE THE LOSS OF SUNLIGHT, PARTICULARLY LATER IN THE DAY. THE SITE IS AT THE HIGHEST POINT IN THE AREA AND THUS WILL CREATE A MAJOR PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE BUILD HEIGHTS WITH FURTHER LOSS OF AMENITY AND PEACEFUL ENJOYMENT OF OUR HOMES AND NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE SCALED BACK SO THAT A MORE APPROPRIATE SCALE CAN BLEND WITH EXISTING ARCHITECTURE ALLOWING FOR GROWTH WITHOUT COMPLETELY CHANGING THE SKYLINE OF THE WHOLE AREA.

I strongly object to this proposal. The building height is too high for the village lifestyle in Crows Nest, furthermore it will create a wind tunnel (like we currently have in St Leonard's) and block sunlight to houses and units in the Hayberry district. Traffic is already difficult on Alexander Street, even with all the buildings vacant, adding 191 apartments to this will on make traffic on Alexander Street much worse. Currently during peak hours, their are cars queuing to turn onto Alexander St from the Pacific Highway. North Sydney council is against this, and it it being forced on us in the name of affordable housing (shame). My preference is to limit it to 8 stories maximum to align with the village atmosphere, and do not provide car parking spaces (190 spaces and 7 levels really of underground parking is way too much!!) as it is walking distance to the metro. Tenants can use share cars, or the many current public transport options.

This building is far too high and out of character for the neighbourhood. We have zoned high rise at St Leonards and in North Sydney around the new Metro stations, which we support, however this is outside of these designated zones and too high when the surrounding buildings are mostly single-story residences with a few mixed commercial/residential of 4 stories.

We already have less green space than other suburbs and this overdevelopment will place even more stress on overused infrastructure such as parking, schools, parks and sporting space.

It will cast a shadow over Hayberry St and enable residents to see into our homes invading our privacy.