Skip to main content

State Significant Development


Sydney Metro Crows Nest Over Station Development

North Sydney

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

Concept Development Application (SSD 9579) for an Over Station Development (OSD) above the new Crows Nest Metro station including maximum building envelopes, gross floor area, conceptual land uses, car spaces and signage zones.

Consolidated Consent

Consolidated Consent - SSD-9579 MOD 2


Notice of Exhibition (1)

Notice of Exhibition_09092020_085055

Request for SEARs (1)

SSD 9579 - Crows Nest OSD - SEARs Request - Report - 29 8 2

EIS (67)

Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix H- CN OSD Concept SSDA - Area Schedule
Appendix B - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Site Title Diagram and
Appendix F - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Built From and Urban De
Appendix FF - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Services and Utilities
Crows Nest OSD Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix AA - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Transport Traffic and
Appendix EE - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Waste Strategy Report
Appendix FF - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Services and Utilities
Appendix FF - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Services and Utilities
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix GG - CN OD Concept SSDA- CPTED Report
Appendix DD - CN OSD Concept SSDA- Aviation Report
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix CC - CN OD Concept SSDA- Design Excellence Strate
Appendix F - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Built From and Urban De
Appendix BB - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Preliminary Construct
Appendix E - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Sydney Metro and OSD De
Appendix JJ - CN OSD Concept SSDA - EIS Addendum - Draft S
Cover letter - Crows Nest OSD
Appendix HH - CN OSD Concept SSDA- North Sydney DCP 2013 A
Appendix II - CN OD Concept SSDA- Biodiversity Development
Appendix Y - CN OSD Concept SSDA- Statement of Heritage Im
Appendix X - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Environmentally Sustain
Appendix Z - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Acessibility and DDA Im
Appendix L - CN OSD Concept SSDA - View Impact Study- Key
Appendix L - CN OSD Concept SSDA - View Impact Study - Key
Appendix W - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Flood Assessment and St
Appendix O - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Crows Nest OSD Design Q
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix W - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Flood Assessment and St
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix K - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Study - Key Publ
Appendix O - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Crows Nest OSD Design Q
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix W - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Flood Assessment and St
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix K - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Study - Key Publ
Appendix D - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Architectural Drawings
Appendix K - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Study - Key Publ
Appendix G - CN OD Concept SSDA - SEPP 65 Compliance Analy
Appendix K - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Study - Key Publ
Appendix G - CN OD Concept SSDA - SEPP 65 Compliance Analy
Appendix W - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Flood Assessment and St
Appendix C - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Architectural Drawings
Appendix S - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Social and Economic Im
Appendix A - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Secretarys Environmenta
Appendix L - CN OSD Concept SSDA - View Impact Study - Sur
Appendix M - CN OSD Concept SSDA - View Impact Study - Sur
Appendix N - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Visual Impact Assessmen
Appendix V - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Noise and Vibration Imp
Appendix K - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Study - Key Publ
Appendix T- CN OSD Concept SSDA - Consultation with Stakeh
Appendix U - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Wind Impact Assessment
Appendix R - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Strategic Market Assess
Appendix P- CN OSD Concept SSDA - Clause 4.6 Variation Req
Appendix Q - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Clause 4.6 Variation Re
Appendix K - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Study - Special
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix I - Solar Impact Analysis - Adjoining Buildings
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B
Appendix J - CN OSD Concept SSDA - Shadow Diagrams - OSD B

Response to Submissions (8)

Request RTS_15102020_021053
Appendix E - Photomontages
Appendix A - Updated Architectural Drawings
Appendix B Updated CN Design Guidelines
Appendix C Updated CN DEX Strategy
Appendix D Civil Engineering Plans
Crows Nest RTS Cover Letter
Crows Nest Response to Submissions Report v2

Amendments (2)

Scoping Meeting Request_20190403014034
Crows Nest SSDA Response to Submissions

Additional Information (28)

Appendix J - Solar Impact Analysis
Appendix B - Indicative OSD Design
Crows Nest SSDA Response to Submissions Report
Appendix S - Shadow Diagrams
Appendix W - DCP Assessment
Appendix O - Preliminary Construction Management
Appendix F - OSD Area Schedule
Appendix Y - Summary of issues raised by community
Appendix U - Strategic Market Assesment
Appendix Q - View Impact Study - Surrounding
Appendix M - ESD Report
Appendix H - Waste Strategy Report
Appendix D - Updated Design Guidelines
Request for RtS letter - Crows Nest OSD - SSD 9579_SSD-957
Appendix K - Wind Impact Assessment
Appendix Z - Clause 4.6 Variation Request
Appendix X - Community information session
Appendix V - Economic and Social Impact Assesment
Appendix T - Issue Categories and Responses
Appendix R - View & Visual Impact Assessment
Appendix P - View Impact Study
Appendix N - Transport Traffic and Pedestrian
Appendix L - Services and Utilities Infrastructure
Appendix I - SEPP 65 Compliance Analysis Report
Appendix G - Flood Assessment and Stormwater Plan
Appendix E - Sydney Metro and OSD Demarcation Plan
Appendix C - Built Form and Urban Design Report
Appendix A - Architectural drawings

Determination (4)

Notice of Decision(final)
Stamped Plans
Assessment Report
Development Consent

Approved Documents

There are no post approval documents available

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.


Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint


There are no enforcements for this project.


There are no inspections for this project.

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.


Showing 1 - 20 of 708 submissions
Name Withheld
St leonards , New South Wales
You have failed to accurately inform how these developments will provide
public benefit vs compromising the quality of life on existing
residents and the surrounding area. Focus on building and delivering
the metro infrastructure instead of seeking opportunities to raise
money and wealth of developers.

1. 27 storey residential buildings are a breach of the local character
for Oxley & Clarke street, this is far too high. These buildings will
overshadow Hume park and surrounding areas. This is in direct conflict
of your and North Sydney councils "stepped height controls" to
preserve the heritage and character of the area.

2. The area around Crows Nest metro is already so densely populated
and with the state of the economy and already significant development
happening in St Leonards (St Leonards Square, 100 Christie Street,
Embassy apartments, 88 Christie Street etc), there is no need for
this. There are increasing reports of apartment developments in St
Leonards, Alexandria, Pymble not settling due to financing issues -
15-30% not settling. How can the State Government propose additional
housing that has no benefit to the area but just adds unnecessary
supply for the purposes of money.

3. This immediate area cannot cope with the additional supply of
residences - schools? childcare? There has been insufficient planning
and concrete details about how these important resources will be
delivered and where. There is already little available land for
establishing appropriate schools and support services in the immediate
area. This is irresponsible planning what you are proposing.

4. The "green space" proposed by your plans are NOT a provision of
additional open space by the State Government. The expanded Hume park
was committed to by North Sydney Council in 2015. This was in fact
committed to by the council as a result of the council approving
breached height controls to developers in Oxley Street and using
developer contributions to undertake the Hume park expansion.

Your materials are therefore misleading and in fact not factoring in
as much additional green space or public benefit as you claim.
Ryen Partin
Lane Cove , New South Wales
I am a Crows Nest resident and have specific concerns regarding the
proposed heights of sites A, B and C.

I have viewed the visual impact reports and am shocked at the size of
the proposed structures which obstruct any view for nearby residents.
Furthermore, the visual impact due to the height is overwhelming and
not consistent or sympathetic to the planned and existing buildings in
Crows Nest.

The height restriction between Willoughby Road and Pacific Highway is
approximately 5 storeys (ground + 4).

I encourage metro to resist the desire to spread the St Leonards model
of over development crowded high rises into Crows Nest.

Specifically, addressing Site C, as Hume Park is to be redeveloped I
ask Metro to consider using site C as an extension to the park
providing an open space and public thoroughfare to help overcome the
lack of open space in the community.

I ask that consideration be made to reducing the overall height for
sites A and B to no more than 8 and construction open space on site C
for the use as a park and pedestrian thoroughfare from the Metro
station to Crows Nest shops.

I emphasis that as site A has the highest land elevation the elevation
of the land exaggerates the height of the building. While this would
have a striking visual impact it does not mesh well with not respect
the local area structures nor residents' wishes.
TONY Davidson
Sydney , New South Wales
My wife and I own a home unit in Crows Nest and do have concerns that the
North Sydney Council's policy regarding minimal car parking spaces in
new residential towers will cause street parking problems in and
around these new towers.
There needs to be some long term car parks available for all these new
home unit residents or reduce the number of towers or new developments
or increase the number of car spaces in new developments.

What additional infrastructure - parks, schools, etc are proposed to
ensure a good quality of life for new residents to the area?
pauline Muszkat
wollstonecraft , New South Wales
Require to be informed if Christie Street will remain closed to through
traffic as it is at present with a small reserve. It is not showing as
open space on plan. I object strongly if this is to be the case.
This was a hard fought battle years ago to get the street closed due
to rat runs of large number of vehicles from River Road. If it is
proposed to open Christie Street it would require the traffic to turn
right into Oxley as this would be the only route to the highway, as no
left turn will be allowed towards the railway and cause a great bank
up of traffic trying to access highway.

Alternatively, Hume Street runs from River Road and is two way except
last few metres to River which turns into one way south towards River
Road. This then would be a two-way road to connect with highway and
with lights already installed due to Metro being built.
Name Withheld
NAREMBURN , New South Wales
I vehemently oppose the rezoning of the Crows Nest Metro station area to
allow for two 27-storey towers.

It is obvious that this rezoning proposal will completely change the
character of the area and will have deleterious effects to residents
(commercial and residential) in areas on both sides of the Pacific
Highway i.e. in the Crows Nest/Naremburn and the Wollstonecraft areas.

The proposal allows for excessive height and scale that will:
- eradicate the highly-valued village feel of Crows Nest;
- severely compromise solar access to key spaces like Willoughby Road,
Hume Street Park;.
- reduce the value and amenity of all residential properties in the
Crows Nest, Naremburn and Wollstonecraft areas; and
-cause significant overcrowding on all public space, will strain (to
the point of collapse) on infrastructure and amenities and will change
the lifestyle of all those currently living and working in the area.

In short, the proposed rezoning will permanently damage the area for
all current residents and businesses. It will make the area a
permanent eyesore and it disregards the best interests of the current
community and residents.

The rezoning proposal must be stopped and any government
representative that allows it to continue does so at their peril.
Vlad Vyshnivetskyy
St Leonards , New South Wales
I object against Site A buildings to be 27-storey tall.
1. It will be significantly taller than any other building in
adjusting blocks and break the cityline plus cast shade on smaller

2. It will add a lot of new residents to already over populated area,
which requires parking (150 is even less than 1 per unit) and on
surrounding streets. Plus extra road traffic and huge impact on local

3. its construction will make overall duration of construction works
on this site to almost 10 years. Since when demolition works started
last year until planned completion in 2026. It is too long for impact
on local residents, we want to live in a nice suburb, not at the
construction site with loud noise and lots of trucks.

Instead of another residential tower - please create public park on
top of new Crows Nest station. Such green space is desperately needed
in this corner of Crows Nest for noise control, air quality, public
space for recreation.

Thank you,
Randall Brophy
St Leonards , New South Wales
As a resident of St Leonards for 12 years I wanted to voice strong
opposition to adding yet more high-rise apartments to the St
Leonards/Crows Nest area, and Crows Nest in particular. With multiple
25-40-level residential developments already in process (without
sufficient infrastructure and public space to accommodate all these
residents), the re-zoning to mid- and high-density between River Rd,
Park Rd, Canberra Ave and Marshall Avenues, the impact of stacking and
packing more people into tihs area will be disastrous for quality of

I can point to overcrowding of transport, traffic, education,
services, infrastructure, open space and parking, with higher crime
rates, pollution, stress-inducing noise, pedestrian deaths and injury,
coming in due time.

With NSW urban and suburban areas already undergoing what the BBC
calls "an eye-watering level of infrastructure development", it is
clear the residents of this area want a break from it when they come

An attractive modern low-rise complex (e.g. six storeys) with green
space and adequate setbacks would be more appropriate, healthier, and
would still generate plenty of profit for developers.

I vigorously appose going to 27, 17 or even 8 if we're to preserve any
kind of "village" vibe in our already overcrowded suburb.
Northern Suburbs Basketball Association
Crows Nest , New South Wales
We wish to make this submission brief so that it is unambiguous and

Northern Suburbs Basketball Association (NSBA) currently has the
Management Rights to run the Crows Nest Indoor Sporting Facility on
behalf of its owner North Sydney Council. (located in Clarke Street)
The facility operates 7 days a week from 7am to 11pm.
It is used my people from all ages, all abilities, multi-sport
(basketball, netball, badminton, futsal, table tennis, volleyball,
wheelchair games, etc) rain or shine.
It is also hired out by many schools and many corporates.
It gets over 10,000 discrete visitors a week.
It is the ONLY indoor stadium facility owned by North Sydney Council.
We are turning away over 1000 young kids as we cannot accommodate
Demand is clearly much larger than supply.

In all your plans you are showing this current existing facility as
becoming GREEN SPACE.
We can only assume that means it will be demolished (leaving 10, 000
users a week out in the lurch) and becoming a small addition to the
current park that then might be used by an additional say 50-100

Our submission to you has TWO arms:

1. Do NOT demolish this current facility.
2. Additionally, in your proposed 27 floor building (which appears to
be getting considerable flak as a result of no apparent community
benefit) we would strongly recommend allocating two floors for an
INDOOR STADIUM which we could also manage on your behalf. This will
solve three problems:
a) The huge demand for sporting facilities that are currently
b) Will give your proposal the strong "community benefit" it needs to
c) Prevent the huge vocal opposition you will encounter if our 10,000
visitors a week lose their ONLY Stadium in this whole area.

We are keen to discuss these matters with you.
Please advise how/when we can have these discussions.
Please also note that the Premier herself is a Patron of NSBA and is
well aware of our need for additional facilities.

Kind Regards
General manager-Stadium Development
Michele Gennoe
Cammeray , New South Wales
The over development of crows nest will seriously degrade the character
of the area. There is already a shortage of public open space and
parks in the area and the significant increase in the density of
housing will cripple the area with more congested roads and
The views of the current residents should be taken into account and
made more important to the future development. Instead of destroying
the character and making another part of Sydney even more unlivable
and impossible to get around there should be greater thought into how
to increase parks and facilities for current residents
Christopher Ho
Wollstonecraft , New South Wales
The current proposed development is massively excessive, especially
combined with the proposed development between St Leonards Station and
Crows nest. Not to mention the seemingly likely South St Leonards
forest of apartment buildings.

That overly large number of new residents in such a confined area,
where there has already been substantial development over the last 10
years will turn the area into a monument to poor planing and over

The Crows Nest station over development is definitely excessive, it
should have half the new floor area at most, or the 'village'
atmosphere of the area will be killed forever.
Name Withheld
Wollstonecraft , New South Wales
I have several objections to the proposal as follows:

I object in principle to the over-riding of Council planning controls
- and in particular I object to the inconsistency of this specific
proposal with North Sydney Council's `Placemaking and Principles Study
for Crows Nest'.

I object to the height and mass of the proposed buildings. Buildings
of this size are not needed to meet Crows Nest's requirements for
increased residential stock to meet Greater
Sydney Commission growth projections. The area is already ahead of the
2021 targets, plus has several large residential towers already
approved or under construction.

I object to the blatant attempt in the DRAFT St Leonards Crows Nest
Plan 2036 to create a high rise corridor down the Pacific Highway,
including this Metro Rezoning proposal. This
disregards the objective of protecting the `village atmosphere' of
Crows Nest and ruins any ability to transition from the tower
developments to the surrounding suburbs.

I object to the proposed bulk and scale of towers. This will become a
`precedent' for developers to `justify' the building of more
over-sized residential buildings in the area.

I object that the Government knows there is a need for at least one
new primary school and high school in this general area but has made
no real attempt to locate such a space. It
clearly does not intend to use the area above or adjacent to the
railway station for this purpose.

I object to the significant overshadowing effect from these proposed
buildings on to the surrounding streets, particularly from Five Ways
along Willoughby Road up to Ernest Place.
I further object to the catastrophic effect the development will have
on Hume Street Park which the Council has been improving and expanding
over the last decade.
John Fitzgerald
Crows Nest , New South Wales
I object to the concept plan for the overstation development ("OSD") at
the Crows Nest metro station site.

Th scale of the OSD is too high because it will cause unacceptable
overshadowing of surrounding areas, especially Willoughby Road.

The scale of the OSD is too great because it will cause unacceptable
traffic congestion. The OSD will provide accomodation for a large
number of people. However, the OSD provides inadequate access for
residents' cars. I predict most residents will drive their cars to and
from the OSD through streets to the east of the OSD. This area is
already somewhat congested, especially near Burlington Street. Extra
traffic will only matters worse.

The scale of the OSD is too great because it will set a precedent for
tall residential buildings south of Oxley Street. The current
strategic plan from North Sydney Council for the area south of the
intersection of Oxley Street and the Pacific Highway is for a scale of
buildings considerably lower than the 50 storey buildings proposed for
the area adjacent to St Leonards Station. A building of 27 storeys is
inconsistent with this plan.

I think buildings of a scale up to 15 storeys would be appropriate.
This scale would be an appropriate comparison for development south of
Hume Street which should be no more than 10 storeys, tapering down to
no more than 7 storeys at the intersection of Falcon Street and the
Pacific Highway.

I support the redevelopment of the Crows Nest metro site. However, I
think the proposed scale of the concept plan is too much.

John Fitzgerald
Name Withheld
Wollstonecraft , New South Wales
There is a need for more enclosed parklands not tall towers.
The shadow over the existing park, which doesn't have as luscious
level grass as depicted in the illustration, will even more so be
overshadowed by those tall buildings. I'd hate to send my little one
to that childcare centre in the park as it wouldn't see the sunlight
at all, a point which isn't highlighted.
St Leonards has opened up more apartments, and North Sydney too. The
infrastructure for schooling has grown but it's still difficult to get
in to neighbouring schools. To make the place more liveable for the
existing and surrounding families (as Crows Nest is a place that other
neighbouring families visit), an enclosed park land, like those found
in London boroughs would fit in nicely with the community atmosphere
of Crows Nest. The Hume St park which is depicted in the illustration
is a sloping piece of land (not flat) and the Ernest St place is small
and not enclosed. I was looking forward to new parklands and gardens
in that location, not more towers. 27 levels is excessive and not in
keeping with the rest of Crows Nest. Whoever designed that doesn't
know the people. I hope you listen and amend the designs based on the
feedback. Even 17 levels is ridiculous. Crows Nest has to be the line
drawn for the community charm and some historical element. If you
proceed anyway, please keep any new building that have to be built to
the same level that was there before. Lets not knock everything down
either physically by buildings or to people's emotions by changing the
life of Crows Nest with monstrous buildings. Disappointing and not the
place where I've chosen to live. Please reassess.
Greenwich , New South Wales
My Submission.
I have red with interest the spin on the new development plans for the
Crows Nest Metro precinct.
SO MUCH SPIN much of this presenting this as a fait a compli.

I understand there are powerfull lobby groups pushing here for yet
more apartments.
Your spin presents this as a new commercial hub, when in fact it is
yest more piles of lucrative apartments .
A very low percentage is office space, currently at a premium in
Sydney at present
Let,s step back and have an honest look at this?

Is this visionary..... NO
Is this seriously building a workplace for the new Residents.....NO
Are the jobs above the Metro....NO

Suppose this "fail" is approved, then what next major buidings parks
and infrastructure will be needed and where will they go?
The stated aim to retain the Crows Nest Village will fail as it
inevitably becomes another Chatswood.



John Meadows
Crows Nest , New South Wales
I want see money provided from this development (State Infrastructure
Contribution Levy) for the expansion of Hume Park in Crows Nest. The
plan must ensure good pedestrian access around the development area
(as wide as possible footpaths - wider than currently exists with
overhead awnings for weather protection of pedestrians and it would be
good to have a walkthrough from the Pacific Highway to Hume Park. The
17 Storey building should be a commercial building NOT a hotel. A
commercial building will provide for more jobs. Ensure minimum
disruption of solar access to Hume Park.
Jill McArthur
Greenwich , New South Wales
I am gravely concerned at the scale of residential development in this
plan and the absence of concrete proposals for providing the
commensurate infrastructure improvements required to meet residents'
needs and expectations for acceptable precinct amenity.
The plan seems to be deliberately opaque and disingenuous.
It proposes development to provide future jobs growth, matched with
additional residential options. The most cursory examination reveals
that, on the contrary, what is proposed is almost exclusively
apartment accomodation in massive high rise towers with negligible
commercial space. So are we to assume that the real intention is for
these residents to be housed in this area but commute out of area for
The health precinct is already well established in St Leonards (which
is the subject of massive building at present) but the residences in
this plan are proposed for Crows Nest. What professions/enterprises is
the new job growth going to be in and where is it supposed to be
housed given the ridiculously low ratio for commercial v residential
in the plan.
Furthermore, the plan (sort of) pays reference to the need for
infrastructure improvements. Much is made of laneway design and road
setbacks but passing reference to schools, traffic management (because
let's be clear this many additional residents will bring more cars),
community services and shopping.
Also, the green space proposals are risible for the developments
proposed. If government really wants to encourage a healthy population
residing in areas of optimal amenity then it should be mandating as
much open space as possible.
Finally, the demand for this extra capacity may well be lessened by
events arising at the federal level. The Prime Minister has flagged
conducting discussions with the states on optimal levels of
immigration. Additionally, developers, who will find funding
increasingly challenging, will cut corners to optimise profits
resulting in sub-standard design and construction. Commentary
regarding standards for these two elements in the plan are
Irene Mok
Greenwich , New South Wales
I am opposed to the Sydney Metro Crows Nest Over Station Development. The
local areas at St Leonards and Crows Nest currently have very
insufficient parking for residents. This has a significant impact on
the residents' quality of life and ease of access to important
infrastructure such as bus stops, shopping centres and train stations.
The Over Station Development Plan did include Appendix AA_ CN OSD
Concept SSDA_ Transport Traffic and Pedestrian Assessment Report.
However, it is concerning that the Report did not model on the impact
the Over Station Development will have on parking and access to key
infrastructure. The stated intention of the Over Station Development
Plan was to improve employment prospects and improve access to
transport. The assumption of the Report was based on the premise that
new residents in the Over Station Development will not own vehicles
and will rely on existing or the Metro for travel. This is a highly
inaccurate assumption because no survey of the prospective new
residents was ever conducted and no intentions of vehicle ownership or
vehicle usage had ever been ascertained. It is appalling that the NSW
Government Department of Planning and Environment planned to approve
the Over Station Development on the basis that they believe the
inaccurate assumptions of the Transport Traffic and Pedestrian
Assessment Report. It highlights a gross oversight about the nature of
the Report's unsound research evidence, faulty methodology, fabricated
conclusions without any basis on facts and complete disregard for the
residents of St Leonards and Crows Nest. If the Over Station
Development is intended to improve employment opportunities, assist
sustainable population growth and access to transport links, then it
falls short of its stated purpose by a considerable measure. I will
urge the Minister to reconsider the Over Station Development and not
approve this Plan.
Clarence Brown
Greenwich , New South Wales
I oppose this development. NSW citizens continue to have to deal with the
consequences of poor planning decisions. Principally, this is from
high-density residential development without appropriate
infrastructure to support it. The Crows Nest Metro Over Station
Development (OSD) is yet another example of this. The various
assessments conducted as part of this proposal should ring alarm
bells. For example, Appendix AA - Transport, Traffic and Pedestrian
Report states that because the development is on top of a railway
station it would have the effect of "minimising private vehicle
and trip generation" (page 7). Essentially, the assumption is that
people will use cars less because they can rely on public transport.
This is foolish. People in Sydney will continue to use cars to get
around, even for short trips. The report concedes (at page 65) that "a
significant number of trips each week are taken within North Sydney
LGA that are not commute to work trips" and OSD residents will still
"reasonably require" the use of a private vehicle for shopping and
other social activities. How does this analysis align with the idea
that private vehicle ownership will be minimised? It doesn't. The
mitigation measures proposed are inadequate. Clearly, setting up a
Metro doesn't solve Sydney's disjointed public transport system. The
public transport system is not integrated and it is still more
efficient to travel by car locally within the North Sydney LGA and to
a lot of broader destinations around Sydney. The analysis to support
the conclusion that there is unlikely to be adverse impacts on roadway
congestion is essentially the equivalent of wishful thinking. The
assumption that there will be a "minimising" effect on private vehicle
ownership underpins the reasoning that "Net traffic generated by the
site has been assessed as being less than that of existing land uses
on Crows Nest Station site. As such, modelling was not undertaken for
nearby intersections and the local road network" (page 7). In other
words, if the assumptions don't play out as imagined, we don't even
have any real evidence or insight into what the flow-on impacts will
be to nearby roadways. That is simply not good enough. The report uses
2016 census data (See page 64) to estimate private vehicle ownership
for OSD residents. The estimation for the OSD is significantly short
of the actual numbers for comparative dwellings in St Leonards (which
is just down the road). The plan is to deliberately provide "a minimal
number of parking spaces per apartment" to discourage vehicle
ownership. So again, if the imagined scenario isn't fulfilled, those
vehicles are going to flow-out into on-street parking. Congested
side-street parking is likely. It has happened all across Sydney.
Close scrutiny of this proposal shows that the assumptions on which it
is based are at best optimistic, but most likely flawed. The analysis
papers-over genuine risks that showed be approached with rigor. It's
yet another example of the 'she'll be right mate' approach to planning
that NSW residents have had to deal with. I sincerely hope that there
are people in power who genuinely want to make good decisions for the
good of the people. I hope that they want to base their decisions on
real evidence and proper holistic planning. I hope that they quash
this planning proposal until the planning is supported by robust
evidence and analysis that shows public amenities and public life will
not deteriorate as a result of proposed development.
Name Withheld
Crows Nest , New South Wales
The Sydney Metro project represents a once in a generation opportunity to
critically evaluate how current, and shape how future, transport looks
Properly executed, the Metro will enable the necessary, but liveable,
density to be achieved to facilitate a growing city.
The current proposal does not achieve this.
Whilst acknowledging the need to increase population density,
particularly around transport corridors, this proposal tips that
balance far too in favour of development.
In very simple terms:
- the scale of the residential complex should be reduced
- the pro-rata car parking provision should be reduced - these folk
will be living on top of a train station!
- the opportunity to reduce the scale of the Pacific Highway through
Crows Nest and to return road space to public land doesn't appear to
have been given sufficient consideration.
It is also incomprehensible how a state government can be deploying a
state of the art metro system through one transport corridor, but at
the same time propose a 1950's solution in the form of a road to the
Northern Beaches.
Name Withheld
Crows Nest , New South Wales
Attention Director, Key Sites Assessments

Re: Over Station Development

Based on Community Feedback on page 12 for the proposed development
there are lots of best practice concept statements but vague
supporting detail. Two specific issues are:

-Traffic congestion and parking are important to consider
- More green space, community services and facilities are wanted

Traffic studies confirming no significant impact are not believable.
Since the movement to increase housing density along the Pacific
Highway began several years ago, the traffic and parking in Crows Nest
has become increasingly problematic. Council and the RMS have done
little to foster improvement. History shows that despite public
transportation (busses and 4 close in train stations), people buy and
use cars. Local parking is a constant problem for residents and

It is disingenuous (and possibly insulting) to say that above station
structures, i.e. 350 new homes, 200 hotel rooms, an 8 story commercial
commercial building, and street level retail will be sufficiently
served by 150 parking spaces and it is worse to claim there will be no
adverse impacts on the road network (Page 22). Simple math, if
applied, discredits this assumption.

Consider, the above over station occupants plus already proposed and
approved and under construction high rise buildings plus current St
Leonards buildings recently opened plus street retail plus current
metering restrictions plus through highway traffic to Falcon Street
and North Sydney plus "significant" (large, to be defined) structures,
and evaluate the legitimacy of the "studies".

Presumably there is a formula for green space relative to population
density. It is woefully inadequate in its current configuration and
appears to be more so as families are stacked vertically. The effects
on children being raised in units without ample outdoor facilities is
a disservice. There is more focus on retail services than open space
recreational facilities. It begs the bigger picture question of what
this is all meant to achieve and what are considered "quality of life"
values. Developer monies are seriously insufficient to realise the
benefits touted in the glossy brochures.

It is worth considering thecurrent disastrous development issues in
NSW (trains, light rail, roads, museum, sporting venues), Council
should try to lead in quality, effectiveness and cost in its
development actions. We voters are at best skeptical, but mostly angry
about the integrity of development. Problems can't be laid on
developers alone; they can't develop what is not abetted, or a more
kindly expression, made available by government.


Project Details

Application Number
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Rail transport facilities
Local Government Areas
North Sydney
Determination Date
Last Modified By
Last Modified On

Contact Planner

Paula Bizimis