I object to the project because the properties mentioned lie outside the council's proposal for high density development. The area across the road on McIntosh Street is already appropriately zoned for units and will have increased density under the Kuring-gai TOD proposal.
McIntosh Street does not have the capacity to take all the traffic associated with the additional development of the abovementioned properties because it is a small road. In the mornings, McIntosh Street and Rosedale Road are very busy with commuter traffic. There will already be higher density development along 10-20 McIntosh Street under current zoning so the proposal at 21-25 McIntosh street should definitely not proceed.
There are also safety issues regarding pedestrian access as many people cross McIntosh Street to get to the station.
In addition, 21-25 McIntosh Street should remain low density because of the adjacent proximity of these properties to the heritage-listed property, Eryldene. Having an 8 storey apartment block adjacent to Eryldene is not in keeping with the character of that side of McIntosh street and will look terribly out of place.
In conclusion, I am in support of appropriate development around Gordon in accordance with Kuring-gai Council's proposed high density development plan. However, the proposed development of the above mentioned properties will exacerbate traffic conditions in McIntosh Street, compromise pedestrian safety and ruin the streetscape next to the heritage-listed property of Eryldene. Therefore, 21,23,25 McIntosh St should remain low density residential as proposed by council.

I strongly object to this submittsion.
- Out of character - Killara is a low rise, leafy suburb. This building is completely inconsistent with surrounding homes
- overshadowing & privacy - the height and scale with block light and overlook neighbouring properties, reducing residential amenity. At 8 stories on a relatively high ground, these 3 building will stand out on the skyline for a significant area around, creating a permanent eyesore, in addition to blocking light and overlooking all surrounding properties.
- Infrastructure and traffic strain - the development will add hundreds of residents and cars to an areas where schools, shops, medical services and local roads are already under pressure
- parking - the proposed 191 parking spaces is wholly inadequate. There will obviously be far more need than 1.17 car spaces per unit. The train station parking and streets are already jammed full of cars before 7am every workday. This buildings would need close to double what is proposed to be adequate.
- over development - approving this building will set a precedent for high rise towers in an area historically protected from such development, permanently and irrevocabally damaging the area.
- arbitrary boundary - the NSW 400m boundary is arbitrary, significantly negatively impacting properties on the edge of that boundary.
- Impact on Eryldene house and garden - the proposed development neighbours the herigate Eryldene house and garden, and will negatively impact the garden amenity generally with it being overlooked by such massive buildings, and the flora will be impacted by the light being blocked by such tall buildings
- Noise - simultanous construction of 3 enourmous buildings will significantly impact neighbours during the construction phase

I urge the department to refuse the applciation in its current form, or at a minimum, reduce its height and density to have less impact on the surrounding neighbours. Apartments or 4 or 5 stories at most should be considered this far away from the station, with due consideration for neighbours and the area.

Development of 21, 23, 25 McIntosh Street and 55 Werona Avenue, Gordon.
SD-834788456

This proposed development is part of the NSW Government’s Transport Oriented Development (TOD) plan and is consistent with that planning policy. This development represents a step forward in addressing the current housing shortage. It offers broader housing options that are accessible to those who work in and support this community every day such as teachers, emergency service personnel, healthcare workers and others as well as older residents looking to downsize.

This development includes 33 affordable housing apartments, 29 will be held for 15 years and 4 will be protected permanently. 389 jobs will be created during construction and 11 permanent jobs.

The location of this proposed development is ideal. It is a short flat walk to Gordon station and a redeveloped bus interchange and shopping centre. Significant sums have been invested by the State Government over many years to upgrade the Northern Trainline, Metro Connection and the bus interchange. As a result, higher density development should be a natural progression. Gordon, compared to other suburbs has multiple parks and excellent public transport connection to both public and private schools located in the LGA.

The development site (21-25 McIntosh St and 55 Werona Ave) does not directly border Eryldene as it is separated by another residential lot (19 McIntosh St). The plans preserve sunlight, and the development does not overshadow Eryldene’s gardens. The landscaping has been planned to blend with Eryldene’s Camelia gardens and has been designed to retain the leafy streetscape in McIntosh St, improving the amenity of the street. This development does not impact on Eryldene’s legally enforceable right of carriage as their rear access.

29 trees will be removed from the development site none of which are indigenous to the local area . Many of these non-indigenous trees are near the end of their natural lives. However, 66 new trees will be planted hence ensuring a healthy tree canopy in the long term as none of the large indigenous trees will be impacted by the development. The developer plans to replant some of the mature camellias from the development site. Tree retention has been prioritised where possible and deep soil zones have been included to ensure successful growth of new trees.

The proposed development has a 10m setback from McIntosh Street and is lower than many TOD projects (8 storeys). The only height variation is for lift access to the rooftop communal spaces – not living areas – and this does not cause extra shadowing. From the street, the design blends well and avoids a heavy “wall like” appearance.

Council’s own draft zoning plan (Scenario 3b) proposes much denser buildings opposite Eryldene as well as 25 storey apartment blocks along the highway many of which are over 1 km to public transport. The area bounded by Werona Ave, Park Ave, Rosedale Rd and McIntosh St have council proposals of developments which vary in height between 5-10 stories hence this development is in context for the area. Although 25 McIntosh St is within an HCA it holds no heritage value. The other 3 properties in this development are not within an HCA.

I am a healthcare worker and I was brought up in Gordon and lived in Gordon for 25 years.
I have moved to regional NSW as I cannot afford to live in Gordon. I often visit the area and when I first noticed the development on the East side of Lindfield 10 years ago, I was concerned about what was to come. I now visit the shops in Lindfield and am pleased with the social cohesion which these developments have created. Hence, the proposed development in McIntosh St which includes affordable housing will create a cohesive community with good, easy access to both transport and shops.

This development is important for the elderly who no longer wish to maintain large gardens and no longer hold a driver’s licence as it is within easy walking distance to the train station and bus interchange. This gives them easy access to public transport to attend medical appointments, hospitals, and entertainment.

I strongly urge Planning NSW to approve this development as it will create real opportunities for older residents, essential workers and families to live in the communities they support whilst aligning with the area’s infrastructure as well as complementing Gordon’s evolving landscape. The western side of Gordon has undergone a big change however most of these apartments are down a steep hill so are not suitable for older residents or young mothers pushing prams. It is time for the eastern side to be developed to help alleviate the housing shortage and provide more affordable housing for those who serve our community.

Dear Sir/Madam
I wish to formally object to SSD-83478456 (21,23,25 McIntosh St & 5 Werona Ave, Gordon) for the following nine reasons:

1. Expected Damage to Aging Sewer Lines Located in Critically Endangered Bushcare Site
I have been dedicated to preserving the critically endangered Terrumbine Reserve Bushcare site with like-minded people for 16 years. The site is in excellent condition as it’s been tended for 30 years. It’s Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest of which less than 2% remains in Australia. (Yes, 98% has been cleared.) What occurs higher up this remnant affects this precious site.

The proposed development will adversely affect Terrumbine Reserve because the additional 330 toilets, 330 showers, 165 baths, 165 sinks and dishwashers, AND 165 washing machines will add pressure to the aging sewer lines which run through the site and which we believe date to the 1940s. The sewer has failed three times in the past two years, likely due to other recent developments that are not as big as this one. One incident resulted in sewerage poured into Rocky Creek and onto Middle Harbour for a week before I noticed and reported it to Sydney Water. Sewer leaks are only discovered by residents, not by monitoring by Sydney Water or property developers, but they affect us all. Sewerage degrades Bushcare sites and can kill native animals plus makes the harbour unsafe to swim.

I do not see any composting toilets or greywater initiatives in the plans to reduce this pressure.

2. Lack of Proper Consultation regarding Endangered Species
The Biodiversity Report was clearly written by someone without knowledge of the area. It wasn’t until page 11 that two probable plant communities were accurately identified after every probable one was considered and discounted. The author did not consult with the land managers who have intimate knowledge of the area, such as Ku-ring-gai Council or Bushcarers, so this lengthy report has limited use.
For example, there is brief mention of the grey headed flying fox. Sydney’s largest colony is a mere 750m away (NOT 2km as inaccurately asserted on p33). It’s guaranteed these animals forage in trees on the development site. As a keystone species, the flying fox is critical to the health of all forests along the eastern seaboard and beyond as they travel vast distances to feed, pollinate and spread seed. They use local areas in Gordon to train their young and I heard them last night behind my house, which is a similar distance away from the colony.
The powerful owl is also known in the area. This important critically endangered apex predator, the largest of Australia’s owls, was discounted in the report on p31. Its main food source is ringtail possum. I can assure you ringtails live in the proposed development site and I’ve heard and seen powerful owls near my house, so I know they’d be feeding in the trees to be cleared by this development. They follow their food.
Terrumbine Reserve has endangered long-nosed bandicoots including a rare white tipped tail variant, identified by the Australia Museum in 2014. I’ve seen them on my lawn and most recently on Nelson Street. So, there are individuals know to be less than 400m away from the development site.
There could be an entire ecosystem of animals in the development area that the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report has overlooked. The report is so general in nature, it fails to adequately acknowledge impacts on known threatened species.
Please Note: Just because an animal hasn’t been sighted by a remote ecological consultant or appear on a website or database, doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Most Australian animals are nocturnal and secretive and only a tiny percentage of sightings are reported. It suits developers to say endangered animals aren’t present based on reports commissioned by them. The remote consultant did NOT seek out local knowledge from the land managers. Plus, the proposed development area is 350m from a well-preserved wildlife corridor, Terrumbine Reserve. If there is food, which trees provide in abundance, native animals come.

This development removes critical food sources for endangered animals which is unacceptable.

3. Increased Flood Risk to Other Properties
My house, along with many others located downstream from the development, will be placed at greater risk of flooding due to higher hard to soft land ratio. There is no onsite storm water retention planned, which is a fundamental flaw.

It is agreed that climate change will increase precipitation in Sydney - August had record rains - it is therefore unconscionable to ignore the risk of flooding created by poor planning.

The development will increase the local flood risk to unacceptable levels.

4. Increased traffic congestion and disrupted access to Gordon train station and shops.
In addition to the 2-3 years of building work, which will involve stationary traffic as trucks arrive and depart during peak times, and damaged asphalt, the ongoing increase of over 330 cars (realistically two per household) when only 191 parks have been provided will see the street filled with parked cars, and the commuter car parks filled with resident’s cars preventing rail commuters using them.

Increased traffic and parked cars will severely disrupt resident and commuter access to the train and shops.

5. This development is NOT targeting the housing crisis.
The 165 planned apartments do nothing to alleviate the housing crisis because 85% of them are non-affordable by definition, and of the affordable ones are only affordable for 15 years. The apartments will be the usual luxury apartments out of the reach of most middle- and low-income earners so will be eventually purchased by wealthy locals or overseas investors, or money launderers, to perhaps rent or leave empty, depending on their whim. Out of 165 apartments, only four are to be affordable in perpetuity!

If we really want to add four affordable homes, put a granny flat or tiny home in each backyard of the existing houses. It would be hundreds of millions of dollars cheaper and could be achieved in a week.

This is really about profits for developers – not solving the affordability crisis for teachers, police officers, musicians, artists and non-professionals, such as baristas and most young people who wish to live near where they work.

6. Destruction of Sydney’s Green Lungs
We moved to this area because we wish to live in the leafy area with wildlife. However, land clearing appears under the guise of “development”. Land clearing by 1,000 cuts of “just a few” trees. Nearly forty trees slated for removal is significant if you’re a native animal depending on them for food and shelter. Mature trees around 100 years old are extremely valuable as they reduce ambient temperature, clear toxins from the air, produce oxygen, reduce greenhouse gases and are huge carbon sinks that cannot be replaced in a lifetime, not even by replanting hundreds of trees (which the development does NOT intend to do anyway).

7. Residents Requested Conservation Zoning
Ku-ring-gai Council consulted Gordon and Killara residents regarding Heritage zoning and received majority support to rezone to “Heritage” about a decade ago. This development ignores this recent rezoning and is contrary to what residents requested.
This development goes against what the majority of residents want – the preservation of the leafy post-war family homes with large gardens of natives and traditional European and Asian ornamentals. It is a gross overdevelopment in what is supposed to be a Conservation precinct and would be detrimental to this area of low-density family homes.

8. Eryldene Access Problems Expected – Affecting Viability
From previous local developments it’s known that realistically two car spaces are required for every apartment. This means there’s a shortage of up to 140 car spaces. These excess cars will fill up the streets and the commuter car parks on Werona Avenue, interfering with smooth running of events at the Historic House Eryldene.
Eryldene is located on McIntosh Street a mere 50m away from the development site and is a locally significant historic house built in 1913 that hosts functions for the public. The development will create problems for running of their regular events such as Mother’s Day Tea, Garden Tours, Christmas Fetes, summer jazz concerts and weddings as street parking becomes extremely limited.
(Note, a significant number of people who attend these events are elderly or have mobility issues.)
Eryldene relies on fund raising at events for its survival as it receives NO ongoing government funding.
Reducing adequate parking for Eryldene is unacceptable as it threatens its fundraising ability and therefore its very survival as a cultural venue.

9. Existing Property UNDER-Occupied
There’s already a significant number of apartments along the Pacific Highway in Gordon and surrounds that appear empty. What is needed is a stocktake of housing in the area, and empty housing needs to be taxed at penalty rates to encourage owners to either sell or rent. Land-banking especially by developers and investors has become commonplace and is creating an illusion of scarcity, which elevates property prices for those families desperate for a home. This is an unacceptable practise that needs to be addressed as it’s creating a property bubble, which will one day burst hurting us all.

In conclusion, this development is bad for most residents - their ability to enjoy Gordon and access the train and shops. Flooding risk to historic houses will increase plus sewer leaks in a riparian area. (If the sewer is replaced, untold damage will occur to the Bushcare site.) Endangered animals further threatened as their feeding area is reduced, and street traffic increased. Eryldene will struggle. This does nothing to increase affordable housing and only benefits the developer, some wealthy investors and possibly money launderers. Is that what the NSW govt wants?

I strongly object to the proposed development for the following reasons:
1. Inconsistency with Ku-ring-gai Council's Preferred Planning Scenario
The proposal is inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council's Preferred Scenario, which was developed following extensive community consultation and seeks to accommodate housing growth while preserving the area's heritage character, tree canopy, and natural environment. The scale and form of this development are contrary to these planning principles.
2. Adverse Impact on Heritage Character
The site is located adjacent to, and opposite, heritage-listed properties dating back to the nineteenth century and within a Heritage Conservation Area (HCA). The proposed development would significantly diminish the heritage significance, streetscape character, and cultural identity of the surrounding neighbourhood through its scale, bulk, and visual dominance.
3. Excessive Height, Bulk and Inappropriate Design
At nine storeys and over 30 metres in height, the proposed building would become the tallest structure on the eastern side of Gordon. The excessive height and massing would result in significant overshadowing, loss of privacy, and visual intrusion for neighbouring residents. The proposal also lacks appropriate transition zones and setbacks to adjoining properties and streets. Furthermore, the building's design fails to respond to the heritage context of the area and lacks the architectural quality expected for such a prominent development.
4. Significant Loss of Tree Canopy and Wildlife Habitat
The proposal would require the removal of at least 50 established trees, resulting in a substantial loss of tree canopy and green space. This would have a detrimental impact on the local environment and biodiversity, including the habitats of native wildlife such as kookaburras, rosellas, galahs, and echidnas. The loss of mature trees is inconsistent with the environmental values for which Ku-ring-gai is widely recognised.
5. Increased Traffic and Pressure on Local Infrastructure
The development proposes 165 apartments on a single site, which will generate significant additional traffic movements. Combined with other proposed developments in the area, this will further exacerbate congestion on local roads and at access points to the Pacific Highway. The proposal will also place additional pressure on already constrained infrastructure, including stormwater systems, sewerage networks, public transport services, and local parking availability.
6. Insufficient Community Benefit
While the development introduces a substantial increase in residential density, it does not provide sufficient community benefits to justify its significant impacts. The proposal would result in the loss of heritage character, tree canopy, environmental values, and residential amenity without delivering commensurate improvements to local infrastructure, public open space, or community facilities.
For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Department refuse this proposal or require substantial modifications to reduce its adverse impacts on the heritage, environmental, and residential character of Gordon.

7. Inappropriate Location for Affordable Housing Development
I support the provision of affordable housing and recognise its importance in addressing housing affordability challenges. However, affordable housing should be delivered in locations that are supported by appropriate planning, infrastructure, and transport accessibility.
The proposed development represents a stand-alone high-rise building in the middle of a predominantly low-density residential and heritage-sensitive neighbourhood. Its scale is inconsistent with the established character of the surrounding streets and creates unnecessary conflict with heritage, environmental, and residential amenity objectives.
A more appropriate planning approach would be to concentrate higher-density and affordable housing developments within designated transit-oriented precincts, particularly in areas immediately surrounding Gordon Railway Station and other major transport hubs. Such locations are better suited to accommodate increased population density, provide residents with convenient access to public transport, reduce car dependency, and minimise impacts on established residential streets and heritage conservation areas.
The current proposal places an excessively large and isolated high-rise development in a location that lacks the urban context and infrastructure capacity necessary to support this scale of development. As a result, it fails to achieve a balanced outcome between housing provision and the protection of local character, heritage, and environmental values.

I am writing in support of this proposed development in Gordon.

I grew up in this area, living here for 25 years and attended local schools. It is a community I know and value deeply. However, due to the high cost of housing and the limited diversity of housing types, it has not been possible for me, my husband, and our two young children to remain in the area.

Increasing the availability of housing, particularly in locations close to public transport and existing infrastructure, is critical to making Gordon more accessible for families like mine. Higher-density housing not only creates opportunities for people with strong connections to the community to stay, but also helps the area adapt to changing demographics.

I strongly support the delivery of additional housing through this proposal. Increasing the supply of homes in the area is essential to ensuring greater accessibility for families and young people, allowing those with strong ties to Gordon to remain connected and contribute to the community as it continues to grow.

For these reasons, I believe this development represents an important step towards ensuring Gordon remains a liveable and sustainable community for future generations.

I, as owner of 31 Mcintosh St Gordon strongly object to the project for the following reasons:
1. Completely lost to our privacy, with proposed high raise building directly viewing at our premises.
2. The proposed building will cast significant shadows on to my property causing increased cost associated with, lighting, heating and drying costs
3. It will significantly increase traffic movements within the area
4. It will decrease my property value due to adverse effects mentioned above
5. Proposed building is out of character within heritage streetscape and does not match any other buildings that on the street.
6. The proposal did not consider adverse impacts to the existing facility been provided such as playground and park near by.
6. The proposal did not consider adverse traffic impacts for the movements additional vehicles being provided by the building.
7. The extend of exhibition letter has been inclusive as the mailing list only went up to 37 McIntosh Street where the letter distribution list should extend to 1 km of the proposed building.

Thank you for your time

regards
Shuwa

I am writing to strenuously object to the proposed Residential Development with In-fill Affordable Housing - 21, 23 & 25 McIntosh Street and 55 Werona Avenue, Gordon - (EXH-90771456) for its unacceptable impacts on the character and integrity of the State Heritage Register listed Eryldene and the two adjacent and impacted heritage conservation areas.

Eryldene is located at 17 McIntosh Street, Gordon. It is a unique and highly intact early 20th
century house and garden designed by noted Australian architect William Hardy Wilson and
his client Professor Eben Gowrie Waterhouse. Eryldene’s house, gardens, horticultural
collection and specifically its substantial historic camellia collection have national and
international significance. The camellia collection includes rare and endangered cultivars and comprises over 500 plants.

VISUAL and PHYSICAL IMPACT on HERITAGE.
The wider setting surrounding Eryldene also makes an important contribution to its cultural values through the modest scale of neighbouring houses and apartments, their mature gardens visible over Eryldene’s gardens and hedges, and the streetscape of McIntosh Street with its wide green verge and spreading trees along the frontage of the property. The proposed development will be highly visible from Eryldene, it will impact its aesthetic values and thus its State significance.

The impacts are not just aesthetic but environmental. For Eryldene, such intense adjacent development threatens the garden’s microclimate and its internationally recognised camellia collection, affecting vegetation health due to overshadowing, altered air flow patterns, soil moisture content variations and increased pathogens.

The HEIGHT, BULK and SCALE of the proposal is alien to the character of the area and are unacceptable. There is no transition from the single storey neighbouring dwelling to three large buildings of 8 storeys. It is cramped, crowded and with a minimum 12 metre separation between blocks and impacts every adjoining property – State and locally listed items and houses within the conservation area.

The SETBACK is minimal. Any proposal should be in harmony with the setback of Eryldene and its eastern neighbour. While the current dwelling is further forward on the block than Eryldene, its scale and bulk are vastly different from that proposed.

OVERSHADOWING from the east as indicated on the shadow diagrams will impact the growing conditions within the garden and lead to plant decline due to the radical changes wrought on mature plants. The extent of overshadowing of both 17 and 19 Macintosh Street is unacceptable.

EXCAVATION for the two-level underground car park will undoubtedly alter the water. This has the potential to substantially impact the significant garden and at worst, lead to plants in the significant garden to die. The large angophoras and iron bark trees, remnants of the native forest and part of the garden at Eryldene since it was first designed in 1914 would be badly affected by large excavations for underground car parking and the consequent diversion/interruption of the water table.

SUSTAINABILITY OF ERYLDENE: The proposed development’s visual and physical impact will place Eryldene’s revenue raising capacity, which is tied to the historic, horticultural and aesthetic values of the garden, in jeopardy. The scale of the buildings to the east would be detrimental to the privacy of Eryldene’s lawn tennis court and cancel Eryldene’s ability to hire that space for private events: an essential source of income for the ongoing maintenance and the presentation of Eryldene’s public programs.
Over many years the NSW State Government has, through many and various grants, contributed to sustaining Eryldene as a house museum. This long-term investment by government at both a State and local level is at risk.

TREE CANOPY AND HABITAT: The lack of provision for tree canopy for this development is out of character with the area and combined with the potential to cause the demise of trees on surrounding properties, is an unacceptable impact.

I am writing this submission in support of the Residential Development with In-fill Affordable Housing - 21, 23 & 25 McIntosh Street and 55 Werona Avenue, Gordon. My family were residents in this beautiful area from 1992 for over 25 years. My children grew up and went to primary and secondary school in the area. My support for this project is for the following reasons:
1. affordable, low cost housing for essential workers is a much needed addition to the area.
2. the project has minimal impact to the heritage elements and tree canopy of the area - these are worth maintaining.
3. the project provides alternatives to free-standing homes for our children to have a diversity of options for housing in the area.
Thank you for allowing me to make this submission.

Dear Planning Committee,
I wish to express my utmost opposition to the development proposed for 21–25 McIntosh Street and 55 Werona Ave, Gordon. This project is ill-conceived and fails to address the fundamental needs and character of our community.
The infrastructure in this area is woefully inadequate to support a project of this magnitude. The inevitable addition of hundreds of new residents and vehicles will overwhelm our narrow, congested roads and overload public transport links. Additionally, there has been no commitment to concurrently upgrade schools, healthcare, or parkland to mitigate this immense pressure. The community will be left to deal with the negative consequences.
Moreover, the sheer bulk and height of the development represent a jarring overdevelopment of the site. It will irrevocably damage the heritage and low-scale charm of the neighbourhood, setting a dangerous precedent for future projects.
This proposal clearly disregards the local planning controls designed to protect our community. It appears to be a direct result of the State Government's Higher Density Dwelling initiative, which is forcing unsustainable density into our neighbourhood without any commitment to providing the essential infrastructure upgrades—like wider roads, better public transport, and more schools—required to make it work.
We urge the State Government to reject this application, which would so severely impact our community without any plan to mitigate that damage.
Sincerely,