This project will further develop narrabeen, where there is already a lack of parking and very little trees. By adding a 6 story development further strain on the people and environment would incur. It will be an eye sore and negative for the whole narrabeen community.

The proposed development currently sits in zoning of R3 with a max permissible height of 8.5m, with an addition 3.8m over the max permissible height (bonus clause 87 of housing SEPP) bringing this to a total of 12.3m.
The variation clause 4.6 at add an additional height to a combined total of 19.3m is excessive.

Appendix 37 - Visual Impact Assessment is subjective.
- Location 02 / 04 / 06 / 07 all indicate that the magnitude as moderate and the visual impact as low. Further weight and consideration as to how the merits of the visual impact assessment are determined.

Appendix 38 - Demolition & Construction Waste Management Plan. This has not been prepared by a suitably qualified consultant. UFD are food preparation and services consultants, not experienced to provide commentary on construction waste management. Also the calculations of their assessment need to be reviewed.

In the context of the significance of the project - is a 14 day notification period sufficient? Generally aren't SSDAs subject to a 30day notification period?

Appendix 36 - View Loss Study. I question why this is taken at a RL19.894 (ie above the power lines running down Ocean street. Shouldn't the view loss be taken from ground level? Also why was there no view loss studies carried out on Octavia, Lagoon and Loftus St?

Appendix 12 - Clause 4.6 Variation Request. The very last bullet point in the conclusion notes 'Therefore compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unneccessary in the circumstance of this proposal'. In the context of the proposed development compliance with development standard is reasonable and neccessary. If developments are allowed to proceed with little regard to development standards then poor planning decisions will be made. Incorporating language of this tone is offensive to planning controls.

In reference to traffic - Ocean st is currently zoned 50km. The addition of the nominated 192 cars for the units will add further congestion to the area.

If this proposal is endorsed by the state government, it will set a precedent for future development. As a resident driving down Ocean st, and seeing 6 storey developments on the western / northern side of Ocean street will be a real shame and a blight on the neighbourhood.

This area of Narrabeen is situated in a low rise are between the beach and the lake. It is iconic in this regard. Al recent developments have been kept within the local Development Control Plan height of 8.5metres. During the 1970's, a time with little control on development, some higher unit blocks were built. My concerns within this development are as follows:
1. It is very out of character for the area.
2. This proposed project fronts three streets, therefore, it would be very dominant.
3. The height greatly exceeds the current DCP.
4. The street set backs especially on Lagoon Street are far too small even for a two storey development.

There is nothing wrong with development as long it is the right development for the area or suburb in which it will be built. This project is certainly not suitable to this area and will have a negative effect on the amenity for those living and visiting the area. All areas or suburbs are not the same and according there should not be a blanket development plan for all areas

We all like options or choices in life and one is being able to live in or visit this iconic area. Allowing this project will change the area and there will be no turning back.

I support the project as submitted. Thank you.

The Northern Beaches is full of elderly people, my brother in law calls it "the retirement home' when he comes to visit from the inner west. However, it seems there are no options for retirees to downsize into low maintenance, seniors living homes that allow them to remain close to family, friends, and essential services.

Without available seniors housing, many, including a good portion of my friends parents, remain in their long occupied family homes, therefore reducing availability of suitable homes for younger families to grow and move into. I've personally tried to find suitable accommodation for my parents near my home and there is almost nothing in the Northern Beaches. Almost all the places we look at to try to buy to upgrade into, are tired old buildings, out of maintenance, that very very elderly people are moving out of directly into nursing homes as they are too old to live at home any more. If they were able to move into seniors developments like this one - more families would have more options, as elderly locals would be able to move somewhere more suitable to them before they become too incapacitated to manage.

The project looks large but they have kept the big pine trees on Ocean St, and the design looks nice. I think the area needs more development like this. It looks a lot nicer than most of the ugly developments I see around Sydney.

No doubt the angry locals will complain because they all want to keep everything low rise because they are worried about their unearned baby boomer property prices. That's their right but no doubt they will all want to stay in the area when they get old.... If no more young people can afford to move into the area - they will be asking carers and families to travel from a long way away to look after them!!

I support this project.

Please see attached. I oppose to the current proposal but am supportive of a development that meets planning controls.

The Indigo project is a disaster for Narrabeen. Its is WRONG for the following reasons:
Height of building
Traffic congestion
Insufficient parking for the residents of the proposed building
Terrible architecture
No affordable housing considerations

It will serve the community well, relieving some housing stock for the younger generation with families. The developer is reputable and have produced quality senior living for which there is demand locally.

Absolutely not, this is a disgusting development and clearly not what the community wants.
Here are my personal thoughts on this development:

Phoney Consultation and Loopholes: "Engagement" was sales spin, not dialogue; SSD status dodges local rules, inviting unchecked overdevelopment that forever scars Narrabeen.


One-Sided SSD Submissions: Community notes in the SSD cherry-pick pro-development views while downplaying widespread opposition, presenting a skewed narrative logically manipulative, eroding trust in the process and demanding independent review.



Horrible Parking Anomalies and Shortfalls: Documentation falsely claims "adequate" provisions, but totals only 192 spaces (178 resident, 3 staff, 7 visitor) a glaring mismatch with the EIS breakdown (actual sum ~190, excluding overlaps like 4 EV spots, and 4 visitor spots), far below DCP norms (e.g., 30+ visitor spots needed); this under provision invites street chaos, with no justification for the discrepancy, raising red flags on accuracy. Are the residents not allowed visitors, and no workers on site, where are these people supposed to park, there already strain on local on street parking especially on weekends when everyone visits the beach.



Overbearing Design and Setbacks: The existing structure's generous setbacks from roads and neighbours make it appear modest despite its footprint; the new build slashes these, reducing the gap to the next building, rendering it oppressively dominant and intrusive causing privacy loss and visual blight that crushes neighbouring properties, and the low rise, low density of a 1 road peninsula.

Inefficient Land Use: The current facility maximises central square metres for resident rooms without maxing out height, proving thoughtful design; this proposal flips that, increasing internal structural gaps between buildings from 12m to 27m, a luxury not afforded to neighbours who now receive increased shadow lines.

 The design is ineffective in maximising land use to build units, they could lower the building height to 3 stories, and make better utilisation of internal land.

Sky-High Costs, Zero Affordability: Units in the millions exclude everyday retirees, delivering elite pads is not community care, the laughable over 55's retirement proposal with a lack of parking is not representative of reality, many over 55's are still working, requiring 2 car's.


Betrayal of Community Legacy: This block has long been a respectful community hub for elders, leveraging its generous size to deliver an efficient, low-rise aged care facility that harmonises with Narrabeen's scale now it's a developer-driven money grab masquerading as seniors housing; had it required consolidating multiple smaller lots, this oversized proposal would never have advanced, exploiting the site's unique history to prioritise profits over people.

Monstrous Scale and Height: At 6 storeys, it's twice the height of nearby buildings and the local council regulations, obliterating the density limits in place and casting long shadows over homes emotionally gut-wrenching, as it erases the open, airy feel we've loved, while logically defying local height controls for no good reason.

Privacy Shredder: Towering balconies and windows will peer into backyards, turning private sanctuaries into exposed spectacles heartbreaking for families who've built lives here, and a clear breach of amenity standards.

Traffic Gridlock: Hundreds of extra trips will choke Ocean and Lagoon Streets, as mentioned their low expectations on trips is a misrepresentation of the cars and working residents this building will generate, hiking accident risks for kids, as it endangers the safe, strollable haven we've nurtured. There is one single lane bridge to the north next and a holiday park that during holidays and summer is packed with kids. To the south a school, this development and significant increase in traffic presents a real danger that children will be hit by cars, absolutely unacceptable.

Environmental and Infrastructure Strain: Bulldozing trees and overloading creaky sewers/power grids risks blackouts and spills; on a flood zone, it's a ticking bomb for community-wide costs. Narrabeen beach is already undergoing expensive beach restoration, recent and regular storms are washing away the beach front up to houses and units, the addition of this sky scrapper does not resolve this issue, and creates future concern for erosion on an mostly sand peninsula.

Superior Alternatives: Ingleside's 5km away is farmland that could absorb this without building this monstrosity, its devastating to sacrifice this land for greed when space abounds elsewhere.

Service Cuts: Dropping from 55 beds/35 assisted units to 10 rooms abandons vulnerable locals, a shameful downgrade hidden as "progress".

Reject this proposal it is the right thing to do.