Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
MONA VALE
,
New South Wales
Message
I disagree with and object to the proposal to construct a 8 storey apartment block at 35-39 Darley Street East.
The site is the highest point on Mona Vale and the building will be totally out of context with the surrounding buildings and an eyesore to Mona Vale beach as will be clearly visible from all directions being on the very top of the hill. This is incompatible with surrounding built form and introduces a scale that has no precedent in this locality.
The building has too much bulk and removes the privacy (overlooking balconies) & light ( shadowing ) from surrounding residences. Impacting quality of life. Then at night the local residences will have substantial more light above them and noise. This has a high risk of creating mental health issues.
The bulk of the building will also impact any attempts of residents to install solar systems that can run efficiently and recover any investment costs. Finally, a building of 8 stories will require special equipment if a fire occurs, none of this is available in Mona Vale or surrounding suburbs creating a high risk of loss of life if a fire occurs. The government would be liable for negligence if a life is lost.
Mona Vale already has a challenge with the ability of the local infrastructure to provide good water pressure and sewerage processing capabilities. It is reported that on 130+ days last year raw sewerage was release at Warriewood beach as current infrastructure could not cope with requirements and current volumes in the local system (Warriewood is the sewerage plant for Mona Vale ). This new proposal more than triples the load on the current infrastructure from this property. Building this size of development without addressing infrastructure is inconsistent with environmental policies of government.
Mona Vale is not a rapid transit hub and current transport – B1 to the city is using congested roads that are continually becoming worse. This is not a Rail or Metro location so the ability to handle a rapid growth in residences does not exist.
Traffic congestion in Mona Vale is already a major issue shopping centres regularly being are parked out. Bringing in large number of new residences will bring more cars and more congestion, without the ability to widen or build new roads due to the existing structure of the suburb. The overall future plans for Mona Vale need to be considered in reviewing this application. Mona Vale is not a new suburb being created for residential growth.
I am not against growth and would consider a 4-storey construction as appropriate for this site and the surrounding residences.
The site is the highest point on Mona Vale and the building will be totally out of context with the surrounding buildings and an eyesore to Mona Vale beach as will be clearly visible from all directions being on the very top of the hill. This is incompatible with surrounding built form and introduces a scale that has no precedent in this locality.
The building has too much bulk and removes the privacy (overlooking balconies) & light ( shadowing ) from surrounding residences. Impacting quality of life. Then at night the local residences will have substantial more light above them and noise. This has a high risk of creating mental health issues.
The bulk of the building will also impact any attempts of residents to install solar systems that can run efficiently and recover any investment costs. Finally, a building of 8 stories will require special equipment if a fire occurs, none of this is available in Mona Vale or surrounding suburbs creating a high risk of loss of life if a fire occurs. The government would be liable for negligence if a life is lost.
Mona Vale already has a challenge with the ability of the local infrastructure to provide good water pressure and sewerage processing capabilities. It is reported that on 130+ days last year raw sewerage was release at Warriewood beach as current infrastructure could not cope with requirements and current volumes in the local system (Warriewood is the sewerage plant for Mona Vale ). This new proposal more than triples the load on the current infrastructure from this property. Building this size of development without addressing infrastructure is inconsistent with environmental policies of government.
Mona Vale is not a rapid transit hub and current transport – B1 to the city is using congested roads that are continually becoming worse. This is not a Rail or Metro location so the ability to handle a rapid growth in residences does not exist.
Traffic congestion in Mona Vale is already a major issue shopping centres regularly being are parked out. Bringing in large number of new residences will bring more cars and more congestion, without the ability to widen or build new roads due to the existing structure of the suburb. The overall future plans for Mona Vale need to be considered in reviewing this application. Mona Vale is not a new suburb being created for residential growth.
I am not against growth and would consider a 4-storey construction as appropriate for this site and the surrounding residences.
Rebecca Berrell
Object
Rebecca Berrell
Object
MONA VALE
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to this proposal and ask that it is rejected on the following grounds
1. Scale of the building – It is double the height of any building in the Mona Vale basin beach area and 4 times the height of the neighbouring properties. It will also take sunlight and solar light from surrounding buildings.
2. Visual Impact – consider the location of this proposed development that is on the crest of a hill that means it will stick out visually from any point and drastically change the landscape. Completely exceeds any tree canopy that is the character of the peninsula of Pittwater. This position has been purposely chosen by the “out of area” developer to achieve maximum profit with no regard for the character of Mona Vale or the area. The images in their report are from elevations that reduce the impact visually, not a true reflection.
3. Distance from Town Centre - The “town centre” definition is conveniently placed so this development is just within 15m of the 400m. It is flawed. The B1 bus stop should have been the definition, and then this development would sit outside the 400m.
4. Excavation – 3 levels of basement carpark right to boundary. Concerns over impact on stability of land and wastewater and flood water.
5. Parking – 124 spots for 55 apartments is not enough. If you look at bedrooms (and 2 cars per master bedroom), there is not enough car spots to cover potential cars for residents in this development. In the report they are not even allocating the required spots for the affordable housing component. On top of that, residents in apartment blocks will often use car spots for storage and park on the street. During weekends and summer this street is already under huge stress and already 311 residents on this one small stretch of street.
6. Traffic Safety - Dangerous traffic issues due to cars entering and exiting the car park of this building – hard to see at the crest of the hill and often close calls for cars so adding a huge development there is going to be a concern for road safety. This road is the only way to access the entire Mona Vale Basin. Also note that this street is a thorough fare for several aged care facilities as well.
7. Building Fire Risk - access to fire resources like a ladder truck is scarce (only in Manly I believe) and water supply and pressure issues.
8. Affordable Housing - % market value rent for these apartments will not be affordable for our public servants or people in need of affordable housing. These are being built to maximise ocean views and the % of current market rent cost of a new luxury 1 bedroom apartment in this location is NOT affordable. You are knocking down affordable housing and building completely unaffordable housing.
9. Trees – removal of trees and only leaving 3 trees, potential they will damage the only trees they are meant to keep. Impacts the bird life.
Consider the broader picture for excessive development as well:
Bushfire Hazard – we are at risk of an ember attack even near the beach with how close the dense bushland line is to Mona Vale
Evacuation Routes – only 2 roads in and out that are also surrounded by bush and in the past have been closed with bushfires. In a catastrophic fire event, you would have the whole Pittwater peninsula trying to evacuate through Mona Vale and via single lane roads that would likely also be shut. Building such high buildings and increasing the population at this rate is putting public safety at risk.
Health/Sea/Sewerage – The Warriewood Treatment Plant cannot cope with the current population and waste. We still have 1000 homes in the area not connected to the sewerage system yet. And overflow going straight out into our surf and swimming area of the ocean, impacting the health of our community. How can you overload this system even more without upgrading it.
Water Supply and Water Pressure – already an issue in this area
Traffic and road safety will be an issue – no traffic plan in place yet for Mona Vale.
Our infrastructure struggles already, no investment in infrastructure. We may have 11,000 residents in Mona Vale but have over 60,000 people that Mona Vale services daily.
Look at broader impact of multiple developments – consider all the points above and what multiple excessive developments will do to the health and safety of our area as well as the environment. You will ruin Mona Vale and Pittwater.
I reserve the right to add an addendum to this submission.
1. Scale of the building – It is double the height of any building in the Mona Vale basin beach area and 4 times the height of the neighbouring properties. It will also take sunlight and solar light from surrounding buildings.
2. Visual Impact – consider the location of this proposed development that is on the crest of a hill that means it will stick out visually from any point and drastically change the landscape. Completely exceeds any tree canopy that is the character of the peninsula of Pittwater. This position has been purposely chosen by the “out of area” developer to achieve maximum profit with no regard for the character of Mona Vale or the area. The images in their report are from elevations that reduce the impact visually, not a true reflection.
3. Distance from Town Centre - The “town centre” definition is conveniently placed so this development is just within 15m of the 400m. It is flawed. The B1 bus stop should have been the definition, and then this development would sit outside the 400m.
4. Excavation – 3 levels of basement carpark right to boundary. Concerns over impact on stability of land and wastewater and flood water.
5. Parking – 124 spots for 55 apartments is not enough. If you look at bedrooms (and 2 cars per master bedroom), there is not enough car spots to cover potential cars for residents in this development. In the report they are not even allocating the required spots for the affordable housing component. On top of that, residents in apartment blocks will often use car spots for storage and park on the street. During weekends and summer this street is already under huge stress and already 311 residents on this one small stretch of street.
6. Traffic Safety - Dangerous traffic issues due to cars entering and exiting the car park of this building – hard to see at the crest of the hill and often close calls for cars so adding a huge development there is going to be a concern for road safety. This road is the only way to access the entire Mona Vale Basin. Also note that this street is a thorough fare for several aged care facilities as well.
7. Building Fire Risk - access to fire resources like a ladder truck is scarce (only in Manly I believe) and water supply and pressure issues.
8. Affordable Housing - % market value rent for these apartments will not be affordable for our public servants or people in need of affordable housing. These are being built to maximise ocean views and the % of current market rent cost of a new luxury 1 bedroom apartment in this location is NOT affordable. You are knocking down affordable housing and building completely unaffordable housing.
9. Trees – removal of trees and only leaving 3 trees, potential they will damage the only trees they are meant to keep. Impacts the bird life.
Consider the broader picture for excessive development as well:
Bushfire Hazard – we are at risk of an ember attack even near the beach with how close the dense bushland line is to Mona Vale
Evacuation Routes – only 2 roads in and out that are also surrounded by bush and in the past have been closed with bushfires. In a catastrophic fire event, you would have the whole Pittwater peninsula trying to evacuate through Mona Vale and via single lane roads that would likely also be shut. Building such high buildings and increasing the population at this rate is putting public safety at risk.
Health/Sea/Sewerage – The Warriewood Treatment Plant cannot cope with the current population and waste. We still have 1000 homes in the area not connected to the sewerage system yet. And overflow going straight out into our surf and swimming area of the ocean, impacting the health of our community. How can you overload this system even more without upgrading it.
Water Supply and Water Pressure – already an issue in this area
Traffic and road safety will be an issue – no traffic plan in place yet for Mona Vale.
Our infrastructure struggles already, no investment in infrastructure. We may have 11,000 residents in Mona Vale but have over 60,000 people that Mona Vale services daily.
Look at broader impact of multiple developments – consider all the points above and what multiple excessive developments will do to the health and safety of our area as well as the environment. You will ruin Mona Vale and Pittwater.
I reserve the right to add an addendum to this submission.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
MONA VALE
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission of Objection
Development Application: SSD-113872990
Proposal: Residential Flat Building with In-fill Affordable Housing
Site: 35–39 Darley Street East, Mona Vale
To the Assessment Panel,
I write to formally object to State Significant Development Application SSD-113872990 for the proposed residential flat building with in-fill affordable housing at 35–39 Darley Street East, Mona Vale.
While I acknowledge the importance of providing additional housing, including affordable housing, this proposal represents a level of development that is inconsistent with the established character, infrastructure capacity and environmental constraints of Mona Vale.
The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires consideration of the environmental, social and economic impacts of development, the suitability of the site, the public interest and the adequacy of existing infrastructure. In my view, this proposal does not adequately satisfy these considerations.
1. The Proposal Represents a Fundamental Transformation of Mona Vale
This proposal is not simply an example of urban renewal.
It represents a significant transformation of Mona Vale's established coastal village character.
The existing neighbourhood is characterised by lower-scale residential development, landscaped streets, generous setbacks and a distinctive beachside identity. Developments of this scale introduce a built form that is substantially different from the surrounding area and contribute to a gradual but permanent change in the character of the suburb.
Residents are increasingly concerned that the cumulative effect of developments of this scale will transform Mona Vale into a high-density urban precinct rather than the coastal village recognised within Northern Beaches strategic planning.
Development should complement and respect local character—not replace it.
2. Existing Sewerage Infrastructure Has Already Reached Capacity
Existing wastewater infrastructure is already under considerable strain.
Residents have experienced repeated incidents where untreated sewage has overflowed into the ocean following rainfall events, resulting in pollution of beaches regularly used by local families, children and visitors.
This demonstrates that existing sewer infrastructure is already struggling to meet current demand.
Approving significant additional residential density before this infrastructure is upgraded risks increasing environmental impacts and public health concerns.
Essential infrastructure should be capable of accommodating growth before further development is approved.
3. Traffic Congestion Is Already Unsustainable
Traffic congestion throughout Mona Vale continues to worsen.
Darley Street East feeds directly into an already constrained road network, while the peninsula relies heavily on two principal routes for access in and out of the area.
Peak-hour congestion already affects residents, businesses, public transport and emergency services.
While individual traffic assessments often conclude that impacts are acceptable, they rarely assess the cumulative impact of multiple approved and proposed developments across Mona Vale and the wider Northern Beaches.
Council and the Department should consider the combined effect of these developments rather than assessing each proposal in isolation.
4. Bushfire Evacuation Presents a Significant Public Safety Risk
The proposal would substantially increase the resident population within a peninsula that has limited evacuation routes.
During a major bushfire or other emergency requiring evacuation, congestion on the limited road network could significantly delay residents attempting to leave the area while simultaneously restricting access for emergency services.
Given increasing bushfire risk across New South Wales, evacuation capacity should be a critical planning consideration.
Population growth should not outpace emergency management capability.
5. Water Infrastructure Is Already Under Pressure
Residents continue to experience inconsistent water pressure throughout the area.
Although infrastructure providers may advise that the network is operating within acceptable parameters, the lived experience of residents suggests that capacity issues already exist.
Further residential density will inevitably increase demand on water infrastructure unless significant upgrades occur beforehand.
6. Infrastructure Must Precede Development
One of the greatest concerns within the community is that infrastructure investment continues to lag behind residential growth.
Roads, sewerage, water supply, drainage, schools, health services and community facilities should be delivered before—or at least concurrently with—major increases in population.
Approving developments ahead of infrastructure places the burden on existing residents through worsening congestion, reduced service levels and declining liveability.
Good planning requires infrastructure-led growth, not growth-first planning.
7. Housing Affordability Should Not Come at the Expense of Liveability
Northern Beaches Council supports increasing affordable housing supply as part of a broader housing strategy. However, affordable housing objectives should not override the fundamental requirement that development be appropriate for its location and supported by adequate infrastructure.
Furthermore, where developments also include a substantial proportion of high-value apartments, the overall project does little to improve housing affordability for essential workers, young families or first home buyers.
Housing diversity is important, but it must be delivered in a way that maintains community amenity and protects the qualities that make Mona Vale an attractive place to live.
8. Community Infrastructure and Social Impacts
A successful community is measured not only by the number of dwellings constructed but by the quality of life available to residents.
This proposal will increase demand on parks, recreational facilities, schools, public transport, healthcare, parking and community services.
There is little evidence that corresponding investment in community infrastructure will occur before these impacts are experienced.
Without adequate planning for supporting infrastructure, developments of this scale diminish rather than strengthen community wellbeing.
Conclusion
This proposal represents development that exceeds the practical capacity of existing infrastructure and is incompatible with the established character of Mona Vale.
The cumulative impacts on traffic, sewerage, water supply, emergency evacuation, community facilities and environmental quality have not been adequately addressed.
The proposal also raises significant questions regarding whether the existing infrastructure can safely and sustainably accommodate the increased population.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Department refuse SSD-113872990 in its current form or require substantial amendments that:
* Reduce the overall scale and density of the development.
* Ensure infrastructure upgrades are delivered before occupancy.
* Protect the established character of Mona Vale.
* Properly assess cumulative traffic, environmental and emergency management impacts.
* Demonstrate that essential services have sufficient capacity to support the additional population.
The Northern Beaches community deserves development that is appropriately planned, infrastructure-supported and consistent with the long-term vision for Mona Vale.
Thank you for considering this submission.
Development Application: SSD-113872990
Proposal: Residential Flat Building with In-fill Affordable Housing
Site: 35–39 Darley Street East, Mona Vale
To the Assessment Panel,
I write to formally object to State Significant Development Application SSD-113872990 for the proposed residential flat building with in-fill affordable housing at 35–39 Darley Street East, Mona Vale.
While I acknowledge the importance of providing additional housing, including affordable housing, this proposal represents a level of development that is inconsistent with the established character, infrastructure capacity and environmental constraints of Mona Vale.
The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires consideration of the environmental, social and economic impacts of development, the suitability of the site, the public interest and the adequacy of existing infrastructure. In my view, this proposal does not adequately satisfy these considerations.
1. The Proposal Represents a Fundamental Transformation of Mona Vale
This proposal is not simply an example of urban renewal.
It represents a significant transformation of Mona Vale's established coastal village character.
The existing neighbourhood is characterised by lower-scale residential development, landscaped streets, generous setbacks and a distinctive beachside identity. Developments of this scale introduce a built form that is substantially different from the surrounding area and contribute to a gradual but permanent change in the character of the suburb.
Residents are increasingly concerned that the cumulative effect of developments of this scale will transform Mona Vale into a high-density urban precinct rather than the coastal village recognised within Northern Beaches strategic planning.
Development should complement and respect local character—not replace it.
2. Existing Sewerage Infrastructure Has Already Reached Capacity
Existing wastewater infrastructure is already under considerable strain.
Residents have experienced repeated incidents where untreated sewage has overflowed into the ocean following rainfall events, resulting in pollution of beaches regularly used by local families, children and visitors.
This demonstrates that existing sewer infrastructure is already struggling to meet current demand.
Approving significant additional residential density before this infrastructure is upgraded risks increasing environmental impacts and public health concerns.
Essential infrastructure should be capable of accommodating growth before further development is approved.
3. Traffic Congestion Is Already Unsustainable
Traffic congestion throughout Mona Vale continues to worsen.
Darley Street East feeds directly into an already constrained road network, while the peninsula relies heavily on two principal routes for access in and out of the area.
Peak-hour congestion already affects residents, businesses, public transport and emergency services.
While individual traffic assessments often conclude that impacts are acceptable, they rarely assess the cumulative impact of multiple approved and proposed developments across Mona Vale and the wider Northern Beaches.
Council and the Department should consider the combined effect of these developments rather than assessing each proposal in isolation.
4. Bushfire Evacuation Presents a Significant Public Safety Risk
The proposal would substantially increase the resident population within a peninsula that has limited evacuation routes.
During a major bushfire or other emergency requiring evacuation, congestion on the limited road network could significantly delay residents attempting to leave the area while simultaneously restricting access for emergency services.
Given increasing bushfire risk across New South Wales, evacuation capacity should be a critical planning consideration.
Population growth should not outpace emergency management capability.
5. Water Infrastructure Is Already Under Pressure
Residents continue to experience inconsistent water pressure throughout the area.
Although infrastructure providers may advise that the network is operating within acceptable parameters, the lived experience of residents suggests that capacity issues already exist.
Further residential density will inevitably increase demand on water infrastructure unless significant upgrades occur beforehand.
6. Infrastructure Must Precede Development
One of the greatest concerns within the community is that infrastructure investment continues to lag behind residential growth.
Roads, sewerage, water supply, drainage, schools, health services and community facilities should be delivered before—or at least concurrently with—major increases in population.
Approving developments ahead of infrastructure places the burden on existing residents through worsening congestion, reduced service levels and declining liveability.
Good planning requires infrastructure-led growth, not growth-first planning.
7. Housing Affordability Should Not Come at the Expense of Liveability
Northern Beaches Council supports increasing affordable housing supply as part of a broader housing strategy. However, affordable housing objectives should not override the fundamental requirement that development be appropriate for its location and supported by adequate infrastructure.
Furthermore, where developments also include a substantial proportion of high-value apartments, the overall project does little to improve housing affordability for essential workers, young families or first home buyers.
Housing diversity is important, but it must be delivered in a way that maintains community amenity and protects the qualities that make Mona Vale an attractive place to live.
8. Community Infrastructure and Social Impacts
A successful community is measured not only by the number of dwellings constructed but by the quality of life available to residents.
This proposal will increase demand on parks, recreational facilities, schools, public transport, healthcare, parking and community services.
There is little evidence that corresponding investment in community infrastructure will occur before these impacts are experienced.
Without adequate planning for supporting infrastructure, developments of this scale diminish rather than strengthen community wellbeing.
Conclusion
This proposal represents development that exceeds the practical capacity of existing infrastructure and is incompatible with the established character of Mona Vale.
The cumulative impacts on traffic, sewerage, water supply, emergency evacuation, community facilities and environmental quality have not been adequately addressed.
The proposal also raises significant questions regarding whether the existing infrastructure can safely and sustainably accommodate the increased population.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Department refuse SSD-113872990 in its current form or require substantial amendments that:
* Reduce the overall scale and density of the development.
* Ensure infrastructure upgrades are delivered before occupancy.
* Protect the established character of Mona Vale.
* Properly assess cumulative traffic, environmental and emergency management impacts.
* Demonstrate that essential services have sufficient capacity to support the additional population.
The Northern Beaches community deserves development that is appropriately planned, infrastructure-supported and consistent with the long-term vision for Mona Vale.
Thank you for considering this submission.
Attachments
Tracey Anderssen
Object
Tracey Anderssen
Object
BILGOLA PLATEAU
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to this development considering the following issues:
1. Planning, Scale, and Bulk
• Excessive Height: An 8-storey building is completely out of character for an area currently dominated by 1, 2, 3, and
occasional 4-storey structures.
• Unjustified 'Future Character': The proposal relies on a projected future character that assumes up to 50
surrounding sites will eventually redevelop into high-rises, rather than respecting the existing established character.
• Visual Impact & Massing: The design consists of one massive, continuous 8-storey block across the site without
breaks to share light, air, or visual amenity with neighbouring properties.
• Prominent Topography: Situated on the crest of the hill on Darley Street East, the building will stand out
prominently on the ridgeline when viewed from surrounding areas and headlands.
2. The 'Affordable Housing' Fallacy
• Unrealistic Financials: With a stated construction cost of ~$93M (excluding land value), the cost per unit exceeds
$1.8M. Setting rent at 30% of market rates will still place essential workers (nurses, police, paramedics) under
severe rental stress (exceeding 50% of income).
• Abuse of Density Bonuses: Developers leverage a small fraction of 'affordable' units to claim extra height bonuses
(moving from 6 to 8 storeys). If genuine affordability cannot be delivered to local support workers, the extra storeys
should not be granted.
• Temporary Scheme vs. Permanent Building: Affordable rentals are only retained for 15 years under the scheme,
whereas the extra physical height granted to the developer remains permanently.
3. Traffic, Parking, and Beach Precinct Impact
• Cumulative Traffic Impact: Evaluating single developments in isolation hides the true impact. Adding 53 high-density
apartments to a street already suffering heavy beach and local traffic will severely choke the network.
• Inadequate Parking Assumptions: The 124 proposed spaces (approx. 2 per unit) do not account for larger 3- and 4-
bedroom luxury layouts with multiple adult drivers per household, overflowing onto local street parking.
• Exaggerated Transit Hub Claims: Walking distances to major transport hubs (like the B1 bus line) are significantly
longer than implied in the developer's submission.
4. Safety, Emergency Access, and Evacuation Risks
• Bushfire Evacuation: Mona Vale relies on very few access/egress roads (Barrenjoey Road, Mona Vale Road).
Uncontrolled over-densification creates severe risks during emergency evacuations.
• Fire & Rescue Limitations: High-rise structures require specialized aerial ladder appliances (stationed far away in
Manly or Hornsby). Narrow coastal streets and tight boundary setbacks make manoeuvring emergency vehicles
extremely difficult.
5. Environmental & Infrastructure Concerns
• Utilities Capacity: High-density developments strain local sewerage (Warriewood Treatment Plant) and already
weak water pressure systems when multiplying bathroom counts sixfold on a single site.
• Excavation & Groundwater: Excavating over 10 metres down (3 basement levels) right up to boundary lines poses
risks to groundwater, localized flooding, and structural stability of neighbouring properties.
• Loss of Trees & Canopy: Opposition was strongly voiced against removing mature native trees (paperbarks,
jacarandas). Shallow plantings on top of concrete basements cannot replace deep-soil native canopy.
Mona Vale simply does not have the infrastructure to support the size of this development. Any future development must consider the safety and wellbeing of it's current population.
I am for development however it MUST planned and well-considered and for the people NOT for developers and a simple fix for Governments.
Thank you for considering my application.
Tracey Anderssen
1. Planning, Scale, and Bulk
• Excessive Height: An 8-storey building is completely out of character for an area currently dominated by 1, 2, 3, and
occasional 4-storey structures.
• Unjustified 'Future Character': The proposal relies on a projected future character that assumes up to 50
surrounding sites will eventually redevelop into high-rises, rather than respecting the existing established character.
• Visual Impact & Massing: The design consists of one massive, continuous 8-storey block across the site without
breaks to share light, air, or visual amenity with neighbouring properties.
• Prominent Topography: Situated on the crest of the hill on Darley Street East, the building will stand out
prominently on the ridgeline when viewed from surrounding areas and headlands.
2. The 'Affordable Housing' Fallacy
• Unrealistic Financials: With a stated construction cost of ~$93M (excluding land value), the cost per unit exceeds
$1.8M. Setting rent at 30% of market rates will still place essential workers (nurses, police, paramedics) under
severe rental stress (exceeding 50% of income).
• Abuse of Density Bonuses: Developers leverage a small fraction of 'affordable' units to claim extra height bonuses
(moving from 6 to 8 storeys). If genuine affordability cannot be delivered to local support workers, the extra storeys
should not be granted.
• Temporary Scheme vs. Permanent Building: Affordable rentals are only retained for 15 years under the scheme,
whereas the extra physical height granted to the developer remains permanently.
3. Traffic, Parking, and Beach Precinct Impact
• Cumulative Traffic Impact: Evaluating single developments in isolation hides the true impact. Adding 53 high-density
apartments to a street already suffering heavy beach and local traffic will severely choke the network.
• Inadequate Parking Assumptions: The 124 proposed spaces (approx. 2 per unit) do not account for larger 3- and 4-
bedroom luxury layouts with multiple adult drivers per household, overflowing onto local street parking.
• Exaggerated Transit Hub Claims: Walking distances to major transport hubs (like the B1 bus line) are significantly
longer than implied in the developer's submission.
4. Safety, Emergency Access, and Evacuation Risks
• Bushfire Evacuation: Mona Vale relies on very few access/egress roads (Barrenjoey Road, Mona Vale Road).
Uncontrolled over-densification creates severe risks during emergency evacuations.
• Fire & Rescue Limitations: High-rise structures require specialized aerial ladder appliances (stationed far away in
Manly or Hornsby). Narrow coastal streets and tight boundary setbacks make manoeuvring emergency vehicles
extremely difficult.
5. Environmental & Infrastructure Concerns
• Utilities Capacity: High-density developments strain local sewerage (Warriewood Treatment Plant) and already
weak water pressure systems when multiplying bathroom counts sixfold on a single site.
• Excavation & Groundwater: Excavating over 10 metres down (3 basement levels) right up to boundary lines poses
risks to groundwater, localized flooding, and structural stability of neighbouring properties.
• Loss of Trees & Canopy: Opposition was strongly voiced against removing mature native trees (paperbarks,
jacarandas). Shallow plantings on top of concrete basements cannot replace deep-soil native canopy.
Mona Vale simply does not have the infrastructure to support the size of this development. Any future development must consider the safety and wellbeing of it's current population.
I am for development however it MUST planned and well-considered and for the people NOT for developers and a simple fix for Governments.
Thank you for considering my application.
Tracey Anderssen
Mona Vale Residents Association
Object
Mona Vale Residents Association
Object
Mona Vale
,
New South Wales
Message
Concerns raised by impacted residents stress its inappropriate 8 storey building height, bulk and scale located in a low-rise context. Additional concerns include direct impacts of overshadowing, overlooking and loss of privacy. Residents point out inadequate resident, visitor parking and limited local road capacity.
It is noted that the site is located under a Western Sydney International Airport late night flight path (RWY23 Arrival East Night). This has not been considered in the EIS but needs to be at the assessment stage.
It is noted that the site is located under a Western Sydney International Airport late night flight path (RWY23 Arrival East Night). This has not been considered in the EIS but needs to be at the assessment stage.
Julie Maslen
Object
Julie Maslen
Object
Mona vale
,
New South Wales
Message
*Mona vale does not have a rapid transport system.
*There will be nothing affordable about this development- it is purely for the profit of developers - this is not what state significant developments are supposed to be about.
*This development is totally out of character with the area and there is the argument to keep “Sydney as Sydney”-a beautiful city that deserves proper planning and a sensibility for the environment . The elected government needs to listen to its citizens who are dead set against the “Hong Kongification” of this village where , for the most part, appropriate development has been undertaken up until now. No one can look at a photo from the air today vs 20 years ago and say we have not done our bit for housing development.
*This is a peninsular with one road in and one road out, surrounded by bushland that is consistently affected by bushfires which has already led to property loss. It is also surrounded by water that is flood affected- you just cannot keep squishing more development in and not expect severe environmental and economic outcomes, eg houses will be uninsurable.
*We already have raw sewerage having to be released from our water treatment plant into the ocean outfall at Turimetta beach because it is way over capacity. This has been the case for decades now as the overdevelopment of the Warriewood valley flood plane has added thousands of homes in an unsuitable flood affected area with little to no additional infrastucture having been built. In fact we lost our hospital in Mona vale that serviced the peninsular - Northern beaches hospital is sub standard. Hopefully, now that the State government has had to purchase it from healthscope, some of its operational issues can be addressed. I had a heart attack in May last year and I made the decision not to call an ambulance because they have to take you there. Instead, I made my very distressed daughter drive straight past it to continue on to Royal North Shore Hospital because I didn’t trust that hospital not to kill me. There is also the problem that access is blocked as soon as we have a downpour of rain.
* Mona vale is a service hub already for all suburbs to the north of of us, and up to Terry Hills in the west, and south to Collaroy, so it’s not just a village of 11 thousand people. It services around 65k surrounding residents and is already full to bursting as far as schools, parking and provision of services.
Please take the time to reassess your rapid fire, deskbound decisions with no thought to the consequences downstream of such overdevelopment.
Reduce immigration levels and send home temporary residents that have overstayed their visas.
Better utilise the resources that you have but have locked up with red tape - clubs NSW were in the media today saying they wanted to, but couldn’t, develop their land due to restrictive government red tape. This sounds like a brilliant idea. Fix that before riding roughshod over communities who do not want outrageous overdevelopment like something in Hong Kong. It is not what we, the people, want.
*There will be nothing affordable about this development- it is purely for the profit of developers - this is not what state significant developments are supposed to be about.
*This development is totally out of character with the area and there is the argument to keep “Sydney as Sydney”-a beautiful city that deserves proper planning and a sensibility for the environment . The elected government needs to listen to its citizens who are dead set against the “Hong Kongification” of this village where , for the most part, appropriate development has been undertaken up until now. No one can look at a photo from the air today vs 20 years ago and say we have not done our bit for housing development.
*This is a peninsular with one road in and one road out, surrounded by bushland that is consistently affected by bushfires which has already led to property loss. It is also surrounded by water that is flood affected- you just cannot keep squishing more development in and not expect severe environmental and economic outcomes, eg houses will be uninsurable.
*We already have raw sewerage having to be released from our water treatment plant into the ocean outfall at Turimetta beach because it is way over capacity. This has been the case for decades now as the overdevelopment of the Warriewood valley flood plane has added thousands of homes in an unsuitable flood affected area with little to no additional infrastucture having been built. In fact we lost our hospital in Mona vale that serviced the peninsular - Northern beaches hospital is sub standard. Hopefully, now that the State government has had to purchase it from healthscope, some of its operational issues can be addressed. I had a heart attack in May last year and I made the decision not to call an ambulance because they have to take you there. Instead, I made my very distressed daughter drive straight past it to continue on to Royal North Shore Hospital because I didn’t trust that hospital not to kill me. There is also the problem that access is blocked as soon as we have a downpour of rain.
* Mona vale is a service hub already for all suburbs to the north of of us, and up to Terry Hills in the west, and south to Collaroy, so it’s not just a village of 11 thousand people. It services around 65k surrounding residents and is already full to bursting as far as schools, parking and provision of services.
Please take the time to reassess your rapid fire, deskbound decisions with no thought to the consequences downstream of such overdevelopment.
Reduce immigration levels and send home temporary residents that have overstayed their visas.
Better utilise the resources that you have but have locked up with red tape - clubs NSW were in the media today saying they wanted to, but couldn’t, develop their land due to restrictive government red tape. This sounds like a brilliant idea. Fix that before riding roughshod over communities who do not want outrageous overdevelopment like something in Hong Kong. It is not what we, the people, want.
Hannah Bee
Object
Hannah Bee
Object
BAYVIEW
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to the proposed development at 35–39 Darley Street East for the following planning reasons.
1. Excessive Scale and Density
The proposal seeks to increase the number of dwellings from 18 apartments to 53 apartments, representing almost a threefold increase in residential density. This level of intensification is inconsistent with the established character of the Mona Vale Basin, which is predominantly low-rise residential development.
The size and bulk of the proposal would dominate the surrounding streetscape and fundamentally alter the character of the area.
2. Out of Character with the Mona Vale Basin
Mona Vale's appeal comes from its coastal village atmosphere, generous landscaping and moderate-density housing.
A development of this magnitude risks creating an urban form that is more appropriate in larger metropolitan centres than within this established beachside neighbourhood.
Approving this proposal could set a precedent for similarly oversized developments throughout the Basin.
3. Traffic Congestion
Darley Street East already experiences significant traffic from:
Mona Vale Beach visitors
Local businesses
School traffic
Residents accessing Barrenjoey Road
Introducing 53 apartments will substantially increase vehicle movements despite the provision of basement parking.
This additional traffic is likely to:
increase congestion
lengthen waiting times at intersections
reduce pedestrian safety
increase conflict with cyclists.
4. Parking Impacts
Although the proposal includes 124 basement car spaces, visitor demand and service vehicles may still result in overflow parking into surrounding streets.
Parking is already under pressure during weekends and holiday periods because of the beach precinct.
5. Overshadowing and Loss of Solar Access
The increased building height and bulk have the potential to overshadow neighbouring properties.
Reduced sunlight would adversely affect:
private open space
gardens
balconies
living areas
particularly during winter.
6. Loss of Privacy
Upper-level apartments, balconies and communal areas may overlook adjoining homes and apartments.
This would reduce the reasonable expectation of privacy currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents.
7. Noise
The proposal introduces a much larger resident population together with communal facilities including:
swimming pool
gym
wellness areas
communal outdoor spaces
These facilities have the potential to generate ongoing noise extending into evenings and weekends.
8. Removal of Existing Landscaping
The existing site contains mature vegetation that contributes to the leafy character of the Mona Vale Basin.
Removal of mature trees would:
reduce urban canopy
diminish wildlife habitat
increase urban heat
reduce visual amenity.
Replacement planting cannot compensate for the immediate loss of mature canopy.
9. Construction Impacts
The demolition of the existing complex and construction of a significantly larger development will likely continue for an extended period.
Residents will experience:
construction noise
dust
vibration
heavy vehicle movements
disruption to local traffic
reduced pedestrian safety.
10. Pressure on Local Infrastructure
An additional 35 apartments over the existing development will increase demand on:
local roads
drainage infrastructure
public transport
parks
beaches
community facilities.
It is not evident that supporting infrastructure has capacity to accommodate this increase.
11. State Significant Development Process
The proposal appears to be seeking assessment as a State Significant Development. While housing supply is important, local residents should retain a meaningful opportunity to have their concerns fully considered.
A project of this scale should not diminish the importance of local planning objectives or community input.
12. Inconsistent with Local Character Objectives
The proposal should be carefully assessed against the objectives of the applicable planning controls, particularly regarding:
neighbourhood character
building scale
setbacks
landscaping
residential amenity
transition to neighbouring properties.
The apparent increase in scale suggests the proposal may exceed what the surrounding locality can reasonably accommodate.
Conclusion
I support well-designed housing that respects Mona Vale's established coastal character. However, this proposal represents an excessive increase in density, height and building bulk for the site. It would have unacceptable impacts on traffic, parking, privacy, solar access, neighbourhood character and local infrastructure.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that this application is rejected in its current form or require substantial redesign to reduce its scale and better align it with the established character of the Mona Vale Basin.
1. Excessive Scale and Density
The proposal seeks to increase the number of dwellings from 18 apartments to 53 apartments, representing almost a threefold increase in residential density. This level of intensification is inconsistent with the established character of the Mona Vale Basin, which is predominantly low-rise residential development.
The size and bulk of the proposal would dominate the surrounding streetscape and fundamentally alter the character of the area.
2. Out of Character with the Mona Vale Basin
Mona Vale's appeal comes from its coastal village atmosphere, generous landscaping and moderate-density housing.
A development of this magnitude risks creating an urban form that is more appropriate in larger metropolitan centres than within this established beachside neighbourhood.
Approving this proposal could set a precedent for similarly oversized developments throughout the Basin.
3. Traffic Congestion
Darley Street East already experiences significant traffic from:
Mona Vale Beach visitors
Local businesses
School traffic
Residents accessing Barrenjoey Road
Introducing 53 apartments will substantially increase vehicle movements despite the provision of basement parking.
This additional traffic is likely to:
increase congestion
lengthen waiting times at intersections
reduce pedestrian safety
increase conflict with cyclists.
4. Parking Impacts
Although the proposal includes 124 basement car spaces, visitor demand and service vehicles may still result in overflow parking into surrounding streets.
Parking is already under pressure during weekends and holiday periods because of the beach precinct.
5. Overshadowing and Loss of Solar Access
The increased building height and bulk have the potential to overshadow neighbouring properties.
Reduced sunlight would adversely affect:
private open space
gardens
balconies
living areas
particularly during winter.
6. Loss of Privacy
Upper-level apartments, balconies and communal areas may overlook adjoining homes and apartments.
This would reduce the reasonable expectation of privacy currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents.
7. Noise
The proposal introduces a much larger resident population together with communal facilities including:
swimming pool
gym
wellness areas
communal outdoor spaces
These facilities have the potential to generate ongoing noise extending into evenings and weekends.
8. Removal of Existing Landscaping
The existing site contains mature vegetation that contributes to the leafy character of the Mona Vale Basin.
Removal of mature trees would:
reduce urban canopy
diminish wildlife habitat
increase urban heat
reduce visual amenity.
Replacement planting cannot compensate for the immediate loss of mature canopy.
9. Construction Impacts
The demolition of the existing complex and construction of a significantly larger development will likely continue for an extended period.
Residents will experience:
construction noise
dust
vibration
heavy vehicle movements
disruption to local traffic
reduced pedestrian safety.
10. Pressure on Local Infrastructure
An additional 35 apartments over the existing development will increase demand on:
local roads
drainage infrastructure
public transport
parks
beaches
community facilities.
It is not evident that supporting infrastructure has capacity to accommodate this increase.
11. State Significant Development Process
The proposal appears to be seeking assessment as a State Significant Development. While housing supply is important, local residents should retain a meaningful opportunity to have their concerns fully considered.
A project of this scale should not diminish the importance of local planning objectives or community input.
12. Inconsistent with Local Character Objectives
The proposal should be carefully assessed against the objectives of the applicable planning controls, particularly regarding:
neighbourhood character
building scale
setbacks
landscaping
residential amenity
transition to neighbouring properties.
The apparent increase in scale suggests the proposal may exceed what the surrounding locality can reasonably accommodate.
Conclusion
I support well-designed housing that respects Mona Vale's established coastal character. However, this proposal represents an excessive increase in density, height and building bulk for the site. It would have unacceptable impacts on traffic, parking, privacy, solar access, neighbourhood character and local infrastructure.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that this application is rejected in its current form or require substantial redesign to reduce its scale and better align it with the established character of the Mona Vale Basin.
Velia Mignacca
Object
Velia Mignacca
Object
CLAREVILLE
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission uploaded in attachment
Graham Lewis
Object
Graham Lewis
Object
Mona Vale
,
New South Wales
Message
I am a member of SOS Mona Vale and I wish to object to this development application.
One would have to be blind not to see that there is a growing and overwhelming wave of community concern in Mona Vale over the number of INAPPROPRIATE large-scale development proposals popping up everywhere, this being one of them. I am familiar with all the concerns of our community and, in relation to this particular project, all the specific concerns of local, neighbouring property owners . I support each and everyone of those concerns. Putting all that aside, and looking at the local scene from a more wholistic viewpoint, my understanding is that the target under the NSW Government’s Low and Mid-Rise (LMR) Housing Policy for the broader Northern Beaches is 5,900 new homes over 5 years. Why then is Mona Vale being singled out and totally saturated by a tsunami of developers? It's because they recognise the potential the building of high end, totally unaffordable apartments in an attractive beach side suburb has. It is going to garner them huge profits, something that is no longer available to them out west because of building costs and population demographics . The way things are headed, there will ultimately be an over supply of these high rise apartments with a large percentage sitting vacant. With the exception of millionaire investors, nobody will be able to afford to buy these apartments, let alone rent them. As for affordable housing, that is quickly proving to just be a guise to enable developers to reach for the sky in terms of number of floors/over-all height. Translating all that into an area that is basically a peninsular surrounded by ocean on one side and ocean bays and a huge national park on the other, then one can only imagine how much more vulnerable a larger population is going to be to climate change disasters such as bushfires (you only need look at evacuation levels in Europe right now), flooding, hospital access, travel times to work/commuting, traffic and, overall, an infrastructure (including water and sewerage) that has been left way behind. The stupidity that is occurring with this knee jerk reaction to resolving the so called "housing crisis" is mind boggling! The latter has been brought about by continued failures of current and past Governments, both at a State and Federal level. This method of addressing the problem is another failure of Government. I strongly oppose this development application and call upon the State Government to remove Mona Vale from the LMR immediately before any more damage is done to this pristine part of Sydney. Let other areas pick up the slack. We have done our bit already!
One would have to be blind not to see that there is a growing and overwhelming wave of community concern in Mona Vale over the number of INAPPROPRIATE large-scale development proposals popping up everywhere, this being one of them. I am familiar with all the concerns of our community and, in relation to this particular project, all the specific concerns of local, neighbouring property owners . I support each and everyone of those concerns. Putting all that aside, and looking at the local scene from a more wholistic viewpoint, my understanding is that the target under the NSW Government’s Low and Mid-Rise (LMR) Housing Policy for the broader Northern Beaches is 5,900 new homes over 5 years. Why then is Mona Vale being singled out and totally saturated by a tsunami of developers? It's because they recognise the potential the building of high end, totally unaffordable apartments in an attractive beach side suburb has. It is going to garner them huge profits, something that is no longer available to them out west because of building costs and population demographics . The way things are headed, there will ultimately be an over supply of these high rise apartments with a large percentage sitting vacant. With the exception of millionaire investors, nobody will be able to afford to buy these apartments, let alone rent them. As for affordable housing, that is quickly proving to just be a guise to enable developers to reach for the sky in terms of number of floors/over-all height. Translating all that into an area that is basically a peninsular surrounded by ocean on one side and ocean bays and a huge national park on the other, then one can only imagine how much more vulnerable a larger population is going to be to climate change disasters such as bushfires (you only need look at evacuation levels in Europe right now), flooding, hospital access, travel times to work/commuting, traffic and, overall, an infrastructure (including water and sewerage) that has been left way behind. The stupidity that is occurring with this knee jerk reaction to resolving the so called "housing crisis" is mind boggling! The latter has been brought about by continued failures of current and past Governments, both at a State and Federal level. This method of addressing the problem is another failure of Government. I strongly oppose this development application and call upon the State Government to remove Mona Vale from the LMR immediately before any more damage is done to this pristine part of Sydney. Let other areas pick up the slack. We have done our bit already!