Mixed-use Development Mackenzie St, Lavender Bay

I am a local Lavender Bay resident who has lived in the area for over 15 years. Whilst I support transport-oriented development near North Sydney Station, I believe that scale of this proposal would permanently and negatively alter the visual character of the Lavender Bay Conservation Area. It would damage the gradual transition between the North Sydney CBD and Lavender Bay’s lower-scale heritage streetscape that mirrors the natural land sloping down towards the waterfront of Lavender Bay.
The application itself acknowledges that the area has a low capacity to absorb development at close range. This project would extend CBD-scale development into Lavender Bay. A proposal with less visual impact on the streetscape would allow the modern development to blend into and allow for a contrast with historical elements rather than dominating them.

Some specific examples of this are found in Appendix O, which provides clear evidence of this impact. Photomontage 08 (pages 44–45, Figures 39–41) shows the tower rising abruptly above the Victorian terraces at MacKenzie and Walker Streets. Photomontage 07 (pages 42–43, Figures 36–38) also demonstrates its intrusion into the transition between the CBD and Lavender Bay. I strongly disagree with the report’s assessment of the visual impact as being “low-moderate”. Although the tower may appear less prominent from a distance against the North Sydney skyline, its street-level impact would be substantial. It would dominate Willona Street and the streetscapes framing the historic churches near MacKenzie Street. In particular, it would overwhelm the locally heritage-listed St Francis Xavier Church, an 1881 Victorian Gothic Revival sandstone building, diminishing its role as a local landmark.

I ask that the applicants consider substantially reducing the height and massing of the design in order to achieve a more sustainable and tasteful balance between modern and heritage aspects within the suburb. In his poem Above Lavender Bay, Henry Lawson described the red-tiled roofs rising through rich greenery—a distinctive relationship between buildings, vegetation and the harbour that remains recognisable today. The area’s sloping landscape towards the bay is central to its identity and in my opinion is an important aspect to preserve not just for local residents but for all those who visit the area. A more modest development will still substantially fulfil the stated housing objectives whilst taking into consideration the collective impact on the area.

I fully support this development proposal and the arguments presented in the section 8, Assessment of Significant Impacts, detailed in the EIS.

Key features for me are:
• The design is aesthetically pleasing and will bring a new vibrancy to this location which has appeared to be declining for some time. My association with the area goes back 60 years. The photomontage of the development depicts attractive new buildings compatible with the heritage listed church and school building and improve the visual appeal of Mackenzie Street.

• The function of the development with its commercial housing, significant affordable housing and incorporating a place of worship and public areas is appropriate to the history and ambiance of the area and will benefit the immediate and broader community.

• The increased number of residences, including affordable housing and co-living apartments, is a timely and socially responsible initiative, especially in the midst of a housing crisis that seems to be getting worse. It is shameful that many essential workers are ‘punished’ by not being able to afford to live in the areas where they work, such as North Sydney, and we need our essential service providers to live among us in the community to ensure services and quality of life is maintained. This development will help to address the imbalance.

• This location is perfect for an increased number of residences as it adjoins significant transport, shopping and other services, and is located in a pleasant environment for residents to enjoy. It will add vibrancy to Mackenzie St, provide a ‘soft’ interface access between the somewhat stark North Sydney CBD and the development's community spaces, the Lavender Bay and McMahons Point streetscape and neighbouring public parks.

• North Sydney Council will benefit from an increased number of rate payers, which will help the Council to provide essential social and other services.

• I do not support the orchestrated campaign of opposition by ROLBO (Residents of Lavender Bay Opposed to Overdevelopment). In my view ROLBO represents a few residents in the immediate area who are resisting the expected temporary noise and inconvenience during construction and the longer-term inconvenience of having to share their area with a new group of residents. This may be understandable but I believe their opposition does not represent the wishes of the broader community of people who live in, work in and regularly visit the locality. It would be a great shame if this project is not approved.

I object to the proposed development because of its excessive height and bulk, significant heritage impacts, loss of residential amenity, traffic and parking impacts, safety concerns, and inadequate assessment of construction impacts.

1. Excessive height, bulk and visual impact
The proposed 20-storey tower would be approximately 73.5 metres high and 45 metres wide, extending along Mackenzie Street beside St Peter’s Park. With limited articulation, a substantial podium and minimal tower setback, it would appear as a visually dominant wall of development from surrounding residential streets.
The proposed height is dramatically out of scale with Lavender Bay. Even the maximum height available under current State-led affordable housing uplift provisions is approximately 28.6 metres. The proposal therefore represents an exceptional departure from the scale contemplated by current planning controls.
The abrupt transition from the surrounding fine-grain residential neighbourhood to a 20-storey tower would fundamentally alter the character of Lavender Bay, particularly given its immediate proximity to the Heritage Conservation Area.

2. Significant heritage impacts
The development is within and immediately adjacent to the Lavender Bay Heritage Conservation Area, which contains a significant concentration of heritage places.
The proposed seven-storey and 20-storey buildings would substantially overwhelm the setting of St Francis Xavier Church and the former School House. The Church spire would lose much of its existing visual prominence, fundamentally changing the relationship between these heritage buildings and their surroundings.
The proposal also involves partial demolition of the heritage School House, as well as overshadowing and changes to views and setting. These impacts would be permanent and effectively irreversible.

3. Major loss of sunlight
The height and width of the tower would create extensive shadows across surrounding homes, streets and St Peter’s Park.
Particular concern arises where homes already receive limited sunlight. If properties receiving less than three hours of solar access are effectively excluded from consideration of further reductions, the assessment may fail to properly recognise the impact on the very homes most vulnerable to additional overshadowing.
There are also concerns about the accuracy of some baseline assumptions regarding windows, living areas, private open spaces and existing solar access. The actual loss of sunlight experienced by residents should be assessed, rather than relying solely on technical compliance.

4. Traffic and parking
Lavender Bay's narrow streets already experience significant parking pressure, particularly during evenings and church services and events.
More than 50 dwellings would have no allocated parking and there would be no visitor parking. At the same time, four existing on-street spaces would be removed and Parish parking would reportedly fall from 54 spaces to 22.
The resulting additional parking demand should be considered alongside other major developments in the area. The cumulative impact on local streets and parking has not been adequately addressed.

5. Safety and access
The proposed western driveway onto Mackenzie Street is close to the Miller Street intersection, where pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles already converge. Additional vehicle movements, together with activity associated with the proposed retail premises, would create further conflict at an already constrained location.
The proposal should minimise new vehicle conflict points and make greater use of existing access arrangements where possible.

5. Privacy, noise and residential amenity
Multiple levels of balconies and habitable rooms would overlook neighbouring homes, private open spaces, living areas and bedrooms from an elevated position. The cumulative effect of overlooking from numerous floors has not been adequately addressed by relying on generic separation distances.
The proposed swimming pool and communal area on the Mackenzie Street podium roof are also concerning. These elevated outdoor areas would sit above neighbouring homes, creating potential for ongoing noise, particularly given Lavender Bay's steep topography.
These impacts would not be temporary; they would affect neighbouring residents for the life of the development.

6. Inadequate community consultation
Residents and adjoining landowners were reportedly given less than 24 hours' notice of the broader community information session. The EIS combines attendance figures from separate Parish and community sessions without identifying how many attendees were local residents or neighbouring owners, while only 11 people responded to the survey.
The developer was subsequently invited to attend a Lavender Bay Precinct meeting but did not take up the invitation.
Given these circumstances, the consultation material should not be relied upon as evidence of broad community engagement with the proposal.

7. Construction impacts
Five levels of basement excavation into sandstone raise serious concerns regarding noise, vibration and potential impacts on surrounding residential and heritage properties. Detailed construction noise and vibration management should be properly assessed before approval rather than deferred.
Construction traffic would use Lavender, Middlemiss, Mackenzie and Blues Point Roads, with a likely works zone on Mackenzie Street. This would create additional truck movements, disruption and parking pressure.
The cumulative impact of construction from other nearby major developments also requires proper assessment. In particular, the Middlemiss/Lavender Street development has not been included in the cumulative construction assessment.

Conclusion
The proposed development is substantially out of scale with Lavender Bay and would have significant and largely irreversible impacts on the neighbourhood's heritage character, sunlight, privacy, residential amenity, traffic and parking.

I respectfully request that these cumulative impacts be given full consideration and that the proposed development not be approved in its current form.

I object to the proposed development and concurrent Planning Proposal for the St Francis Xavier site.

My family lives immediately adjacent to the site on the northern side of Wilona Avenue. I recognise that the site is well located for additional housing and that St Francis Xavier Church requires investment for its future. I am not opposed to either objective. My concern is that the current proposal uses those objectives to support a level of development that is fundamentally out of proportion with this particular site and its immediate surroundings and will have adverse impact on the amenity my family experiences in our home.

The proposed change in planning controls is excessive and an unnecessary burden on the surrounding community. Existing height limits of 8.5m and 12m would be replaced with a maximum height of approximately 73.5m, enabling a 20-storey tower alongside a seven storey development associated with the former School Hall. This is not incremental growth. It is a fundamental change in the planned scale of the site.

The justification appears heavily dependent on proximity to North Sydney Station and the North Sydney CBD. While that proximity clearly supports additional density, the site itself is not within a typical CBD environment. It sits at the point where North Sydney transitions into the established residential and heritage landscape of Lavender Bay and the Sydney Harbour foreshore, and the building is proposed to be larger and taller than its immediate North Sydney CBD neighbour’s adaptive reuse proposal.
That distinction matters. There must be a reasonable transition between the scale of the commercial centre and the communities surrounding it. Otherwise, proximity to a transport hub becomes a justification for progressively extending CBD scale development into neighbourhood's that were never planned to accommodate it.

The solar access study is fundamentally incorrect, and I ask the department to review the submission provided by ROLBO, which shows that my home on the northern side of Wilona Avenue is bathed in sun at 1pm on the winter solstice. The solar access study in this EIS must be independently reviewed as part of determination.

The overall intensity of activity proposed also needs to be considered, not simply the height of the tower in isolation. A substantially more restrained scheme could deliver housing, affordable accommodation and investment in the Church without overwhelming the surrounding residential and heritage context. The dominance of new development proposed completely overwhelms the important heritage context of this site and I reject that the accommodation proposed for the old School House has fulfilled a suitable and acceptable reuse brief. The design should be reviewed to ensure this important local asset of heritage significance is not destroyed through substantial remodeling.

I also have particular concerns about the proposed western driveway because it is immediately adjacent to our home. Its location near the bend of Mackenzie Street approaching Miller Street is difficult to understand from a site-planning perspective. The development proposes to significantly increase pedestrian activity through the new connection to North Sydney Station and the café and retail uses, while simultaneously introducing another vehicular crossing into that same environment. This creates an avoidable interface between vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists.

It also transfers a substantial amenity impact directly onto the existing residences adjoining the site. Vehicle entry and exit, headlights, turning movements, deliveries, servicing and noise would become a permanent feature immediately beside our home. The development already proposes vehicular access beneath the School House, on a clearer section of Mackenzie Street opposite existing church facilities at 20 Mackenzie Street, and with a significantly less sensitive residential interface and better visual lines for all users. There should be a serious presumption in favour of consolidating access at that location.

I understand that the proposed western driveway relates to the separate basement and subdivision configuration of the tower component. However, the preferred commercial development configuration should not determine the outcome if it creates a materially worse safety and amenity impact. I believe the western driveway should be removed entirely and parking and servicing consolidated through the School House access.

I also object to the extent and orientation of the proposed commercial retail and cafe activity towards Mackenzie Street. Retail activation may be desirable within North Sydney's commercial centre, but the same assumption should not automatically be applied to a residential and Church precinct. The proposed uses will bring additional patrons, outdoor activity, deliveries, waste collection, lighting and noise into an area immediately adjoining existing homes, including my own. This is particularly significant when combined with the new through site connection and increased vehicle access points, which all combined are specifically intended to substantially increase movement through the precinct. The cumulative outcome is a deliberate intensification of activity along the residential edge of the site that will significantly change and cause undue adverse impact on how we experience our home. The Mackenzie Street interface should provide an appropriate transition into Lavender Bay rather than extending the commercial character of North Sydney further into it and I ask the Department to reject this premise. I accept that this site will change. What I do not accept is the proposition that its strategic location makes the scale and configuration of the current proposal inevitable and the impact on our home dismissed.

A substantially reduced development could still deliver new housing, affordable housing, investment in St Francis Xavier Church and improved pedestrian connections. I therefore object to the proposal in its current form and ask that the height, bulk and scale be substantially reduced, the western driveway removed, and the location and intensity of commercial space be rejected.

Objection to SSD-88702457 St Francis Xavier, Lavender Bay

I strongly object to the proposed redevelopment and rezoning of the St Francis Xavier site at Lavender Bay.

I understand that Sydney needs more housing and that sites close to public transport will change. However, what is proposed here is not simply additional housing. It is a development of extraordinary scale within one of Sydney Harbour's most distinctive residential and heritage areas.

Increasing the existing height controls of 8.5m and 12m to approximately 73.5m to allow a 20-storey tower is an enormous change. The proposed tower, seven storey development behind the historic School Hall, retail premises, extensive basements and increased pedestrian and vehicle activity will fundamentally alter the character of this small precinct.

Lavender Bay should not simply become an extension of the North Sydney CBD. And commercial space for retail and the cafe should not be in this location, and should be rejected.

Its value lies precisely in the transition from the city to a lower-scale residential and heritage environment around Sydney Harbour. That character deserves protection even as new housing is provided.

I am particularly saddened by the proposed treatment of the heritage buildings. St Francis Xavier Church, the former School Hall and the surrounding older buildings tell an important story about the history of this community. The School Hall should remain recognisable and useful as a community building associated with the Church, rather than being substantially dismantled and converted into accommodation.

I also strongly oppose the demolition of the Citadel Apartments. It is a beautiful Arts and Crafts building that contributes enormously to Mackenzie Street and the historic character of the area. Buildings like the Citadel are increasingly difficult to replace once lost. Their value is not simply whether they have an individual heritage listing, but what they contribute collectively to the character and history of a place.

There is something fundamentally wrong with retaining historic buildings while constructing new development at such a scale that the heritage becomes visually and physically subordinate to it.

I also question the introduction of significant retail and café activity into the Mackenzie Street interface. The proposed café, outdoor seating, through-site pedestrian connection and substantially increased activity will change what is presently a residential and Church environment into something much more commercial.

I support renewal of St Francis Xavier Church and sensible additional housing. What I do not accept is that achieving those objectives requires a 20-storey development of this intensity.

There must be a better outcome for this site: one that provides new housing while retaining the School Hall as a genuine community asset, respecting the Church and surrounding heritage buildings, preserving the character of Mackenzie Street and keeping new development at a scale appropriate to Lavender Bay.

Once the character and heritage of a place are lost, they cannot simply be recreated through landscaping or architectural references in a new development.

This proposal asks too much of a very special site. I urge the Department to refuse it in its current form and require a substantially smaller and more sensitive redevelopment.

I am writing as a resident of McMahons Point to object to the proposed development at Mackenzie Street, Lavender Bay.

I understand that Sydney needs more housing. However, I am very concerned that the scale of this proposal is simply too large for this location, especially given the existing problems with parking, traffic and furthermore with potential impact on the character of Lavender Bay.

My biggest concern is parking.

Parking in this area is already extremely difficult, particularly on Friday evenings, weekends and other busy periods. There have been many occasions when we have returned home on a weekend and had to drive around the surrounding streets for more than 30 minutes just trying to find a parking space.

This is already a well-known problem for residences living in the area. Miller Street is one of the main streets we rely on for parking and it is regularly already fully occupied. Adding a development of the size proposed at Mackenzie Street would place even more pressure on an already very difficult situation.

If this development is approved with a large number of additional apartments, visitors and commercial activity, I am very concerned that the parking situation will become significantly worse.

There will inevitably be more people looking for parking in the evenings and on weekends, as well as increased demand from visitors. The amount of parking provided within the proposed development will not be enough to accommodate the number of residents and visitors that a development of this size will bring.

Even if many residents use public transport, there will still be people who own and use cars. There will also be visitors, delivery drivers, cleaners, tradespeople, carers, removalists and other service vehicles that need somewhere to stop or park.

The surrounding streets simply do not have spare capacity to absorb all of this extra demand.

Even if the plan considers parking, the proposed number of increased residence proposed does not look like it will be able to capture the demand for such scale in this area.

We previously lived in an apartment area in Chatswood and have seen how increasing residential density can create congestion and parking problems when the surrounding area does not have enough capacity.

If sufficient parking is not provided within this development, the reality is that these additional vehicles will end up competing for the same street parking that existing residents are already struggling to find.

For people who do not live in the area, this may look like a relatively minor issue but for local residents, it affects everyday life.

Spending 20-30 minutes circling the neighbourhood looking for a parking space is already frustrating enough. Adding hundreds of additional residents and visitors without properly addressing parking demand will only make the situation worse.

I would strongly encourage the Department to carry out an independent parking assessment during real peak periods, including Friday evenings and weekends rather than relying only on modelling or assumptions.

I would also encourage decision-makers to visit the area during preak times and see the situation for themselves.

More apartments mean more residents, more visitors, more traffic, more activities such as deliveries and more pressure on local streets and parking.

I am also concerned about the proposed height and overall scale of the development. Lavender Bay has a very different character from the North Sydney CBD. It is a smaller residential area with heritage buildings, narrow streets and a much lower scale of development.

A building of around 20 storeys would be a major change to the character of this area. I do see that the site is close to North Sydney and public transport but that does not mean every nearby site should automatically become an extension of the North Sydney CBD.

There should still be a reasonable transition between the high-rise commercial environment of North Sydney and the established residential areas of McMahons Point and Lavender Bay.

I also read on heritage impact which I agree is an important factor to consider as well. St Francis Xavier Church and the former school building are part of the character and history of the area. While I understand that some heritage buildings are proposed to be retained, I am concerned that placing a very large tower immediately next to them could overwhelm their setting and significantly change the character and feel of the area.

I am also concerned about overshadowing, privacy and the loss of amenity for surrounding residents. A development of this height will inevitably have impacts beyond the site itself. Existing residents should not be expected to accept significant additional loss of sunlight, privacy or outlook without very careful consideration.

Construction is another major concern. A project of this size, including demolition and deep basement excavation, will involve a large number of trucks, workers, deliveries and construction vehicles over a significant period.

This again leads back to the parking issue which is already difficult now. If construction workers also rely on surrounding residential streets for parking, the situation could become extremely difficult for local residents. Any construction management plan should require workers to park off-site and should not allow the surrounding residential streets to effectively become construction parking areas.

I am not saying that the site should never be developed. What I am trying to express is that I believe there could be an opportunity for a more appropriate development that provides additional housing while properly considering the existing circumstances, heritage character and physical limitations of the area.

However, the development currently proposed appears too large for the site and would place additional pressure on an area that is already struggling with parking, traffic and infrastructure.

For these reasons, I respectfully ask that SSD-88702457 not be approved in its current form.

If the site is to be redeveloped, I would strongly support a significantly reduced proposal with lower height and density, adequate on-site parking, proper visitor parking, better protection of the surrounding heritage area and a realistic assessment of the cumulative traffic and parking impacts on McMahons Point and Lavender Bay.

I hope the Department gives fair weight to the experience of people who actually live in the area as well.

Thank you for your consideration.

Hi - I'm a mid-30s woman and I live in Milsons Point (in a 10-floor apartment building) with my husband. I've been a renter here for over 4 years now and I love living in this area.

While I've lived here, my rent has soared by 30% in 4 years and my apartment is among the more affordable ones. I routinely see 1 bedders advertised for 800-900 a week and a recent apartment sale of a 3 bedder in our building was 3.25m. We cannot see our way to buying an apartment in this area or anywhere on the lower north shore while these prices continue, and we will very likely have to move out of the area if we decide to even rent a larger space. To me this says something is broken in the housing market, and that is very much the supply of housing.

I would welcome new apartment buildings in this area that make it possible for myself and others like me to keep living near the city and near amenities. Every large European city has only high-density living within a 10km radius of the city and 'houses' only appear outside this radius - Sydney is unique in that houses and low-density buildings even exist this close to the city.

I suspect most younger people feel this way and we need to look to the future for the current and future generations rather than clinging to a past of village-like inner-city living, which inevitably requires that young people are pushed to areas 2 hours from the city so they can buy a house.

I would strongly urge you to approve this building and any other similar projects to come. Thank you.

I support the project, I believe it will significantly improve housing affordability and availability in the area.

I would however, like to see the number of units and storeys significantly increased as well as units set aside for essential workers.

Refer to attachment which details reasons for my objection to the project.

I object this project in terms of the height of the building proposal and that it will cause overshadowing. Also will cause more restricted parking to already restricted parking in the area and traffic build up.

I am a local resident of Lavender Bay and am concerned about the proposed redevelopment of the St Francis Xavier Church site.
My concern is the scale of this particular proposal and the impact it will have on the character of Lavender Bay.
A 20-storey tower with 107 apartments, together with 58 co-living dwellings in the heritage school building, feels excessive for this location. Lavender Bay has a unique character, with its heritage buildings, established homes, harbour setting and relatively low-rise streets.
I am particularly concerned about the safety of children and pedestrians. I have a young child and regularly walk up and down Mackenzie Street and through the surrounding suburbs. The additional construction vehicles, deliveries, resident vehicles and increased traffic associated with a development of this size could create significant additional risks on already constrained local streets.
I am also concerned about overshadowing, loss of sunlight, traffic, pedestrian safety and further pressure on already limited street parking.
These impacts are particularly concerning when considered alongside the other major developments proposed around Lavender Bay, Lavender Street and Middlemiss Street.
I would like to see a more appropriate scale and design that respects the surrounding neighbourhood and heritage character.
I respectfully ask the Department to refuse the proposal in its current form or require a substantial reduction in its height, bulk and density, together with careful consideration of its heritage, overshadowing, traffic and cumulative impacts.
Thank you for considering my submission.

My wife and I are the owners of a two storey terrace house in Lavender Bay which is in close proximity to the proposed development.

I have reviewed the EIS and wish to make it very clear that I OBJECT to what is proposed.

As I see it the following negative impacts, as a minimum, arise from the proposed Development:

1. The sheer square bulk of the proposed building, and in particular the bottom 3 floors starting from street level, is totally out of keeping with the residential surrounds. It is ugly and completely out of character with the heritage properties in the immediate area. If allowed to proceed the completed development as proposed will result in an irreversible destruction of the heritage character of this area, which is one of the few such left in Sydney.

2. The scale of the proposed building will significantly impact the solar access, privacy and general amenity for all local residents of this lovely suburb, but most particularly those houses immediately adjacent / opposite the site.

3. The fact that the total number of dwellings significantly exceeds the number of carparks, combined with the new zoning, can only lead to the obvious result that many many more cars will be parked on the surrounding streets for extended periods. This will massively reduce the parking available for visitors to existing residents of the area etc, which exacerbates an already constrained parking situation.

4. The additional number of people living in this building, must have the impact of increased motor vehicle traffic by those residents as well as their visitors and contractors. This can surely only result in a reduced level of safety for pedestrians and cycle traffic.

5. The size of the new building will cause substantially increased shading across the area.

Curious to see this evolve

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at the St Francis Xavier Church site, Mackenzie Street, Lavender Bay – SSD-88702457.
I understand the perceived need for additional housing and development around North Sydney, but I believe this proposal is simply too large and out of character for this particular location. There are already too many empty units in high rise buildings in the area.
My main concerns are:
Height, size and density
A development of up to 20 storeys is excessive for this site. Its height and bulk would extend the scale of the North Sydney CBD into Lavender Bay and significantly change the character of the area.
Heritage and character
The site is within and adjacent to the Lavender Bay Conservation Area. While the church is being retained, the size of the proposed development would overwhelm the church and surrounding heritage area.
Overshadowing, privacy and amenity
The development would create significant additional overshadowing and could affect sunlight, privacy, views and the general amenity of nearby residents.
Traffic and parking
Mackenzie Street, Miller Street and the surrounding streets are already busy and have limited parking. A development of this size will bring additional traffic, deliveries, construction vehicles and parking demand, creating further congestion and safety concerns for residents, pedestrians and cyclists.
The future of Lavender Bay
My greatest concern is the overall impact this development will have on Lavender Bay. Once a development of this size is built, the change is permanent and could also set a precedent for further large-scale development.
I respectfully ask that SSD-88702457 be refused in its current form or substantially reduced in height, bulk and density.
Development of this site should respect the heritage, character and residential amenity that make Lavender Bay such a unique part of North Sydney. Governments and developers need to start to look at the long term consequences of overdevelopment and who our cities and infrastructure actually belong to and who really benefits.

To whom it may concern,
I am a resident of Lavender Bay having lived at my current address for over 10 years.
The street I reside in (Wilona Avenue) sits directly below/adjoining the proposed new block., as such I and my family will be greatly negatively impacted by the proposed new building in the following ways :
1. Our dwelling faces north, meaning at the moment we enjoy a reasonable amount of sunlight during the winter months. The proposed building will completely block off such light rendering our house colder and darker in winter. From what I can tell it will probably block out all sunlight to out home in both winter and summer.
2. It will make the surrounding streets to our house much, mush busier. As it is most mornings it is very difficult to turn right out of Miller Street onto Lavender Street due to heavy traffic coming along Lavender Street. The addition of so many more cars trying to make that exit each day will make it impossible. Additionally, street parking is now very limited, it will also make that much more difficult and dangerous for our family and grandchildren when they come to see us.
3. The construction period also greatly concerns me. The noise and physical disruption will be enormous and probably last a number of years.
Overall I object to the lack of consultation with residents such as myself. I understand that lack of "affordable" housing is an issue but surely this proposal is not the answer as it is plainly targeting the views it will afford purchasers, views that will never be "affordable" to the average person. It seem to me that whole development is just a chance for the developer to make a huge profit under the guise of addressing the affordability issue.
Yours Sincerely,

Chris Burnett

I am opposed to this as the proposed high rises will overshadow the existing amenity literally as a large number of existing residences will lose their light plus impact the tourism as this is a very popular walk with tourists who like the old world vibe here- you don’t get that in Milsons point. More parking pressures from the vast residential tower is detrimental here where parking is already at a premium. As a disabled person, I can never park close enough to the bakery to enjoy their goods.
We have endured years of noise from the tunnel/ waringah freeway upgrade and years more disruption to the only access point off the bridge is very unwelcome.
This should be capped at 9 stories if it goes ahead
9

As a resident of McMahons Point, I would like to object to the sheer scale of this proposed development. I am supportive of more housing in the area but am very concerned about the impact this development will have on:
1. Safety due to increased traffic on Lavender St. and surrounding residential streets. The pavements are already congested and quite narrow making walking children and the elderly very difficult and can result on pedestrians having to walk on the road.
2. Lavender street is not part of the North Sydney precinct and therefore a building as tall as this will destroy the heritage of the area.
3. Parking is already very limited in this area and this will only get worse with such a huge development.
4. Overshadowing will impact a lot of the surrounding homes.
I believe that alternative designs should be considered to allow for affordable housing which is more in keeping with the area and addresses the issues above.
Thank you.

I wish to formally object to the proposed development at 1–19 Mackenzie Street and 211 Blues Point Road, Lavender Bay (SSD-88702457).
I recognise the need for additional housing in Sydney and support appropriate development in well-connected locations. My objection is not to housing or urban renewal in principle, but to the scale, density and intensity of the proposed development and its impact on the character and amenity of Lavender Bay.

Lavender Bay is a unique harbour-side pocket of Sydney. Despite its proximity to the highly urbanised North Sydney CBD, it retains a distinctive combination of heritage buildings, mature trees, gardens, public open space and harbour views.
As Sydney becomes more densely developed, these remaining pockets of character become more valuable, not less. Once this particular relationship between the built environment, greenery and harbour is substantially altered, it cannot be recreated.

I am particularly concerned that a development of up to 20 storeys would introduce a scale of built form that is inconsistent with the surrounding lower-scale neighbourhood and the character of the Lavender Bay Heritage Conservation Area. The impacts on visual amenity, public views, sunlight, greenery and the enjoyment of surrounding public spaces should be carefully considered.
The proposal should also be assessed in the context of the cumulative impact of other major developments proposed around North Sydney and Lavender Bay, rather than considering this development in isolation.

Sydney's growth should not come at the expense of the places that make the city distinctive and liveable. Housing can be provided in many locations; a place like Lavender Bay cannot be replaced.

I respectfully ask that the Department give significant weight to the long-term public value of preserving Lavender Bay's unique character, heritage setting, greenery, harbour views and public amenity when assessing this proposal.

I am writing this to lodge my formal objection against the development planned.

I live right across the street from this site, and honestly, this proposal is way too big for our street. We all seen what happened to
Crows Nest and St Leonards with all these massive developments going up non stop, and it totally ruined the local feel over there. We really don't want McMahons Point turned into another crowded concrete jungle like that.

Sunlight will be completely gone: Living directly opposite, a building of this height and bulk is going to block out our morning and afternoon sun. It will cast a massive shadow straight over our front windows and main living areas, leaving us in the dark all day.

Parking is already a nightmare for visitors: Street parking here is impossible as it is. I hold a resident parking permit, but even with that it's hard to park. When family, friends or delivery drivers come over to my house, they already struggle to find any spot. Adding a huge building without proper off street parking will flood our street with cars, making it impossible for visitors to park and making life really hard for us locals who hold permits.

Way too bulky for a small village: McMahons Point is supposed to be a low-density heritage area. Putting something this massive on a tight block completely ignores the rest of our quiet streetscape.

Loss of privacy: Because it's directly across the road, people on the upper floors will be looking straight into my front windows and living room every single day.

Please don't let this happen to our small community. I urge council to reject this application.

I wish to express my strong concern and objection to the proposed State Significant Development at 1–19 Mackenzie Street and 211 Blues Point Road, Lavender Bay (SSD-88702457).

I recognise the importance of increasing housing supply, including affordable housing, and support well-designed development in accessible locations. However, I believe the height, bulk and scale of this 20-storey proposal are inappropriate for the sensitive Lavender Bay context.

My concerns include:

• Heritage and visual impact: The proposed tower would have a significant visual impact on the Lavender Bay Heritage Conservation Area and the setting of St Francis Xavier Church and the heritage former school building. Its prominent elevated position would substantially alter the established character of the area and important views to and from Sydney Harbour.

• Residential amenity: The height and scale of the development have the potential to cause significant loss of solar access and overshadowing, as well as increased overlooking and privacy impacts for neighbouring properties.

• Traffic and parking: The additional density would place further pressure on local traffic and already-constrained street parking and local roads.

• Construction impacts: The substantial excavation and construction activity required for the development may result in prolonged noise, vibration, heavy vehicle movements and disruption to surrounding residents and streets.

While housing and affordable-housing objectives are important, they should be balanced against the heritage significance, established neighbourhood character, public views and residential amenity of Lavender Bay. The proposed development represents a substantial departure from the existing scale and character of the area.

I believe a substantially lower-scale alternative should be seriously considered, allowing additional housing to be delivered while providing a more appropriate transition between the North Sydney CBD and the lower-scale heritage and residential environment of Lavender Bay.

I respectfully ask that the Department refuse the proposal in its current form, or require a substantially reduced height, bulk and scale that better protects the heritage character, public views, solar access and residential amenity of the area.

Thank you for considering my submission.