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

I object the high-rise development at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane and Pearson Avenue, Gordon (Application no SSD-82395459).

The key issues are:

> Misleading and disingenuous: the proposal is littered with errors, misleading statement, and unsubstantiated generalisations biased in favour of the development, with justification purposely centred on housing supply as the imperative for its approval (with undue regard for critical planning considerations.

> Towering Over Gordon: The Excessive height and footprint of this ‘min-city’ is disproportionate and excessive to the surrounding low-rise streetscape street scape and heritage context. TOD building heights are breached, visual privacy implication materially downplayed, overshadowing significantly understated., setbacks grossly inadequate, unacceptable transition impacts given surrounding low-rise residential footprint.

> Poor-quality Design: The design reflects a poorly designed box surrounding local heritage character, with a focus on maximising density and the developer’s profit. What is proposed is an abrupt and jarring interface between high-rise apartment blocks and existing low-rise dwellings (both adjacent, immediately opposites, and directly behind the proposal) with no consideration for visual harmony, privacy, or heritage cohesion.

> Environmental Destruction: 62 trees alone will be destroyed (>50% of trees on-site)., including many native, mature, and exotic trees dating back to Federation, eradicating our precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats, contradicting the Council’s commitment to environmental preservation of this site.

> Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario: The proposal overtly ignores the key planning principles and Council’s scenario which explicitly excluded this site from development. Due to the surrounding heritage significance and value of the area, together with the site’s specific biodiversity value. This has been strategically ignored with the Developer proposal.

> Ignores Heritage Significance and Value of Existing Location: The proposal fails to have proper regard to its impact on the existing heritage value and significance of the area (being one of the earliest settlements in Ku-ring-gai dating back to 1830s). The development is justified through the Developer’s “perceived view” of the “future desired density” of the area, however has a blatant disregard to surrounding heritage homes and the Gordondale HCA which the State has earmarked for preservation.

> Lack of appropriate community engagement: Gross failure of the Developer to undertake ANY meaningful community engagement (breaching DPHI’s Social Impact requirements) to properly respect and address the concerns of the local community and appropriately assess the social impact of the proposal (i.e. no community webinars, no community webinars, no community briefing, emails ignored, enquiry line not provided).

> Traffic Nightmare: The development will worsen the already congested Pacific Highway entry point, with the proposal fancifully claiming there will be no impact on the surrounding traffic network.

> No community Benefit: The proposal offers no improvements to local amenities or benefits to the local community.

This project should be approved as it helps supply housing thus alleviating Sydney's housing crisis.
The concerns of local residents should not be ignored, but many locals are attempting to stifle all forms development, despite the benefit that it would bring to the taxpayers of the state. Higher densities help facilitate neighborhood amenity, support local businesses, ensure infrastructure is fully utilised, and reduces the need for further urban sprawl and its associated negative externalities.

additional points to Opposition to proposed excessive high-rise development at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane and Pearson Avenue, Gordon (Application no SSD-82395459).

- Misleading and disingenuous: the proposal is littered with errors, misleading statement, and unsubstantiated generalisations biased in favour of the development, with justification purposely centred on housing supply as the imperative for its approval (with undue regard for critical planning considerations.
- Towering Over Gordon: The Excessive height and footprint of this ‘min-city’ is disproportionate and excessive to the surrounding low-rise streetscape street scape and heritage context. TOD building heights are breached, visual privacy implication materially downplayed, overshadowing significantly understated., setbacks grossly inadequate, unacceptable transition impacts given surrounding low-rise residential footprint.
- Poor-quality Design: The design reflects a poorly designed box surrounding local heritage character, with a focus on maximising density and the developer’s profit. What is proposed is an abrupt and jarring interface between high-rise apartment blocks and existing low-rise dwellings (both adjacent, immediately opposites, and directly behind the proposal) with no consideration for visual harmony, privacy, or heritage cohesion
- Environmental Destruction: 62 trees alone will be destroyed (>50% of trees on-site)., including many native, mature, and exotic trees dating back to Federation, eradicating our precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats, contradicting the Council’s commitment to environmental preservation of this site.
- Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario: The proposal overtly ignores the key planning principles and Council’s scenario which explicitly excluded this site from development. Due to the surrounding heritage significance and value of the area, together with the site’s specific biodiversity value. This has been strategically ignored with the Developer proposal.
- Ignores Heritage Significance and Value of Existing Location: The proposal fails to have proper regard to its impact on the existing heritage value and significance of the area (being one of the earliest settlements in Ku-ring-gai dating back to 1830s). The development is justified through the Developer’s “perceived view” of the “future desired density” of the area, however has a blatant disregard to surrounding heritage homes and the Gordondale HCA which the State has earmarked for preservation.
- Lack of appropriate community engagement: Gross failure of the Developer to undertake ANY meaningful community engagement (breaching DPHI’s Social Impact requirements) to properly respect and address the concerns of the local community and appropriately assess the social impact of the proposal (i.e. no community webinars, no community webinars, no community briefing, emails ignored, enquiry line not provided).
- Traffic Nightmare: The development will worsen the already congested Pacific Highway entry point, with the proposal fancifully claiming there will be no impact on the surrounding traffic network.
- No community Benefit: The proposal offers no improvements to local amenities or benefits to the local community.

Subject: Objection to development application for the multi-level development at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane, and Pearson Ave, Gordon

I object to the above proposed development in Gordon and make the following additional reasons for the objection:

Isolation of Heritage Homes
The development will impact adversely to the heritage values and culture of the heritage listed homes nearby the proposed development site.

Impact on Local Character
The scale and design of the proposed development are excessive and out of keeping with the surrounding low-rise streetscape and heritage context.

TOD building heights are breached; visual privacy implications, overshadowing are serious and negative for the neighbours. The setbacks and transition zones are grossly inadequate and reduce the privacy of numerous nearby residences.

Traffic and Parking Concerns
The proposed development will worsen traffic congestion for the area.

Environmental Impact
Precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats will be destroyed. 62 trees including many native, mature and exotic trees dating back to Federation will be destroyed.

Infrastructure Strain
As current infrastructure including stormwater, sewer, transport system and parking are already strained, the proposed development could cause further problems.

Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario
The proposal ignores key planning principles and Council’s scenario which explicitly excluded this site from development due to the surrounding heritage significance and value of the area, together with the site’s specific biodiversity value.

Lack of Appropriate Community Engagement
The developer failed to undertake any meaningful community engagement, which breached DPHI’s Social Impact requirements.

Subject: Objection to development application for the multi-level development at Burgoyne Street, Burgoyne Lane, and Pearson Ave, Gordon
I object to the above proposed development in Gordon and make the following additional reasons for the objection:

Isolation of Heritage Homes
The development will impact adversely to the heritage values and culture of the heritage listed homes nearby the proposed development site.

Impact on Local Character
The scale and design of the proposed development are excessive and out of keeping with the surrounding low-rise streetscape and heritage context.

TOD building heights are breached; visual privacy implications, overshadowing are serious and negative for the neighbours. The setbacks and transition zones are grossly inadequate and reduce the privacy of numerous nearby residences.

Traffic and Parking Concerns
The proposed development will worsen traffic congestion for the area.

Environmental Impact
Precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats will be destroyed. 62 trees including many native, mature and exotic trees dating back to Federation will be destroyed.

Infrastructure Strain
As current infrastructure including stormwater, sewer, transport system and parking are already strained, the proposed development could cause further problems.

Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario
The proposal ignores key planning principles and Council’s scenario which explicitly excluded this site from development due to the surrounding heritage significance and value of the area, together with the site’s specific biodiversity value.

Lack of Appropriate Community Engagement
The developer failed to undertake any meaningful community engagement, which breached DPHI’s Social Impact requirements.

I strongly object 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 grossly out of scale with the surrounding low-rise residential and heritage character of Gordon. The height, bulk, inadequate setbacks, and massing are inconsistent with local planning expectations and the TOD guidelines.
2. Poor Design and Incompatible Built Form. The box-like design is unsympathetic to the local streetscape and lacks architectural merit. It fails to respect the existing low-rise and heritage homes surrounding the site, causing significant visual disruption and privacy issues.
3. Environmental Destruction. Over 62 mature and native trees will be removed, decimating more than 50% of the site’s vegetation, including Federation-era trees. This will irreparably harm local biodiversity and contradicts Ku-ring-gai Council’s environmental conservation objectives.
4. Disregard for Local Heritage. The site lies near heritage conservation areas and homes dating back to the 1830s. The development does not address its impact on these heritage values, ignoring the Gordondale HCA and 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 engagement by the developer, breaching planning requirements around social impact. No briefings, webinars, or proper channels of communication were offered.
8. Traffic and Infrastructure Strain. The development will significantly worsen traffic congestion at the Pacific Highway entry point. The submitted traffic assessment downplays real impacts on the already stressed local road network.
9. No Tangible Community Benefit. The development provides no public amenities, open space, or local benefits in return for the substantial impact it will have on the area.
Conclusion:
This development is excessive, inappropriate, and disrespectful to Gordon’s unique heritage, environment, and community values. I urge the Planning Department to reject SSD-82395459 and call for its referral to the Independent Planning Commission for full review.



Sincerely,
Kathryn Elsworth

- The proposed ‘totally inappropriate’ development is not in keeping with the existing residential area and ignores the heritage significance and value of the area and the site specific biodiversity.

- It is a huge monolith of a building plonked onto land towering over the surrounding low rise streetscape of the area, with no consideration for visual harmony, privacy or heritage cohesion.
- It is disproportionate and excessive to the surrounding low rise streetscape and heritage context.

- There has been lack of appropriate community engagement breaching DPHI’s social impact requirements.
- There is no community benefit, no improvement to local amenities or benefits to the local community.
- The traffic is already over congested in this area. In particular, Park Avenue approach onto the Pacific Highway is already a bottleneck, and during peak hour it is at a standstill.
- Many native, mature and exotic trees dating back to Federation would be destroyed, eradicating wildlife habitats.

- Classifying this proposed development as a ‘State Significant Development’ is a farce as it is clearly only based on the greed of the developers targeting and manipulating and exploiting sites that are clearly inappropriate for such developments. The developers are using the current housing shortage and the Government’s affordability angle as the imperative for its approval in an attempt to fast track approvals.

- We are in support of Ku-ring-gai Council‘s preferred alternative scenario for apartment development on the west side of the highway. The height graduation is more in keeping with the area and it is not as obvious in that area due to the topography of the land.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed development at this site for the following key reasons:

1. Traffic Impact
The site is adjacent to Gordon Railway Station and the Pacific Highway—an already congested area. A high-density development here would worsen traffic flow and overload existing infrastructure.

2. Incompatible with Council’s Preferred Scenario
The Council’s preferred scenario—based on extensive community input—clearly designates this site for low-rise development only. With multiple heritage-listed properties within 50 metres, high-density construction is entirely inappropriate and disregards the area's character and planning intent.

3. Excessive Scale
The proposed FSR of 2.5 and 25m building height grossly exceed current limits (FSR 0.3, height 9.5m). This would severely affect neighbouring homes by blocking sunlight, reducing privacy, and disrupting the low-rise residential character.

4. Insufficient Deep Soil
While the plan proposes 42% deep soil, it remains below the 50% requirement—compromising stormwater management, canopy growth, and biodiversity.

This proposal is clearly out of step with local planning controls, community expectations, and the site's environmental and heritage context. I urge Department to reject it in favour of development aligned with the preferred scenario.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you for notifying Sydney Water of SSD-82395459 at Burgoyne Street and Pearson Avenue, Gordon. Please see attached response and information sheet for the applicant.
If this response raises any enquiries, please do not hesitate to contact Sydney Water at [email protected].

The key issues of the project are:
- Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai council's Preferred Scenario: The proposal blatantly ignores Ky planning principles and is inconsistent with Council's Preferred Scenario, supporting new housing without sacrificing our heritage and natural environment, determined following consultation with the community.
- Isolation of Heritage Homes: Positioned adjacent to and opposite heritage homes, the development will destroy the heritage value and culture of our neighborhood.
- Excessive Height and Poor -Quality Design: At a height of 9 storeys, this will cause significant overshadowing and disrupting sightlines with inadequate transition zones and setbacks to adjacent homes and streets whilst reducing the privacy of numerous residences. The design is poor box type structure lacking any modulation or heritage recognition and will be a hideous stain on Gordon.
- Devastating tree canopy and wildlife impact: The development alone will involve the destruction of at least hundreds established tree, impacting the natural landscape and destruction of the habitats of native species.
-Traffic and Infrastructure overload: With 106 apartments in this single development, this development together with other to come will compound an already traffic choke point entering to Pacific Highway plus local street. Further our already strained stormwater, sewerage, transport systems, and parking will suffer further.
-No community benefit: This project offers nothing to the community, instead it only serves to destroy Gordon's heritage and natural environment.

The more I look over this proposed development, the more I don't like it. I especially don't like where it sits in the tree studded streetscape. It looks so alien, especially in relation to issues such as height, bulk/mass and architectural style. It's like a 'shag on a rock'. It belongs in the company of other high rise buildings situate within the CBD of Gordon. Not outside and divorced from the CBD of Gordon.

Stop the destruction of perfectly good housing in Residential 2 [a] land use zones and build high rise inside and above Gordon CBD which is largely tired, obsolete, and desperately in need of a total makeover. There is so much publicly owned land and air space owned by the railway [State Government] and Ku rig gai Council [Wade Lane and the adjacent carpark] that could be redeveloped into high rise living over 25-40 storeys. Why not build over the Pacific Highway and connect the 2 sides of the CBD of Gordon?

I am sure I speak for many long standing residents. We also want TOWN HOUSES or similar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SCATTERED to all parts of the municipality. Not in zoned street blocks or within 800 metres of a railway station. In other words, more infilling over above average allotments. Greater density without wholesale destruction of existing housing in targeted street blocks. Not everybody wants to live near a railway!

I am also concerned about the demand a high rise building like this will place on public passive and active recreation space. What do you propose by way of developer contributions? Much more is needed.

The key issues of the project are:
- Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai council's Preferred Scenario: The proposal blatantly ignores Ky planning principles and is inconsistent with Council's Preferred Scenario, supporting new housing without sacrificing our heritage and natural environment, determined following consultation with the community.
- Isolation of Heritage Homes: Positioned adjacent to and opposite heritage homes, the development will destroy the heritage value and culture of our neighborhood.
- Excessive Height and Poor -Quality Design: At a height of 7-8 storeys (106 residential dwellings), this will cause significant overshadowing and disrupting sightlines with inadequate transition zones and setbacks to adjacent homes and streets whilst reducing the privacy of numerous residences. The design is poor box type structure lacking any modulation or heritage recognition and will be a hideous stain on Gordon.
- Devastating tree canopy and wildlife impact: The development alone will involve the destruction of at least hundreds established tree, impacting the natural landscape and destruction of the habitats of native species.
-Traffic and Infrastructure overload: With 106 apartments in this single development, this development together with other to come will compound an already traffic choke point entering to Pacific Highway plus local street. Further our already strained stormwater, sewerage, transport systems, and parking will suffer further.

Traffic hazards probability increases tremendously should the project go ahead, due to the existing difficult traffic conditions in the junction of Park Avenue and Pearson Avenue Gordon especially during peak hours.

What about building, as an alternative, high rise housing on nearby public owned lands? The huge railway car park in Werona Avenue and the Council owned car park in Wade Lane are grossly undercapitalised. The air space above is way too valuable to not be exploited. And the air space is free!!! But could be sold for high rise living IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT to public transport. See what has been done at St Leonards railway station for inspiration.

Ku ring gai Council is currently offering a LEP that addresses and COMPLIES with the TOD proposal to increase housing density.

Pearson Avenue is notoriously BUSY in peak periods. Wouldn't it be better if vehicular access was from BURGOYNE LANE instead of Pearson Avenue? Part of Burgoyne Lane could be widened, if deemed necessary, to allow passing traffic.

Moving vehicular access into Burgoyne Lane would allow, with an appropriate setback, an all encompassing and UNBROKEN green landscape.

191 car spaces for 106 units is ridiculous. Way too many! Why pay homage to the motor vehicle? Isn't the basic strategy of TOD that high density living principally use convenient public transport? Can I suggest you look at another way of limiting on-site car parking. See the recent NIGHTINGALE HOUSING in Melbourne for inspiration and solution.

The upper 2 floors look like an extension or AFTERTHOUGHT.

A very dark coloured brick/concrete facade, instead of the proposed white coloured facade, makes much better sense. It would then blend with a presumably mature tree screen [as per photo of street facade/elevation in Preliminary Design Concept].

Because of the slope of the land, the development TOWERS over the houses opposite. Privacy is highly compromised.

Why allow high rise living DIVORCED from proposed high rise living in the CBD of Gordon. This development will look so OUT OF PLACE, as does comparable unsightly examples and mistakes in Sydney such as Blues Point Towers at McMahons Point and Coastview Apartments at Diamond Bay [Vaucluse]. Building a high rise development overlooking and surrounded by single dwellings and conservation zones defies conventional wisdom and town planning practices.

Traffic hazards probability increases tremendously in the junction Pearson avenue and park avenue should the development going ahead.

The traffic junction Pearson Avenue and Park Avenue has been very busy and difficult. The development will further increase travel difficulty for nearby residents and increase life hazards probability.

I wish to object to the proposed development (SSD-82395459) at 3A, 3B, 5A and 7 Burgoyne Street, 1 and 3 Pearson Avenue, and 4 Burgoyne Lane, Gordon, on the basis of its excessive scale, unacceptable environmental and heritage impacts, and failure to respond meaningfully to local community concerns.
This development does not demonstrate an appropriate balance between strategic housing objectives and the need to preserve local character, amenities, and livability.
Please find attached my objection letter which outlines my reasons for opposing the proposed development and details the direct impacts it would have on my residence.

Objection to development application for the multi-level development at 3A, 3B, 5A, 7 Burgoyne Street, Gordon; and 1 & 3 Pearson Ave, Gordon; and 4 Burgoyne Lane Gordon.

I object to the above proposed development in Gordon due to the following:
Isolation of Heritage Homes

The development will impact adversely to the heritage values and culture of the heritage listed homes nearby the proposed development site.

Impact on Local Character
The scale and design of the proposed development are out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area.

Excessive Height
The proposed height of 7-8 storeys apartment development, if approved, will be one of the tallest structure on the eastern part of Gordon, causing significant overshadowing and disrupting sightlines with inadequate transition zones and set-backs to adjacent homes and streets and reduce the privacy of numerous nearby residences.

Traffic and Parking Concerns
With 106 apartments in this single development, the proposed development will worsen traffic congestion on both Pacific Highway and Park Ave and put additional pressure on already limited parking in the Gordon station area.

Environmental Impact
Precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats will be destroyed.

Infrastructure Strain
As current infrastructure including stormwater, sewer, transport system and parking are already strained, the proposed development could cause further problems.

In summary, I am not in favour of the above proposed development and I don’t want the approval of the proposed development to be a precedent for more similar developments in the area as the development would negatively affect the amenity of existing residents through privacy, overshadowing, increased noise. This would lower the quality of life for nearby residents.

Objection to development application for the multi-level development at 3A, 3B, 5A, 7 Burgoyne Street, Gordon; and 1 & 3 Pearson Ave, Gordon; and 4 Burgoyne Lane Gordon.
I object to the above proposed development in Gordon due to the following:
Isolation of Heritage Homes
The development will impact adversely to the heritage values and culture of the heritage listed homes nearby the proposed development site.
Impact on Local Character
The scale and design of the proposed development are out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area.
Excessive Height
The proposed height of 9 storeys apartment development, if approved, will be the tallest structure on the eastern part of Gordon, causing significant overshadowing and disrupting sightlines with inadequate transition zones and set-backs to adjacent homes and streets and reduce the privacy of numerous nearby residences.
Traffic and Parking Concerns
With 106 apartments in this single development, the proposed development will worsen traffic congestion on both Pacific Highway and Park Ave and put additional pressure on already limited parking in the Gordon station area.
Environmental Impact
Precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats will be destroyed.
Infrastructure Strain
As current infrastructure including stormwater, sewer, transport system and parking are already strained, the proposed development could cause further problems.

In summary, I am not in favour of the above proposed development and we don’t want the approval of the proposed development to be a precedent for more similar developments in the area as the development would negatively affect the amenity of existing residents through privacy, overshadowing, increased noise. This would lower the quality of life for nearby residents.

As a resident of 2 Pearson Avenue, I vehemently oppose the project for the following reasons:
(1) Pearson Avenue and Park Avenue traffic at present is dysfunctional. At 8:00am-9:30am and 4:30pm-6:00pm on weekdays, extensive vehicle queues will form along Pearson Avenue from Burgoyne Street up to Park Avenue as vehicles wait to cross through to Werona Avenue. Residents between Burgoyne Street and Park Avenue are unable to safely exit their driveways at certain times.

(2) There is persistent overflow from the Pearson Avenue public carpark behind the Park Avenue childcare centre. Overflow causes cars to queue and block traffic along Pearson Avenue during school times.

These traffic conditions will compound given the proximity of this development sits at the most problematic traffic point along Pearson Avenue at Burgoyne Street.

(3) Traffic conditions are already posing a safety hazard for pedestrians. Vehicles increasingly take risks to cross the intersection at Pearson Avenue and Park Avenue. As a resident for the past 6 years, countless accidents and near misses of vehicles failing to give way have been witnessed. This is a high pedestrian area dominated by children given location of the childcare centre. There is a high risk of serious injury/fatality should traffic risks increase.

(4) The unique topography of Pearson Avenue has not been considered with respect to height limits. One size does not fit all. This development will severely limit and block sunlight on units and freestanding properties facing Pearson Avenue during mornings (important given all units facing this direction do not receive sunlight in the afternoon)