Residential development with In-fill affordable housing - East Walker Street, North Sydney

I object to this submission due to the following key reasons:
- Traffic Congestion: the developments will result in increased traffic congestion, longer commute times, higher levels of pollution, and greater stress on public transportation systems. There are significant traffic congestion already during peak hours and the introduction of another apartment development will contribute to additional volumes.
- Quality of Life: Overall quality of life for current residents may be negatively impacted by the increased noise, traffic, and reduced availability of public amenities and green spaces. The proposed development will cause blockage of sunlight for a considerable number of apartments surrounding the location of the development, especially given the 30 story proposal in place.
- Overcrowding: There are already several apartment proposal and development in place and with the recent completion of the Aqualand apartment building, there will be significant overcrowding with the introduction of another development.

I am writing to highlight concerns with the proposed development application:
Residential with Affordable Housing - East Walker St, North Sydney (SSD-671754465)

• The proposed height of the building being 30 stories is completely out of character for the surrounding topography of the area.

• The building zone is bounded by Walker Street and Hampden Street. The only entrance / exit is via Walker Street which at this junction point is only wide enough for one car in each direction.

• All parking in Hampden Street which is a dead-end street and access to this area will quite possibly be restricted to accommodate heavy construction trucks. The residents in the terraces in Hampden Street directly opposite the development will more than likely be denied access.

• Walker Street has nearly reached saturation point in traffic during peak periods with the completion of the Aura development in Walker Street, the opening in January 2025 of Redham House school in McLaren Street and the demolition and construction of 45 McLaren Street adjourning the corner of Walker Street.

• The surrounding buildings which are all directly West of the development will see a marked decrease in direct sunlight for upwards of six months along with a complete shadow effect.

• The development is marked as “Affordable Housing” and although I believe this wording is what the developers are counting on, I question at what price is “affordable housing” going to be priced at with such close proximity to North Sydney CBD and Sydney City.

Thanking you

Frances Eriksson

I am opposed to this proposal because it represents the fourth version of this development effort since 2016.

The proposed proposal was earlier rejected in a lengthy private report to North Sydney Council by a Planning Consultant, which listed more than a dozen grounds for refusal, and then by North Sydney Council itself. The applicant also attempted but failed to advance the action before the Land and Environment Court, which they later withdrew.

This time it aims to use affordable housing rules to exceed bulk, height, and scale even farther than its prior clearance by imposing a 30-story highrise and a 12-story building on a valley floor of lowrise homes. This will have a significant negatiove impact on over 1000 homes in the surrounding area resulting in increased traffic and loss of solar access for starters. It entails a large increase in height over adjacent buildings with no attempt at height transition.

The neighbouring local road network is already overcrowded, with continuous traffic jams at the main Walker/Berry intersection just 50 metres.

I also believe that with all of the recent and upcoming projects surrounding the area, future traffic pressure has not been considered.

The lack of access is also a key concern. It will be extremely difficult first responder entrance in any type of emergency.

The project also causes significant overshadowing of nearby houses.

In terms of heritage, the proposal is located across the road from a set of Victorian terraces to the north and heritage buildings to the west, damaging the region and cultural ethos.

Reports fail to address earlier submissions and objections, do not completely or adequately account for recent developments in this area, and make deceptive assertions about "community engagement". Appropriate reports are necessary.

These are the primary objections. There are more detailed objections to be made.

Submission – 173-179 Walker Street & 11-17 Hampden Street, North Sydney, Application SSD-67175465
As residents of 8 Hampden Street, North Sydney we object to the proposed development at 173-179 Walker Street & 11-17 Hampden Street, North Sydney, Application SSD-67175465. It is unfortunate that the current development proposal does not seem to have taken into consideration sufficiently the substantive content of objections to previous development applications for this site. Moreover, that fact that the development has increased the number of dwellings under the guise of affordable housing provisions makes this even more disappointing.
There is consistent and strong local consensus in the local community that the proposal is unacceptable, inappropriate, and not in the public interest. We will expand on our objections as outlined below.
Emergency Responder Access
We have deep concerns about the Fire Brigade, Ambulance, and Police being able to access Hampden Street in case of fire or medical emergency. This is going to be an even great issue during peak traffic time periods.
Traffic access and broader traffic impact
Traffic access (entry and exit) to Walker Street East and into Hampden Street is already a significant challenge given the access point off Walker street. The additional volume of traffic particularly during peak periods will be unworkable. The additional 263 dwellings will make this impossible and a significant safety concern.
This issue broadens to the Walker Street traffic which already struggles at peak times such as during school drip off and pick up. The current traffic flow problems have not yet taken into account the following developments:
• Aqualand development at 168 Walker with 386 apartments
• New 14 storey residential approval 45 McLaren Street
• The new Reddam School in McLaren Street commencing in January 2025
• New approved 57 storey building at 110 Walker Street
• As well as a number of other proposals in the close vicinity
Parking, traffic and access
The residents of 2-14 Hampden Street all rely exclusively on on-street parking - with no off-street parking provided or permitted. As no on-street parking is designated for the exclusive use of these terrace houses, parking and resident amenity is directly linked to access to the 27 carparking spaces currently provided along Hampden Street and Walker Street (East), which are regularly used by residents. Other on-street parking in the broader area is less accessible, convenient and also highly competitive.
The proposal outlines a significant reduction in the provision of on-street parking (from Walker Street east and Hampden Street) as a result of the proposal, 27 to 16 spaces. This will therefore have a material and significant impact on resident amenity.
Overdevelopment – bulk, scale & height
Existing structures at the subject site typically range between 2-3 storeys. The current proposal is excessive, seeking approval for 30 storeys. This represents a significant increase in the built form, size and scale. The current proposal plans for the largest of the towers (at 30 storeys) to be located immediately opposite the 2 storey heritage terrace homes on Hampden Street, rather than at the southern extent on the site, adjacent to existing Berry and Walker Street precedent, which would also then be in closer proximity to the larger buildings in the North Sydney CBD as well as the future metro station. The proposal is not in keeping with the scale or vision for the local neighbourhood and would result in substantial overshadowing, view loss and impacts to resident amenity – particularly those low scale heritage terrace houses at 2-14 Hampden Street.
Solar Access
The proposal inflicts excessive overshadowing to surrounding dwellings, particularly the 9 storey apartment building at 88 Berry Street, and also Century Plaza. It blocks eastern and northern sun to other dwellings in Walker Street including Belvedere and The Heritage.
Overdevelopment – heritage impact
2-14 Hampden Street are heritage items with ‘Local’ significance. The terrace houses occupy two storeys and currently enjoy views across the subject site, of the North Sydney CBD, and harbour vistas from the upper balconies. The proposal for a 30 storey tower directly opposite these heritage items, is in no way, in keeping with the local character and is in direct violation of the heritage conservation area and ‘setting’ of these items of local heritage significance. The proposal will have a material impact on the heritage significance and setting that these items enjoy currently.
Overdevelopment – view loss
The terrace houses are two storeys, and currently enjoy views across the subject site, of the North Sydney CBD, and harbour vistas from the upper balconies. View loss from the Hampden Street terraces will be significant.
Overdevelopment - Resident’s right to privacy impact
The proposed overdevelopment of the site as proposed, would result in substantially reduced levels of privacy for local residents. Each Hampden Street residence is located directly opposite the proposed development, with the master bedroom windows fronting Hampden Street and therefore, the proposed development. Under the proposed plans, master bedroom windows and the living room (and all windows on the southern side of the properties) would be directly opposite the glass frontages to the north facing windows of the apartments incorporated in the proposed development. As such our right to privacy would be substantially violated by a development of this scale which would look directly into our master bedrooms, balconies and downstairs living areas.
Overdevelopment - Resident’s right to acoustic privacy
The substantial overdevelopment of the site would result in significantly higher levels of activity at the site from both residents, visitors and additional truck movements from Hampden Street. This would add substantially to the noise and activity along Hampden Street in violation of the existing neighbourhood character and would increase traffic and activity (including deliveries and loading) at extended hours compared to previous mid-scale residential activity.
The development, would result in additional activity and extended hours of activation, which would result in early morning and evening disturbances to existing Hampden Street residents through additional activity, traffic, noise and light, from early morning into the late evening by nature of the substantial critical mass of new residents above and beyond the existing. This activity would be taking place immediately opposite the master bedrooms, balconies and downstairs living areas of these heritage terrace houses which front the subject site.
Conclusion
Overall, while we note the attributes of the subject site would support redevelopment, we request the current application is refused on the basis of gross overdevelopment that will have material and substantial impacts for Hampden Street, but also the immediate community.

I strongly object to the proposal.
The report does not address all the previous submissions and objections. Nor do they take into account new developments in this area, which are many. As for engagement, the community has had none.
This will be a disaster for residents in Walker St and surrounding areas.

Please see attached word document.
Thank-you

I object to this proposal.

This development proposal failed three prior times, this is the forth attempt with new leverage of affordable housing provisions to exceed bulk, height and scale even beyond its previous SNPP approval by imposing a 30 storey highrise tower in excessively close proximity to a heritage neighbourhood and the Hampden Street Heritage Terrace Row.
There is united and strong local consensus that the proposal is unacceptable, inappropriate, and not in the public interest.

The reasons and concerns for my objection is as follows:

1. History of Rejection:
o This is the fourth iteration of the development attempt since 2016.
o The proposal was previously rejected by a Planning Consultant, the North Sydney Local Planning Panel (NSLPP), and North Sydney Council. Rejection supported by more than ten substantial reasons.
o An attempt to further the case in the Land and Environment Court was withdrawn by the applicant.

2. Character and Scale:
o The proposal includes a 30-storey tower and a 12-storey building in a low-rise housing area.
o It exceeds bulk, height, and scale provisions, and is out of character with the heritage neighborhood including the Hampden Street Terrace Row.
o It impacts over 1,000 dwellings with major traffic issues, loss of solar access, residential amenity, and view loss.

3. Traffic Impact:
o The local road network is already congested, specially at school hours from two major schools are within 100m.
o The site is on a one-way lane leading to a dead-end Hampden Street, with difficult access for Hampden Street residents at current time. Additional traffic from development will be detrimental for access by Hampden Street residents.
o Future traffic pressure from nearby developments has not been considered.
the new Aqualand development at 168 Walker with 386 apartments is ignored
- the new Reddam School in McLaren Street commencing in January 2025
- a new 42 storey building under construction over Victoria Cross Station
- a new 14 storey residential approval across the road at 45 McLaren Street
- a new approved 57 storey building at 110 Walker Street
o An adequate and realistic traffic analyses, access and intersection modelling, and impacts on existing residences is required.

4. Solar Access:
o Major light and view loss to Hampden Street Terrace Row, where current visual access to sky and natural light will be loss, blocked by the close proximity of the highrise tower directly opposite to the Hampden Street Terrace Row.

5. Heritage Impact:
o The proposal negatively affects the Victorian Terraces to the north and heritage buildings to the west, damaging the neighborhood character.

6. Parking
o The proposal removes on street parking on Walker Street and Hampden Street, this negatively impacts the existing Hampden Street residence which only have access to on street parking, which is already limited and difficult to find parking. .

7. View Loss:
o Major view loss to Hampden Street Terrace Row, where current visual access to sky and natural light will be loss, blocked by the close proximity of the highrise tower directly opposite to the Hampden Street Terrace Row. This is a negative impact to residence's mental health.

8. Emergency Access:
o This development will significantly hinder first responder access and egress in emergencies for Hampden Street residents, and for the development itself, due to the narrow access to site and Hampden Street, posing a major health and safety risk.

9. Proposal Documents:
o Proposal’s inclusive reports do not address previous submissions and objections, do not fully or properly take into account new developments in this area, and make false claims of “community engagement”. Proper reports are required.

10. Affordable Housing SEPP:
o The proposal inappropriately uses in-fill affordable housing changes to increase highrise tower building heights, which only applies to the building with affordable housing, not intended for the luxury apartments.

11. Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARS):
o The SEARS requirements must be upheld and properly measured against the proponent's responses, not as development currently use as ticking off check list to progress forward.


Given these points, it is clear that the proposal is considered unacceptable, inappropriate, and not in the public interest. The numerous grounds for objection highlight significant issues with planning principles, policy, and process.

Your Sincerely,
Edmund Lo

Please see attachment

I own and live in one of the terrace houses on Hampden Street. After both review of the development proposal documentation and discussions with the developer representatives during community consultations, the following are severe shortcomings which need better solutions

Construction impacts are unacceptable
Parking – removal of street parking spots. There will be inadequate on level parking for the terraces. It will be unsafe and difficult to park due to severely limited spots. Available spots will be well away from my property and up the pedestrian stairs. For shopping, stroller/pram, deliveries, tradespeople with tools, it will be too difficult for too long.
Lower Walker and Hampden street use - Car , truck and emergency vehicle access for residents will be unacceptably hampered. Construction vehicles and deliveries all need to be managed on the site not on the street.
Dust – the management of impact from dust spilling from the site is inadequate. My building, balconies, backyard, washing will be covered in dust. Better management of dust from the site is needed
Noise – construction noise needs to be managed more with stricter time limits. No after hours or weekend construction. This would allow for local residents to get rest and relief

Post construction impacts are unacceptable
The character of the area will completely change, which has major impact on the terraces. The development hugely detracts from the heritage aspect of Hampden Street. The proposed tower building has become taller than previous proposals for this site and does not provide any compromise for the 3 storey terraces along Hampden.

Totally unacceptable will be the ongoing major loss of on street parking in the local street. Terrace residents of Hampden Street have 21 street parking spots. The loss of so many local street parks in Hampden and lower Walker street due to the development cannot happen. The development takes away too many street parking spots. The development should provide parking for those affected in Hampden Street.

Light, overlooking and acoustic impacts on my terrace are unacceptable. (As an example the new Aura building has lights on all night shining into the rear of my property, this development will do the same and is closer) The plans show windows and balconies looking into my front room, and over the roof into backyards. The building should be set back further.

Traffic Impact. The developments vehicle entrance /exit at the southern end of lower Walker Street must be retained and is a huge improvement on previous proposals. This allows for a much safer and acceptable Hampden Street area with far lower traffic. Cars exiting the street parking on upper Hampden street must do a 3 point turn to proceed on lower Walker Street, and safety on this corner is maximised with reduced traffic. A give way sign at the top of lower Hampden going west should be installed assist in traffic management with this 3 point turn.

Introduction
 
I object to this proposal. This is the fourth iteration of this development attempt since 2016.
The proposed concept has previously been dismissed in a detailed private report to North Sydney Council by a Planning Consultant, by the NSLPP and by North Sydney Council itself. The applicant had also tried to further the case in the Land and Environment Court, however, later withdrew the application.
 
This time it attempts to leverage affordable housing provisions to exceed bulk, height and scale even beyond its previous SNPP approval by imposing a 30 storey highrise tower plus a 12 storey building in a valley floor of lowrise housing. The proposal is completely out of character with the neighbourhood and impacts more than 1000 dwellings in Walker, Hampden, McLaren, Miller and Berry Streets with major traffic impact, loss of solar access, loss of residential amenity and major view loss. It involves a major and significant increase over surrounding building heights with no attempt at height transition at all.
 
Major Traffic Impact 
 
The adjacent local road network is already heavily congested with constant queuing at the major Walker/Berry intersection only 50 metres away. During the AM and PM peak periods, Walker/ Ridge/ McLaren/Miller Streets are heavily gridlocked and often look like a ‘car park’.

The traffic report does not respond to this impact:
 
- the site is on a one-way lane which leads to a dead-end (photo attached)
- access to the site is extremely difficult northbound, and impossible southbound. Currently residents need to make a u-turn in traffic southbound to enter the lane, or attempt to cross queued intersection traffic northbound
- the Walker Street/Berry Streets intersection has constant high traffic volumes
- there is existing gridlock at peak hours and school times
- two major schools: Wenona and Monte’s are within 100m
- ingress and egress from the precinct is already difficult with only two exits
- garbage trucks currently have to reverse down the one way lane
construction vehicle access would be impossible

Future traffic volume has not been taken into account given the following developments:
- the new AURA (Aqualand) development at 168 Walker with 386 apartments is ignored
- a new 14 storey residential approval across the road at 45 McLaren Street
- the new Reddam School in McLaren Street commencing in January 2025
- a new 42 storey building under construction over Victoria Cross Station 
- a 48 storey proposal at 100 Walker Street
- a 26 storey proposal at 71 Walker Street
- Western Harbour Tunnel and on-ramp impacts and their effects on the intersection
 
I recommend that a proper detailed traffic analysis, access and intersection modelling and performance, and impacts on existing residences conducted at peak and non-peak times of the day is required.
 
View Analysis
 
There is a major view corridor to the west of the site resulting in major view loss to hundreds of apartments including Belvedere, The Heritage, McLaren Apartments, The Harvard, North, Vantage, The Miller, and North Star Apartments (on Walker Street) for those which are South-facing. In some cases, this view loss is going to be total. The View analysis does not adequately respond to this view loss. The proposal fails all four steps of the Tenacity principles (Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council [2004] NSWLEC 140). In particular, step four emphasises that where view loss arises as a result of non-compliance, even a moderate impact may be considered to be unreasonable.
 
Emergency Responder Access
 
It is impossible to get a fire truck into the narrow laneway, therefore extremely difficult first responder access or egress in any kind of emergency is a major health and safety issue and places a heavy burden on those involved in any approval. (refer photo attached)
 
Solar Access
 
The proposal inflicts excessive overshadowing to surrounding dwellings, particularly the 9 storey apartment building at 88 Berry Street, and also Century Plaza. It also blocks Eastern and Northern sun to other dwellings in Walker Street including Belvedere and The Heritage.
 
Heritage
 
The proposal is across the road from a row of Victorian Terraces to the north and heritage buildings across the road to the west and will completely ruin their neighbourhood.
 
Supporting Documents
 
Reports do not address previous submissions and objections, do not fully or properly take into account new developments in this area, and make false claims of “community engagement”. Proper and accurate reports are required. 
 
Previous Planning Panel Approval
 
Despite the above substantial issues, the Sydney North Planning Panel under then Minister Stokes and chairman Peter Debnam, approved a 28 storey building. In doing so, the Panel dismissed 145 detailed objections from surrounding residents, other developers, and North Sydney Council. The Panel did not adequately pose the objections to the developer, and its decision was cursory and highly undemocratic. The planning process to this point has failed residents. The past approval can viewed at:
 
https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/ppr/lep-decision/173-179-walker-street-and-11-17-hampden-street
 
Regardless, it is critical to note that the previous SNPP approval was highly specific and required the following:
 
- A slender built form – this proposal is not slender
- 12m building separations – this proposal does not provide 12m separations
- A reduction in length along Walker Street – this proposal actually increases this length from previously
- Avoidance of overshadowing to the south – overshadowing is increased in this new proposal
- An 8 storey maximum for the secondary building – this has now increased to 12 storeys
 
These are all important points to consider in assessing this new proposal since they transgress the SNPP approval and the Department of Planning’s own report. In addition, the Department’s Urban Design team also raised serious concerns (attached) including floor plate sizes, solar access modelling, building bulk, design not appropriate to the important view corridor, and they were not satisfied with the detail for the proposed level of change to the final LEP. It is evident that the Department of Planning did not support the proposal with conviction.
 
When the previous DA arrived at Council, the developer chose to deem refusal and lodged a case with the Land and Environment Court, which was later withdrawn by the applicant.
 
There is unanimous strong local community consensus that this proposal is unacceptable, inappropriate, and not in the public interest of the North Sydney community.

The proposal cannot be justified on planning principles, policy or process and is fatally flawed on many grounds.
 
In-fill Affordable Housing SEPP
 
This proposal attempts to use the in-fill affordable housing changes to increase its luxury building to 30 storeys and to increase a previous 8 storey approval to 12 storeys. But the SEPP which allows for bonuses in building height only applies to the building with the affordable housing. This proposal attempts to transfer this bonus to the luxury apartments which is disingenuous. A merit assessment of the above impacts will expose this ploy and isolate the affordable housing building.
 
SEARS
 
The Planning Secretary’s SEARS requirements are highly specific. These requirements are policy and must be upheld and fully and properly measured against the proponent’s responses. This latest application treats them as a ticking the box exercise. 

This submission has been prepared in direct response to the impact of views to 45 McLaren Street and requests that the VIA be amended as outlined in the attached letter, to appropriately assess the impacts on the approved development at 45 McLaren Street, North Sydney. It is not until these impacts have been properly assessed and considered, can an assessment of the environmental impacts be undertaken.

Based on independent assessment, I have come to the realisation that
- the site is on a one -way lane leading to a dead-end
- access to the site is extremely difficult northbound, and there is no access southbound. Residents need to make a u-turn in traffic southbound to enter the lane, or attempt to cross queued intersection traffic northbound
- there is no scope for a turning circle at the dead-end due to a heritage protected median garden strip
- the Walker Street/Berry Streets intersection is effectively Highway 1 with constant high traffic pressure
- construction vehicle access would be impossible
- at peak hours and school times there is existing gridlock
- Two major schools are within 100m
- ingress and egress from the precinct is already difficult
- garbage trucks currently have to reverse down the one way lane

In addition, future traffic pressure has not been taken into account:
- the new Aqualand development at 168 Walker with 386 apartments is ignored
- 45 McLaren Street future development will add over 100 new apartments
- the Western Harbour Tunnel impacts and on-ramp and their effects on the intersection
- The new Reddam School in McLaren Street commencing in January 2025
- 57 storey building at 110 Walker Street

The development, if it proceeds, will devalue my investment I have on a property in this area.

I object to the project application number SSD-67175465 for the a number of critical reasons listed below. Please consider the them and reject the project application to prevent further deterioration of the already over-crowded North Sydney LGA.
1. Infrastructure Strain: Increased population density can place a significant strain on existing infrastructure, including roads, public transportation, water supply, sewage systems, and waste management services, leading to potential breakdowns or overuse.
2. Traffic Congestion: the developments will result in increased traffic congestion, longer commute times, higher levels of pollution, and greater stress on public transportation systems.
3. Overcrowded Public Services: Schools, hospitals, and other public services
4. Noise Pollution: Increased noise levels
5. Parking Shortages: Increased population density can exacerbate parking issues, making it difficult for residents and visitors to find adequate parking spaces and leading to illegal parking and associated problems.
6. Quality of Life: Overall quality of life for current residents may be negatively impacted by the increased noise, traffic, and reduced availability of public amenities and green spaces.
7. Public Opinion: If a significant portion of the local community is opposed to the development, this can be a compelling reason to reconsider or modify the plans to better align with residents' wishes and concerns.

Appreciate for your consideration. Please reject project application number SSD-67175465

The project is not in character with the surrounding neighborhood, and threatens to pose substantial infrastructure challenges in terms of traffic flow, in addition to view infringement for existing properties.

Dear officer,
As an existing residence who is living in this area for years, I am strongly object to this high-density residential development in an already crowded North Sydney local government area that's based on the following reasons:

Traffic Congestion: the developments will result in increased traffic congestion, longer commute times, higher levels of pollution, and greater stress on public transportation systems.

Overcrowded Public Services: Schools, hospitals, and other public services
Noise Pollution: Increased noise levels

Parking Shortages: Increased population density can exacerbate parking issues, making it difficult for residents and visitors to find adequate parking spaces and leading to illegal parking and associated problems.

Quality of Life: Overall quality of life for current residents may be negatively impacted by the increased noise, traffic, and reduced availability of public amenities and green spaces.

Infrastructure Strain: Increased population density can place a significant strain on existing infrastructure, including roads, public transportation, water supply, sewage systems, and waste management services, leading to potential breakdowns or overuse.

I hope the above interpretation is given serious consideration, and that we can maintain North Sydney as a better place to live and a sustainable place to grow.

Kind Regards

Others will write well argued cases against this development but for goodness sake - this is a project of selfish greed and graft. Manipulation of rules and for individual gain of the developer. It does nothing but diminish the amenity of the area for everyone. It simply does not pass the pub test.

Value impact study attached - this is referred to in my submissions

I object to this proposal based on the factors noted below:

- Infrastructure Strain: the new development will increase the population density of North Sydney leading to significant strain on existing infrastructure, including roads, public transportation, water supply, sewage systems, and waste management services, leading to potential breakdowns or overuse.
- Traffic Congestion: the developments will result in increased traffic congestion, especially on walker street which can potentially flow onto Mclaren street too, and subsequently lead to longer commute times, higher levels of pollution, and greater stress on public transportation systems.
- Noise Pollution: Increased noise levels
- Parking Shortages: Increased population density can exacerbate parking issues, making it difficult for residents and visitors to find adequate parking spaces and leading to illegal parking and associated problems.
- Quality of Life: Overall quality of life for myself as a current resident will likely to be negatively impacted by the increased noise, traffic, and reduced availability of public amenities and green spaces.

Dear officer,
As an existing residence who is living in this area for years, I am strongly object to this high-density residential development in an already crowded North Sydney local government area that's based on the following reasons:

Traffic Congestion: the developments will result in increased traffic congestion, longer commute times, higher levels of pollution, and greater stress on public transportation systems.

Overcrowded Public Services: Schools, hospitals, and other public services
Noise Pollution: Increased noise levels

Parking Shortages: Increased population density can exacerbate parking issues, making it difficult for residents and visitors to find adequate parking spaces and leading to illegal parking and associated problems.

Quality of Life: Overall quality of life for current residents may be negatively impacted by the increased noise, traffic, and reduced availability of public amenities and green spaces.

Infrastructure Strain: Increased population density can place a significant strain on existing infrastructure, including roads, public transportation, water supply, sewage systems, and waste management services, leading to potential breakdowns or overuse.

I hope the above interpretation is given serious consideration, and that we can maintain North Sydney as a better place to live and a sustainable place to grow.

Kind Regards