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

Please reference the attached submission.

I again add my strong objection to the proposed development at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane, and Pearson Avenue, Gordon (SSD-82395459) for the following reasons:
1. Excessive Height and Density. The proposed 8-storey towers are significantly overbearing in comparison with the surrounding low-rise residential and heritage character of Gordon. The bulk, height, setbacks, are inconsistent with local planning expectations and the TOD guidelines.
2. Poor Design and Incompatible Built Form. The box-like design lacks architectural merit and fails to blend with the existing low-rise and heritage homes surrounding the site. This results in significant visual disruption and impacts privacy issues.
3. Environmental Destruction. A large number of mature and native trees will need to be removed, decimating the site’s vegetation, including Federation-era trees. This will irreparably impact local biodiversity objectives and contradict Ku-ring-gai Council’s environmental conservation targets.
4. Disregard for Local Heritage. The site abuts heritage conservation areas and homes dating back to the 1830s. The development does not sufficiently address heritage values and ignores the area’s historical significance.
5. Inconsistent with Council’s Planning Strategy. The development contravenes Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario, which explicitly protects this site from redevelopment due to its environmental and heritage importance.
6. Manipulative Use of Planning Policy. This project appears to opportunistically exploit affordable housing and TOD legislation to push through an otherwise non-compliant and inappropriate high-density development.
7. Lack of Community Consultation. There has been no meaningful community consultation by the developer thus breaching planning requirements around social impact. No briefings, webinars, or proper channels of communication were conducted.
8. Traffic and Infrastructure Strain. The development will significantly increase traffic congestion through Gordon particularly at the Pacific Highway access points. This will create major impact on an already stressed local road network.
9. No Tangible Community Benefit. The development provides no improvement to public amenities, open space, or local benefits.

This development is inappropriate, excessive and totally non aligned to Gordon's unique heritage, environment, and community values. I urge the Planning Department to reject this proposal and call for its referral to the Independent Planning Commission for full review.

Please see my attached letter for my objection

I wish to register my objection to this project. I grew up on the north shore of Sydney. Although I currently live in Canberra, I often visit Sydney and very much enjoy walking the leafy streets of Gordon and marvelling at the heritage houses. My understanding is that the proposed development would cause the loss of a lot of trees and I wonder how many native animals such as possums might be killed. I very much hope that the development application can be rejected. It would be a great loss to lose such a lovely location full of trees and in close proximity to heritage houses.

The footprint of this development is disproportionate and excessive to the surrounding buildings. It will cause significant over-shadowing, visual privacy implications. Unacceptable transition impacts given surrounding low-rise residential footprint.
Design has not been thoroughly considered as it is not in keeping with the surrounding local heritage character or visual harmony. This is a poor quality design to maximise density and profit.
Essential tree canopy and vital wild life habitats will be negatively impacted as many of the native, mature and exotic trees will be destroyed (environmental destruction).
The proposal ignores key planning principles from the Ku-ring-gai Council's alternative scenarios as this site is excluded from development due to the surrounding heritage significance and the site's biodiversity value.
The development will negatively impact the already congested Pacific Highway entry points including the surrounding traffic network. The increase in the number of vehicles that will use the roads will exceed the current road capacity significantly exacerbating the inadequate road infrastructure for higher volumes of traffic. Unless effective route management systems are planned and undertaken before construction it will cause bottlenecks, public frustrations that will impact safety. It will create traffic nightmare.
Meaningful community engagement has not been forthcoming.
This development destroys the rich heritage and environment aspects that Gordon has to offer. No residents, current and future will benefit.

Formal Statement of Objection
Re: SSD-82395459 – Proposed Development at Burgoyne Street, Gordon
I strongly object to the proposed development at Burgoyne Street for the following reasons:
1. Excessive Height and Density: The proposed scale and bulk are grossly out of character with the
surrounding low-density residential area. It fails to provide a sensitive transition to adjacent R2
zones, breaching local planning controls and Ku-ring-gai Council’s DCP requirements. This level of
intensification is incompatible with the suburban context.
2. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Adding over 100 residential units will significantly worsen existing
traffic congestion and parking shortages. The local road network—especially Pearson Avenue and
adjacent narrow streets—cannot support this volume of traffic, creating safety hazards and increased
commute times for current residents.
3. Loss of Privacy, Sunlight, and Amenity: The proposed height will lead to severe overshadowing and
direct overlooking into nearby homes. This will diminish residential amenity, infringe on privacy,
and reduce access to sunlight for surrounding properties.
4. Environmental Harm: The removal of mature trees and disruption of established root systems will
have a lasting impact on local biodiversity and green cover. This contradicts Council's stated
environmental and sustainability goals.
5. Heritage and Character Impact: The development threatens the integrity of the Gordon Estate
Heritage Conservation Area and nearby heritage-listed properties. This area holds historic and
architectural significance which the proposal fails to respect or respond to.
6. Overdevelopment in an Inappropriate Location: The site is unsuitable for high-density
development. Essential services, pedestrian infrastructure, and public transport capacity are
already strained, and the proposal offers no meaningful mitigation.
7. Community Mental Health and Safety Risks: The intensity of the development, increased traffic,
and construction disruption are likely to contribute to stress, anxiety, and decreased well-being
for local residents—especially children and the elderly.
This proposal represents poor urban planning and disregards community needs and local planning
principles. I urge the NSW Government and Ku-ring-gai Council to reject this development in full

See my objection letter attached

INAPPROPRIATE BUILDING
* bulky, dominating building, too high and out of keeping with the older style low-rise housing
* too close to the street - needs further setback
TRAFFIC CONGESTION
* There is already traffic queuing from Pearson Avenue into Park Street at peak times.
* 106 (!) more dwellings with cars will exacerbate the problem substantially.
* Where is the supporting transport infrastructure for the massive increase in road use?
THIS AREA IS ALREADY TAKING A HUGE HIGHRISE HIT coming down Pearson Avenue.
* This project will add 106 new dwellings to this area, compromising the tree canopy and resident amenities.
I strongly object to this behemoth building.

SSD-82395459 – Proposed Development at Burgoyne Street, Gordon
I strongly object to the proposed development at Burgoyne Street for the following reasons:
1. Excessive Height and Density: The proposed scale and bulk are grossly out of character with the
surrounding low-density residential area. It fails to provide a sensitive transition to adjacent R2
zones, breaching local planning controls and Ku-ring-gai Council’s DCP requirements. This level of
intensification is incompatible with the suburban context.
2. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Adding over 100 residential units will significantly worsen existing
traffic congestion and parking shortages. The local road network—especially Pearson Avenue and
adjacent narrow streets—cannot support this volume of traffic, creating safety hazards and increased
commute times for current residents.
3. Loss of Privacy, Sunlight, and Amenity: The proposed height will lead to severe overshadowing and
direct overlooking into nearby homes. This will diminish residential amenity, infringe on privacy,
and reduce access to sunlight for surrounding properties.
4. Environmental Harm: The removal of mature trees and disruption of established root systems will
have a lasting impact on local biodiversity and green cover. This contradicts Council's stated
environmental and sustainability goals.
5. Heritage and Character Impact: The development threatens the integrity of the Gordon Estate
Heritage Conservation Area and nearby heritage-listed properties. This area holds historic and
architectural significance which the proposal fails to respect or respond to.
6. Overdevelopment in an Inappropriate Location: The site is unsuitable for high-density
development. Essential services, pedestrian infrastructure, and public transport capacity are
already strained, and the proposal offers no meaningful mitigation.
7. Community Mental Health and Safety Risks: The intensity of the development, increased traffic,
and construction disruption are likely to contribute to stress, anxiety, and decreased well-being
for local residents—especially children and the elderly.
This proposal represents poor urban planning and disregards community needs and local planning
principles. I urge the NSW Government and Ku-ring-gai Council to reject this development in full

See attached letter in objection

I STRONGLY OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL!
Please go and sit at the intersection of Pearson and Park Avenue at 8 am or 5 pm on a given day. If you dont die from the toxic fumes from the build up of traffic you may notice the absolute gridlock around the station and from park street to gain access to pacific highway. It is so obvious we do not have the infrastructure to support an 8 storey building with an additional 200 car spaces? Where is the town planning ,common sense and logic behind this proposed development. The down playing of its impact in the proposal is insulting to any persons intelligence.
Whilst I appreciate we need a housing supply this si not the location for it. The height is EXCESSIVE to the the rest of surrounding streetscape and area and our heritage context. It sticks out like a sore thumb and is blatantly disregarding the heritage of this area.
We are also the LUNGs of Sydney and fiercely protective of our treasured environment - and removing over 60 trees is simply unacceptable.
So what is the benefit ? Loss of heritage, our precious environmental habitat and traffic hell.

Please listen to us, this isn't fair. See attached objection

See attached strong objection

This project is totally out of character to the area of Gordon. It will lose trees, create traffic, create congestion, and put further pressure on parking. It should be noted that the parking around Gordon railway station is used by a very large number of commuters who then use the train. There is no provision to maintain this important commuter resource.

Please refer to my letter of objection attached

Traffic management is not adequate in the area. With the additional housing, it will be worse than before. There are a lot of school kids and retirees in the area and they are likely to be impacted.
The destruction of at least 62 trees in the development is against the local environmental preservation efforts.
The scenario chosen is against that of the scenario put forward by Council.
Ultimately, the development is not sympathetic to the local community's voice.

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,

Christopher Coucouvinis

57 Mount William Street, Gordon, 2072

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to express my profound objection to SSD-82395459, the proposed 8-storey high-rise development by Develotek Property Group in Gordon. Like many members of the community, I was already dismayed to learn on Saturday 7th June 2025 via the *Sydney Morning Herald* that Ku-ring-gai Council had submitted their own *Preferred Alternative Plan* to the NSW Government in support of the Transport-Oriented Development (TOD) framework. This submission was made in direct contradiction to the community's preference for the more balanced TOD 3B option—a position Council was well aware of.

To compound that frustration, we now face the shock of a separate development proposal—not even part of the TOD planning process—being quietly submitted for State Significant Development approval. This appears to be a deliberate and opportunistic move by a private developer, “Property Group”, who is unknown to our community and who has failed to engage in any meaningful consultation. Their actions reflect a cynical attempt to piggyback on the confusion surrounding TOD discussions, in the hope that this proposal will slip through unnoticed.

Let me be clear: this specific site was not included in the TOD framework or Council’s own strategic vision for development. In fact, it was specifically *excluded* from both due to its heritage significance, environmental sensitivity, and unique contribution to the biodiversity of the area. Gordon is one of Ku-ring-gai’s oldest settled areas, with historic links dating back to the 1830s. This is not a site suited to high-rise, high-density construction, nor is there any valid justification for treating it as a “State Significant Development.”

The Proposal Is Fundamentally Flawed

Misleading and Disingenuous: The application is riddled with errors, vague justifications, and misleading claims. Its only real “argument” is the tired and overused appeal to housing supply, while disregarding the actual planning, heritage, and environmental context.

Oversized and Inappropriate: These towers will dominate the low-rise residential character of Gordon. The scale and footprint are utterly disproportionate, creating serious issues of “overshadowing, privacy, traffic congestion”, and “loss of visual harmony”.

Poor-Quality Design: As someone who appreciates architectural standards—as shown on programs like *Grand Designs*—I find the design uninspiring and profit-driven. It offers no innovation, no sensitivity to heritage, and no aesthetic contribution to the community. It's a brute-force approach to development.

Environmental Destruction: Once again, we are presented with the tired notion that the land must be cleared—over 60 mature trees destroyed—to make way for ‘progress.’ This is unacceptable in a community that has spent generations protecting and nurturing its natural canopy.

No Community Consultation: The developer has made no effort to engage residents—no meetings, no briefings, no outreach. Even local attempts to contact the proponent were reportedly ignored. It suggests a guilty conscience and a process designed to avoid scrutiny.

Zero Community Benefit: There is no credible improvement offered to infrastructure, amenities, or services. The project imposes major burdens—on traffic, services, and local character—while giving absolutely nothing back.

A Dangerous Precedent

If this development is allowed to proceed unchecked, it will set a deeply troubling precedent for future proposals that disregard strategic planning, heritage protections, and community voice. One such development will open the door to others, further eroding the charm and liveability of Gordon. We will be left with a patchwork of regret, not a legacy of thoughtful urban planning.

Conclusion

This is not a "State Significant Development"—it is a private, profit-driven venture that fails every reasonable test of strategic merit, design quality, and community engagement. I urge the Department to reject this proposal outright or refer it to the Independent Planning Commission for full and public scrutiny.

Let this be the moment the community’s voice is respected, not bulldozed.

Sincerely,

Rosemary Coucouvinis
20 Burgoyne St., Gordon, 2072

I do not support the project for the following reasons
There is going to be very significant residential development in Gordon , including residential blocks up to 28 storeys in the suburb and accommodation for up to 24000 in Ku-ring-gai generally. The SSD s proposed will bring already congested suburban roads to gridlock, will invariably denude a coveted high forest canopy and irreversibly change the livability and character of the suburb. The SSD if approved should therefore be modified to enforce set backs from the boundaries, allow room for deep rooted trees to flourish and be limited in height and volume so as to not dominate the area. In this way there can be a compromise between offering higher density housing but at the same time maintaining the inherent character of the "leafy North Shore".
The SSDs need to be sympathetically incorporated into the suburb, not dominated by it

This proposal is not within the Kuringai Councils recommended area for this type of development.
It is sited with in an area of single level heritage houses and it towers above them and destroys the privacy of their yards.