Residential Flat Buildings (x 2) at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane and Pearson Avenue, Gordon

The application SSD-82395459 should be rejected or put on hold considering the Kuring-Gai council had submitted the preferred scenario to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for approval.
The application is full of misleading or inaccurate information.

Impact to adjacent heritage buildings:-
Right next to the building is right next to the designated heritage conservation (the Gondondal Estate Conservation Area). 9 Burgoyne Street and 8 Pearson Avenue are also heritage listed. The project's high-rise buildings will make an abrupt contrast to the heritage buildings surrounding it. There is no consideration of aesthetic value and privacy of the neighbourhood.

Trees and biodiversity:-
Kuringai has been noted as the 'lungs' of Sydney as our area is renowned for its trees canopy, which also house a vast diversity of birds and native animals. According to this proposal, with the 115 trees on the building site, 62 trees will be cut. With the remaining 53 trees, there is no preservation plan to make sure their root systems will be maintained. So it is unsure about their destiny.
Traffic Issue:-
The 'junction' between Park Ave, Pearson Ave and Wenora Ave is always in a deadlock during peak traffic. Also there are three zebra crossings at that junction. This combination has made that section of Gordon with cars queuing up during peak hours. Some cars may not be going to Pacific Hwy but towards the station to drop off commuters. If there are twin 7- storey apartments built according to the application, with the exponential growth in number of cars and foot traffic at the zebra crossing, the congestion will be a nightmare.

Thank you.

Please see attached Harry Castles submission in objection

See attached letter detailing my strong objection

To Whom It May Concern,

Re: Formal Objection to State Significant Development SSD-82395459 – Proposed High-Density Development on Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane, and Pearson Avenue, Gordon

I write to formally object to the proposed development lodged under SSD-82395459 by Develotek Property Group for the construction of multiple 8-storey apartment towers in the heart of Gordon. As a long-standing community member, I am deeply concerned by the size, scale, and impact of this proposal, which I believe is not only inappropriate for the site, but contrary to established planning principles, local heritage protections, and environmental stewardship.

This application is an opportunistic and deeply concerning attempt to exploit recent changes in planning legislation intended to encourage sensible in-fill housing, not to justify excessive, overbearing, and ill-integrated towers that irreversibly alter the character of our suburb.

1. Disregard for Council’s Preferred Planning Scenario
The proposed development directly contradicts Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario, which explicitly excluded this site from future development due to its significant heritage and biodiversity value. To approve this development would be to override the Council’s democratically endorsed planning framework without proper justification.

2. Destruction of Local Heritage and Character
Gordon is a suburb steeped in heritage, with homes and landscapes dating back to the 1830s. The proposed towers are entirely out of character with the surrounding low-rise residential streetscape and the nearby Gordondale Heritage Conservation Area. The scale, massing, and height of the buildings will overshadow existing homes, reduce visual and acoustic privacy, and significantly alter the cohesive and historic feel of the neighbourhood.

3. Environmental Impact
The removal of over 60 mature trees—including native and historic exotics—would be an act of environmental vandalism, stripping the site of its canopy and destroying critical wildlife habitat. This not only undermines local climate resilience efforts but contradicts Ku-ring-gai Council’s Urban Forest Policy and the NSW Government’s stated commitment to urban biodiversity.

4. Design Quality and Urban Impact
The design reflects an unimaginative, box-like typology, maximising developer profit rather than architectural merit or community amenity. It fails to offer a respectful interface with surrounding homes and contributes nothing to visual cohesion, public space, or neighbourhood livability. The density proposed is jarring and will place unacceptable pressure on local infrastructure and services.

5. Lack of Community Consultation
There has been no genuine community engagement or social impact assessment by the developer. This omission is in breach of the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI)’s social impact assessment requirements and disregards the voices of residents most affected by the development. Emails have gone unanswered, no briefings have been offered, and no channels for meaningful dialogue have been made available.

6. Traffic and Infrastructure Concerns
With nearly 200 car spaces proposed, traffic along Pacific Highway and surrounding streets—already heavily congested—will worsen significantly. The developer’s claims that the project will have minimal impact on the traffic network are fanciful and unsubstantiated. No measures have been proposed to mitigate increased congestion or pressure on public transport.

7. No Tangible Community Benefit
Despite its enormous scale and impact, the proposal offers nothing in terms of improvements to public amenities, open space, or community services. It is purely a profit-driven proposal with no demonstrated benefit for current or future residents of Gordon.

Conclusion

This development is inappropriate, ill-considered, and inconsistent with the established planning, environmental, and heritage protections that make Gordon a unique and liveable suburb. It is crucial that this proposal be referred to the Independent Planning Commission (IPC) for thorough and transparent scrutiny, with opportunities for public input and site inspections.

I urge the Department to reject this proposal in its current form and instead uphold the principles of sustainable, context-sensitive development that respects the community, the environment, and the local heritage that defines Gordon.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

I object to the proposed development SSD-82395459 at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane and Pearson Avenue
The proposal should be rejected and require modifications to align with the Kuring-Gai Council preferred alternative to TOD, which is pending on NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for approval.
The height of the building is of particular concern as it breached the TOD requirement. It should be limited to 4 storeys at maximum. A summary of my concern are listed below:
1. Visual Impact: The building’s scale and height significantly exceed the established norm for the area, leading to a loss of cohesion in urban design and visual amenity.
2. Diminished Heritage value: The development’s scale and height diminish the visual harmony of the area, overshadowing historically significant buildings and altering the established skyline, affecting the appreciation of the many historically significant buildings that are adjacent to the proposed site.
3. Overshadowing: The development will cast substantial shadows over nearby properties, particularly affecting residential homes and public spaces, thereby reducing natural light access.
4. Privacy: The increased elevation will result in direct overlooking into adjacent properties, compromising residents’ privacy.
5. Impact on Tree Canopy: The development will remove at least half of the trees on the proposed site, reducing shade, air quality benefits, and biodiversity. It will also affect the health of the reaming trees.
6. Increased Traffic Congestion: The additional residents from the development will significantly increase vehicle movement, leading to congestion on surrounding roads.

We are horrified by the proposed development on Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane and Pearson Avenue, Gordon. Its sheer size, both height and footprint, will dominate the immediate area. It is of particular concern that the development seeks to bypass the plans for the area by Ku-ring-gai Council; these plans include a considerable increase in housing density in the area. Another concern is the environmental destruction envisaged, which will inevitably be more that the developer suggests in his submission. Also major traffic congestion on Pearson Avenue will be a significant consequence; even with no development in the area it is a significant concern.

Comments attached.

Please see attached...

I am deeply concerned about the prospect of the proposed building opposite my residence. There are a multitude of problems with the proposal as noted below:

Statutory Context:
-The application is not in keeping with Ku-Ring-Gai Council’s proposed TOD alternative zones. This area as R2 low density residential with a maximum of 9.5m and FSR of 03:1. This decision was a result of many of the concerns noted below in this submission but particularly issues regarding traffic safety, the proximity to the neighbouring HCA and Heritage Items and the sensitivity of the environment in this valley.
-Isolation of Properties: The proposal does not appear to adequately factor in the isolation impacts on “Eudesmia”, dwelling house, No. 9 Burgoyne Street, Gordon. This proposed development opens up the issue of site isolation which is in opposition to the principles of ‘site isolation’ control in Part 3 of the Ku Ring Gai DCP.

Engagement:
The engagement for this project was disingenuous. While they did provide a flyer, there was inadequate access to designs to effectively evaluate the plans for initial feedback and the door knock was unannounced prior and gave the impression that the developers were trying to capture positive feedback with residents unable to formulate their thoughts in a considered manner.

Design Quality:
-Given the proximity to the surrounding Victorian and Federation HCA and Local Heritage Items the design shows a distinct lack of understanding of the aesthetic quality of the area. In particular the importance of large established trees is a quintessential feature of the Ku-Ring-Gai LGA.

Built Form and Urban Design:
-The design has direct interface of 7 storeys backing onto the Gordondale Estate HCA with maximum 2 storey buildings which will be overshadowed. Given the development would be to the North of the HCA this will limit access to light for the north facing side of the properties. While claiming that the design ‘steps up’ to reduce impact on neighbouring properties, it steps up the hill TOWARD the HCA.
-The ‘utilisation’ of Burgoyne Lane for driveway access is not suitable for high density dwellings. The lane is not properly sealed and is narrow with cars unable to pass in both directions. This would create unsafe traffic conditions in ordinary circumstances as well as a disastrous bottle neck in emergency situations.
-The application includes misleading information indicating that the height of the development would be in keeping with TOD whereas Ku-Ring-Gai Council’s proposed TOD alternative zones this area as R2.

Environmental Amenity:
-Solar Access: The interface of 7 storeys backing onto my one storey HCA property will overshadow, limiting access to light from the North. Given issues with Ku Ring Gai Council preserving Pearson Avenue visuals of my property we plan on placing solar panels on the garage located on Burgoyne Avenue when we renovate in future. This development will prevent our access to solar power.
-Visual Privacy: Given the proximity of the development and its height with respect to my property I will lose all privacy in the main living area of our property which was renovated to take advantage of the Northern aspect to reduce environmental impacts on the understanding that as an HCA property we would not be able to develop (which is still the case under the Ku Ring Gai proposed TOD), nor would other surrounding properties be permitted to overshadow us.
-View Loss: Changes to the sightlines will dramatically affect my enjoyment of the area’s natural beauty from my property. From my living space I can see out across the valley with no buildings in sight. I bird watch from the rear of my property, appreciate the tall gums and star gaze. The height of this proposed development as well as increased light pollution will drastically impact my enjoyment of views at all times of day.

Transport:
- Park Avenue and Pearson/Werona Avenue are the most congested streets in Ku Ring Gai. Adding a large scale development on an existing choke point without an integrated traffic improvement plan by the State (I would argue that connections to the Railway, Bus connection and Highway this would exceed the typical council traffic works). This will also be a very significant problem during any construction. In the consultation process for Ku Ring Gai Council’s proposed TOD this has been a topic of robust discussion from residents along Pearson and Carlotta Avenues as well as surrounding streets. Councillors accepted that even their previous proposals which had lower density than the State’s TOD were not going to be suitable for the unique geographical features of this area.
- Pedestrian access in the area is extremely dangerous. I regularly observe and experience near misses at Pearson Avenue. Reported accidents are in no way indicative of actual problems faced by the community.
- My property has one crossing on Burgoyne Lane. My stepfather is disabled and the developers have not adequately responded to my concerns about maintaining his access to the property during construction.

Noise and Vibration:
Heritage Federation properties on the street such as my own were constructed on basic sandstone footings placed on a very heavy clay. I anticipate that major structural works will have impacts on surrounding properties including damage to my own building. Furthermore, the original Federation glass in some of the homes is extremely thin and at risk of damage as well as significant noise pollution during the construction process.

Biodiversity:
- The SSD application seems to contain contradictory information regarding Biodiversity. At one point there are no protections required, at others they note that the northwest section of the development site contains a remnant of critically endangered Blue Gum High Forest. The tree to which I believe they are referring to is an essential corridor for local bird life which I observe from my residence and no doubt other native species.
- The proposal acknowledges that the area is a foraging ground for the grey-headed flying fox, however, it does not address how the reduction of trees to the sites will impact this endangered species. They are already under quite a bit of stress in the area as of the 2020 Bushfire season and changes to their food sources is very concerning.
- The proposal acknowledges that the area is a foraging ground for the Powerful Owl, however, it does not address how the reduction of trees, increased light pollution and high buildings at this site will impact this endangered species.
- The environmental report makes no mention of Echidnas. We have observed echidnas migrating through our property on a regular basis throughout the years. They come through Burgoyne Lane, presumably from the water source down in the Flying Fox reserve. There must be an appropriate study to determine the impact of any construction on the echidnas.
- The environmental report makes no mention of Antechinus which also frequent our property. There must be an appropriate study to determine if there is presence of this species which again are probably located through the valley and an important food source for the area’s Powerful Owl population.

Social Impact:
The whole SSD process is causing significant emotional distress for the community and costing huge amounts of time and energy to protect from grotesque and highly inappropriate development proposals such as this one.

The proposal should be refused on all of these grounds.

I lived in Gordon for more than 10 years. It is heart-breaking to see an opportunistic attempt by developer to lodge application while the Kuring-Gai council is formulating an alternative to NSW government TOD.
I have been only given 3 weeks to read 38 Appendixes and 174 pages of EIS to give comments on the proposal. This is more than a full-time job. My findings may only be scratching the surface of a bigger problem the proposal presented.
The application SSD-82395459 should be rejected or at least put on hold considering the Kuring-Gai council had submitted the preferred scenario to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for approval. If the preferred scenario is approved, it will replace the current TOD planning controls.
The application should also be rejected because it has misleading/incomplete/inaccurate information. It whitewashes the irreparable damage to Gordon heritage, environment and biodiversity. It downplayed the traffic jam it will cause during the construction and the long-term impact to the traffic after

Details of my reason to object can be found in the attachment.

1. Scale is excessive for the street: high rises should be concentrated along the Pacific Highway at Gordon as per Ku--Ring-Gai Council preferred option which has public support; there are already several blocks of flats along there. The highway can cope with the resulting increased traffic unlike around Werona, Pearson, Burgoyne and Park streets which are already congested, particularly at peak and school hours.
2. Excessive vegetation loss: over 60 significant trees will be removed affecting local wild life and carbon foot print (replacement trees if any will take decades to reach their size) ;
3. The lack of setback on all sides does not allow for tree planting, revegetation and landscaping, not mentioning privacy. Climate change with increasing temperatures (refer to current trends on BOM) will worsen "the heat effect" generated by all this concrete.
4. Poor design with 2 uninteresting rectangular blocks over-towering nearby properties.

As a longstanding member of this community, I vehemently object to the proposed development.

Over the years I have taken regular and, at times, daily walks along Pearson Avenue and Burgoyne St, enjoying the quiet contemplation afforded by such a tranquil environment (rather than walking along one of the busier, noisier thoroughfares nearby). The verdant leafiness of this part of Gordon and the beauty and historical significance of its buildings adds to the pleasure of these walks and I would hate to see such attributes destroyed by the looming height and excessive size of the ‘mini-city’ eyesore proposed by the Developer. It is unsurprising that this proposal is so unwelcome and inappropriate given the failure of the Developer to engage in any genuine, meaningful conversation with the community about our concerns through avenues such as briefings or webinars relating to the project.

The hideous, high-rise design proposed is completely out of synch with the low-rise heritage architecture around it and the plan ignores key planning principles and the Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario which explicitly excluded this site from development. Furthermore, I am appalled to learn that 62 trees, many of which are old native trees and provide a habitat for local wildlife, would have to fall in order to make it happen; sacrificing biodiversity in return for a hideous, towering apartment block focused only on maximising density and profit for the Developer.

My other major concern is the effect that this multi-story apartment complex would have on the traffic congestion of the surrounding area. Many of the feeder streets to the Pacific Highway are narrow and the local community already faces queues and delays on the road caused by the bottleneck on Park Avenue (for example). Just trying to go for a coffee at one of the cafes on St Johns Ave or on the Highway involves frustration in driving there, finding a park and then finding a seat in the cafe because of all the people and vehicles crammed into a small shopping area and its surrounding streets. And then there is the ever-present headache of trying to find a park within walking distance of Gordon Station whenever one needs to catch a train somewhere. Solving’ this problem with another ugly, multi-level car park is a grim prospect so I hate to think of the domino effect the proposed building could have.

Anyone who has lived for decades in this part of Sydney has already seen Chatswood and Hornsby disfigured by rampant high-rise development. And who benefits from the destruction of the aesthetic and historical ambience of these suburbs? It is certainly not the local community for whom a proposal such as this has no benefit; we who feel lucky to live here and for whom a quiet stroll among leafy trees and charming heritage houses is one of life’s simple pleasures.

11 June 2025
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Re: Submission of Strong Objection to SSD-82395459--
3a, 3b, 5a & 7 Burgoyne Street, 1 & 3 Pearson Ave & 4 Burgoyne Lane, Gordon

Based on Willowtree Planning’s request for SEARs re SSD-82395459, dated 4 April 2025:

Design Approach and Built Form
I completely disagree with Willowtree Planning’s (p.7 of 21) presumption that the addition of this oversized development could be considered “the desired future character” of this attractively leafy, unpretentious, undulating, early-settled area of Gordon. No development of such height is welcome in the beautiful tree-canopied suburban streets of Gordon, or any suburb!
And, I join many other rational residents in disputing Willowtree’s (what a misnomer!) claim that this proposed development would be “visually digestible”. It is positively unpalatable in all respects and its plans should be swiftly committed to the garbage bin on account of the wasteful demolition of seven substantial houses for humans and uncountable habitation and nature highway for the multitude of wildlife that inhabit the valleys and creeks nearby that would occur.

Solar Access
Willowtree’s statement on solar access is so badly explained it sounds suspect and needs more clarity. Despite claims of “proposed setbacks” and boasting about “skilfully designed built form”, it is very difficult to believe that the heritage listed No. 9 next door would benefit from even “a minimum of 4 hours of direct sunlight between 9am to 3pm” even on “21st June”!

Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access
Willowtree’s “No significant impact on the surrounding road network” is a laughable statement. Pearson Ave is fully parked out early every weekday and a challenge for drivers most every hour of the day, reaching crescendo at the end of the school day when traffic backs up from the junction of Charlotte Ave and Mona Vale Road to approach to the Pacific Highway—without the assistance of traffic lights!! A potential 200 cars entering and exiting a more than 100-unit, eight-storey unit block in Pearson Avenue, almost opposite a three-storey—reasonable height—unit block would definitely further exacerbate the traffic problems on the narrow winding roads in this vacinity.

Please also take into account that at 1-7 Carlotta Avenue, just down the road and even nearer the pinch point with Mona Vale Road/Pacific Highway, the area might be lumbered with the Uniting Gordon Development for senior citizens on the former
Ku-ring-gai Council‘s former depot. It is a development that has been in the making for near on 10 years and, by the rights of first come first served, should precede any other. And, mercifully, unlike SSD-82395459, no perfectly good homes or masses of oxygenzting canopy vegetation had to be demolished to provide the site for that development.

Flooding
Subject to implementing these mitigation measures, the proposed development is deemed acceptable from a flood management perspective.
Doubtless, much good luck would be deemed necessary to mitigate flooding problems in the area plagued with a very old/antique public drainage system. And it is not the only infrastructure that should be updated before future development of any kind is even contemplated, e.g., roads, sewer, power supply (is always being worked on), not to mention transport, the excuse for the Transport Oriented Development move by Government. Well there was yet another interruption to the train system as I write.

Waste
I am hoping there will be no need of a waste management plan because adjudication by the Planning Department or Minister for Housing will reasonably deny SSD-82395459. The demolition of the homes that occupy the in excess of 7,000 sqm of land along with the essential, oxygenzating canopy would be waste enough.

Heritage
The houses being offered up for demolition may not be on any heritage list but No.7 should have been and demolition of it would be sinful. However, No.9 is on the Local Heritage Register and it would be overshadowed into insignificance by SSD-82395459. Also, the unique Garden Square community and, close-by, three more locally heritage listed treasures in Park Avenue—the Church, No. 20-22 plus Nos.18 and14-16 Park Avenue— would be at risk of being squashed between this proposed 8-storeys of boxy-looking dwarfing and overlooking apartments and another as unattractive 10 storeys on the north side of Park Avenue.

The Ku-ring-gai Council has submitted a preferred alternative to the State Government’s imposition—TOD, etc. Please don’t allow any State Significant Developments like SSD-82395459 to interfere, even cause overbuild, ruin the environment.

Yours in hope,
Carolyn Darby
PO Box 595, Gordon 2072

Please find attachment

Having downloaded and studied the plans, I object on the basis that the height and bulk of the buildings is far too huge and is incongruous with the surrounding area of houses and gardens. Developments should merge with the landscape and this one most certainly would not. The residents would be confronted with a towering block that would destroy the beauty of the area. Likewise, and of great importance, is the fact that the project's significant sprawl and size would mean the cutting down of a great many large trees and the clearing of the whole area which provides habitat for our native wildlife that has already been driven out by over-development in other suburbs. In an era in which the protection of the environment has become increasingly important, it is crucial that Ku-ring-ai's unique landscape be protected by the State Government. Once it is gone it is gone forever.
Finally, I would like to add that the streets near Gordon Station are already crowded with parked cars and congestion is very bad in both the morning and afternoon. The project does not provide adequate parking for multiple cars and hence the overflow of cars would have to be parked in the streets.
Overall, this project is entirely unsuitable for everyone except the developer who has his eye on the money, not on the impact of the buildings on the environment, the residents and the wildlife.

Dear Planning Team,
I strongly object to this development for a number of reasons. My key objections are as follows:
1. Traffic and infrastructure overload.
This development will compound the already traffic choke point at the corner of Pearson and Park Avenues particularly at pre school drop off and pick up times and at peak times with traffic build up entering the Pacific Hwy.
2. Devastating tree canopy and wildlife impact. Many established trees will be destroyed along with the habitats of native animals and birds. This area forms part of the corridor to adjacent Richmond Forest .
3. Excessive height and poor quality design. It will cause significant overshadowing of properties and the extremely poor box type structure with white balconies does not fit in with the type of homes in the area. It will ruin the ambiance and feel of the suburb.
4. Isolation of heritage homes. It will destroy the heritage value and culture of our neighbourhood.

I sincerely hope that you will not allow this development to continue.
Kind regards

This development proposal is misleading and disingenuous, biased in favour of the development on the basis of housing supply and with little regard for the social & environmental impact that will result from cramming more and more people and cars into a small area. Residents are already struggling with the snail-slow one lane Park Avenue overhead bridge exit onto the Pacific Hwy. Shoppers from over 100 new apartments will have to join the already too long Woolworths supermarket queues to purchase supplies. 62 trees will be destroyed and the excessive height of the new buildings will impact visual harmony, privacy, heritage cohesion and the priceless village character of Gordon .

Please find attached the submission from Friends of Ku-ring-gai Environment Inc.

Professional opinion — objection to the proposal on heritage grounds, recommendations made to alleviate unacceptable heritage impact, refer to submission

Please refer to attached submission on behalf of 16 Park Avenue, Gordon