Following points:
1. Infrastructure / current situation: Rangers Avenue is used as main access to Balmoral and Taronga Zoo for visitors which becomes a main issue on summer weekends and school holidays where all locals experience extreme delays exiting and entering there homes by car. With a development of such size these traffic problem will be exacerbated. The current population density already creates daily traffic issues on all surrounding streets up to Military Road. There is no space to extend the road system for even higher usage numbers. The same goes for all local attraction.
2. The current landscaping of developments consists of single homes with a front and/or back porch, it creates the village character of Mosman, so that a multilevel appartment building of this size will not only be a major eyesore but also negatively impact to character of our suburb.
3. The size of of the building will block light and views for all properties behind such as in Holt Avenue. It will have a negative impact on property values of surrounding properties and will thus inflict financial damages to all home owners which are the Mosman residents. It is therefore clearly detrimental to the interests of Mosman residents.
4. The argument of trying to establish higher density housing in order to provide housing for lower income households is not valid here. The homes created will by default exceed the price level of anything a lower income household can afford. So the only interest this development serves is the enrichment of property developers and polictians who would like to make a statement without substance - no matter the consequences for the people they should represent.

See attachment. Thank you for your consideration.

I object to this proposal on a number of grounds.
Overall it is fundamentally unsuitable for the site in question in terms of size vehicular impact and the devastating effect it will have on a the C4 properties on Holt Avenue if this extensive R3 is allowed. Additionally a development of this size and scale will ruin the beautiful horizon views when looking from Mosman Bay.
The assumptions adopted around safe walking distance and the traffic flows are incorrect.
The level of professional assessment and modelling is inadequate for a development of this nature, bulk and scale.

Safe walking distance: The route adopted is not safe for anyone other than someone who is willing to sprint between vehicles moving at speed. It is of course possible to take the adopted route however it is absolutely not safe during peak times. When my children walked to the bus stop they walked to the safe traffic crossing at the junction of Military Road and Spofforth Street. Some mornings I still have to do this now as the car volume and speed makes it to risky to cross. I believe that if a genuine safe walking route is adopted the site will be outside of the 800m requirement.
Failing this the comment that Bloxsome Lane is a suitable route is ridiculous, my house backs onto this lane and we live on the upper levels so can view the lane easily and it is absolutely not safe when pedestrian and vehicular activity is concurrent, to suggest otherwise is simply misleading. There are no pavements to speak of and all vehicles need to reverse to exit. It is a lane where children play and ride bikes. I have seen multiple close calls with cars and trucks trying to navigate a narrow lane.
Personally I think a good and reasonable measure of safe walking route would be : it is safe and/or sensible for a person pushing a pram to take this route and be confident it is safe? The route proposed would not meet this hurdle and they cannot simply assume it is acceptable to sprint between cars to cross during peak times.
Additionally not all of the plots are within the 800m limit even adopting the proposed route. It surely goes against the intention of the policy that by addition the zone can be increased without limit. It should not be allowed to simply add multiple non-complying lots to a contiguous complying one in order to create a megasite.

Trees and environment: the proposal includes removing 22 trees, as trees are vital to the character of Sydney this should not be allowed and trees preserved.

Traffic: Rangers Avenue is extremely busy at peak times especially during the school runs and sunny beach days. The traffic backup along Rangers Avenue and Avenue Road is significant. To assess the impact this additional traffic will have on traffic flows it is not sufficient to simply look at 24 hour averages. This needs a professional traffic assessment undertaken over time. This should include data taken at peak times and the impact of other developments currently being planned. To consider each development in isolation will clearly be an inadequate approach. Unless the cumulative impact is professionally modelled this is purely someone guessing and providing the outcome they want to see. I have dealt with property development for the past 40 years in many countries and I know from personal experience that professional vehicle impact modelling is essential as outcomes are often very different to those expected from a cursory assessment. The proposal assumes that vehicles can enter the site turning both right and left from Rangers Avenue. I cannot see how the right turn could be safely made. In fact I would think this should be prohibited and a solid median strip be created to ensure this does not occur.
Given the winding nature of Rangers Avenue I think large vehicles are going to find it difficult to service this site and can foresee the traffic volumes in Holt Avenue increasing as they look for alternative routes. This also needs to be studied professionally and professionally modelled.

Excavation: The submission is short in detail on this however I suspect that the excavation required to create the underground parking will be extensive. The significant removal of earth needs a detailed, independent and professional assessment as it could cause damage to the Holt Avenue properties as well as rock face itself. How will such an excavation be transported along Rangers Avenue with its Gross Vehicle Mass limit of 3 tonnes and the tight turns? I can see Holt Avenue being used for access and this should be specifically restricted.

Town Planning: If the Spit Road Junction and the Military Road spine were properly developed the affordable housing targets would easily be met and in a way that is compatible with Sydney's and Mosman's image and character. Sydney is one of the most beautiful cities in the world and changes to the built environment should look to preserve this. Change is needed but to do so on a piecemeal basis is not correct. The Holt Avenue properties have been classified as C4. This does not really benefit the owners of those properties as restriction go with this zoning. These areas are created for the benefit of Sydney as a whole. The create this C4 Zone to retain a characteristic and viewing experience for visitors and other residents. To then (within meters) build six-storey residential blocks is clearly not sympathetic with the built environment and is frankly brutal and the authorities should step in to stop this. There is no real mention of the loss the residents on Holt Avenue will experience. The C4 Zoning which was aimed at preserving views and character is now meaningless and the properties themselves are essentially blighted. There has already been a significant reduction in capital value evidenced by the fact that properties that sold within days now are unsellable.
Whilst I understand times change I do think it is improper for the views of the Holt Avenue properties to be completely lost by this proposed development. The authorities should ensure that the final development is designed in a way that there is a sympathetic view sharing outcome.

Overall I feel this proposal is totally incompatible with the location and really makes a mockery of the good intentions of the SSD and the affordable housing aims. The developer is manipulating the policy and has provided the maximum GFA possible with no consideration for the existing landscape, character or the impact to neighbouring residences.
In terms of Sydney's beauty the steep nature of the topography is a key element. A development of this nature will completely destroy the views from Mosman Bay. I feel it is essential for the negative impact of this development on skyline views to be clearly shown and taken into account when this development is assessed. Once lost these amazing vistas will be lost forever.
In short it is essential for the powers that be to protect one of the most beautiful cities in the world. This type of development will destroy the very thing that makes Sydney special and I would urge you to prevent this development from going ahead. As said there are numerous sites along Military Road and Spit Junction that are prime for redevelopment and can be designed in a way that provides genuine affordable housing in a compatible and sympathetic way.
As guardians of our built environment and heritage please do not allow this development to be proceed.

1. I do not believe any of these will be considered 'affordable' - the site has city views
2. Rangers Ave is already a traffic nightmare this additional housing can only make it worse
3. This development involves removal of beautiful, free standing homes which add to the character of the area
4. It is unclear what parking is provided - it is already difficult to park along the street

Re: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH IN-FILL AFFORDABLE HOUSING – 11-23 RANGERS AVENUE, MOSMAN
Application No SSD-96272465 Location 11-23 Rangers Avenue, Mosman (Lots 41 and 42 Section A in DP2509, Lots 1 and 2 in DP748842 and Lots 37-39 in DP2509)

I request that this development application be denied based on the below.
• Me and my family are owner/occupiers at “9/33 Park Ave Mosman”, and the proposed development will result in a reduction of afternoon sunlight to our home (i.e. we will have more shadowing, especially during winter time). Please see attached photo that shows the current view from our balcony (looking towards the proposed development).
• Mid-rise housing is understood to be “generally 3-6 storey apartment buildings”. The proposed development of a “seven-storey building” is in accordance with this.
• The entire development (11-23 Rangers Avenue) is not within the LMR Outer Area (i.e. 800m walking distance from nominated town centre). Furthermore, I have attached an excerpt from the NSW Government “LMR Map” specifically showing that 11 Rangers Avenue is not within the LMR area.
• I believe that there is a considerable benefit imbalance between the money that the developer will gain vs how much affordable housing will actually be achieved from this development (it is also understood that the affordable housing for this development is only “temporary”).
• I believe that the development site has been opportunistically selected in order to provide mainly luxury apartments with attractive city views, and that the SSD affordable housing component is more or less a "tokenistic" opportunity for the developer to cash in on a site that would not otherwise have been allowed to be developed.
• It is also noted that Rangers Ave traffic already has high volumes of traffic and I do not believe that the proposed development has adequately considered the future decrease in pedestrian safety along Rangers Ave and nearby streets.
• I also believe that replacement of existing “old established houses” with the large modern apartment building (which is out of character with the area) will have a negative visual impact, and will contribute negatively with regard to the existing heritage and environmental characteristics of the area that we live in.

Regards,
Damian Boyd
9/33 Park Ave Mosman NSW 2088