This development is diagonally opposite a school for mentally and physically disabled children so totally inappropriate with the enormous additional traffic.
Not only this but the development is in a dip with restricted vision in the busy road and near a busy intersection.
This development proposal of 167 apartments involves 2out of 3 properties outside the original TOD.
All properties are zoned R2 in the revised TOD.
Excessive height - 32 metres which exceeds the maximum permitted building height - GREED - and is next to single and a double storey homes.
Not only that it is in the flood zone and riparian zones!

I object to the above proposed development in Lindfield as follows:

Isolation of Heritage Homes
The development will adversely impact the heritage values and culture of the heritage listed homes nearby the proposed development site.

Impact on Local Character
The height, scale and design of the proposed development are excessive and out of keeping with the surrounding low-rise streetscape and heritage context.

The setbacks and transition zones are grossly inadequate and reduce the privacy of numerous nearby residences.

Traffic and Parking Concerns
The proposed development will worsen traffic congestion for the area.

Environmental Impact
Precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats will be destroyed. Many trees will be destroyed.

Infrastructure Strain
As current infrastructure including stormwater, sewer, transport system and parking are already strained, the proposed development could cause further problems.

Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario
The proposal ignores the Council’s key planning principles and ignores the surrounding heritage significance and value of the area, together with the site’s specific biodiversity value.

I object to the above proposed development in Lindfield as follows:


Isolation of Heritage Homes
The development will adversely impact the heritage values and culture of the heritage listed homes nearby the proposed development site.

Impact on Local Character
The height, scale and design of the proposed development are excessive and out of keeping with the surrounding low-rise streetscape and heritage context.

The setbacks and transition zones are grossly inadequate and reduce the privacy of numerous nearby residences.

Traffic and Parking Concerns
The proposed development will worsen traffic congestion for the area.

Environmental Impact
Precious tree canopy and vital wildlife habitats will be destroyed. Many trees will be destroyed.

Infrastructure Strain
As current infrastructure including stormwater, sewer, transport system and parking are already strained, the proposed development could cause further problems.

Inconsistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Alternative Scenario
The proposal ignores the Council’s key planning principles and ignores the surrounding heritage significance and value of the area, together with the site’s specific biodiversity value.

This project is located in the Lindfield heritage conservation area at east side from train station and across Nelson Road. Any development by the TOD is against the concept of the recently Ku Ring Gai Council endorsed alternative TOD scenario, which enforces the importance of preservation of heritage conservation area in this region and removal of "teething / edge" of properties located in the original 400m radius state TOD measure.

Should the alternative TOD scenario is enacted, we should not approve any medium-high rise development in the heritage conservation area in Lindfield heritage conservation area at east side of train station and this has got across Nelson Road. However, if this project has to be approved, then the State should remain the original State TOD so to be fair to other residents.

Also, the increase of 167 households plus 251 vehicles would significantly adverse influence the already overcrowded Tryon Road / Nelson Road usage, plus the overflow will impact the junction Lindfield Avenue connecting to Pacific Highway and Tryon Road connecting to Archbold Rd. The State government has a role to ensure the additional demand already over-capacity infrastructure could match the extra population demand:

1. Trains – Lindfield Train station is already very crowded especially in peak hours. Sydney Train has scheduled Lindfield as “minor” station and we have only 1 of 3 trains in weekday peak hours, aka, we have to wait 11min+ to catch a train
2. Roads
3. Hospitals
4. Schools
5. Sewages
6. Electricity grid stability

Dear Secretary,

I am writing as a concerned local resident to formally object to the Concept State Significant Development Application SSD82899468 for the proposed construction of 167 residential apartments across 9 storeys, with 251 car parking spaces, at 1–5 Nelson Road, Lindfield.

While I support the need for appropriate urban development, this proposal raises several significant concerns relating to infrastructure strain, incompatibility with the established character of the neighbourhood, and adverse environmental and amenity impacts. The development, as proposed, is excessive in scale and intensity for this location.

1. Inadequate Local Infrastructure and Traffic Impacts
The current local road infrastructure in and around Nelson Road, Lindfield, is not designed to accommodate the volume of traffic that a development of this magnitude will generate. The proposal includes 251 car spaces, which will lead to a substantial increase in vehicle movements on already constrained suburban roads. This will exacerbate traffic congestion, create safety issues near schools and pedestrian areas, and increase noise and pollution levels in what is currently a relatively quiet residential area.

Additionally, no clear or sufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the existing public transport and road infrastructure can absorb the pressure of hundreds of additional residents and vehicles.

2. Excessive Height and Bulk Out of Character with the Area
The proposed building height of over 32 metres and 9 storeys is entirely inconsistent with the surrounding built environment, which primarily consists of single and double-storey detached dwellings. This kind of vertical intensification is completely out of scale for Lindfield’s low-density, leafy suburban character.

The visual bulk and scale of the development will dominate the streetscape and set a precedent that undermines the existing residential character and planning controls. This is contrary to the principles of orderly development and the protection of local character as outlined in the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and Development Control Plan (DCP).

3. Negative Impact on Streetscape and Amenity
The development will significantly alter the neighbourhood’s visual landscape, introducing a bulky and intrusive built form that is wholly incompatible with the modest homes around it. The proposed building will create a looming effect over neighbouring properties and public spaces, compromising the sense of openness and greenery that defines the Lindfield area.

4. Overshadowing, Loss of Privacy, and Reduced Solar Access
The scale and orientation of the development will result in substantial overshadowing of adjacent homes and open spaces, particularly during winter months. This raises serious concerns about the loss of solar access for neighbouring properties, which may no longer meet minimum sunlight requirements.

In addition, the high number of units and windows overlooking adjacent properties poses significant privacy concerns. Current residents who enjoy a private, low-density lifestyle will be forced to contend with noise, visual intrusion, and a loss of residential amenity.

5. Contrary to Strategic Planning Intentions
This proposal appears to circumvent the intent of local planning frameworks. While higher density may be appropriate in some areas closer to railway stations and commercial centres, this particular site is not identified as a high-density zone under the Ku-ring-gai LEP or other relevant strategic plans.

Introducing such a large and incongruous structure sets a dangerous precedent for further inappropriate overdevelopment in similar low-density locations.

Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above—insufficient infrastructure, excessive height and bulk, streetscape and amenity impacts, and overshadowing and privacy issues—I respectfully request that the NSW Department of Planning refuse Concept Development Application SSD82899468.

Should the Department proceed to assess this application further, I strongly urge that extensive community consultation, an independent traffic impact assessment, and rigorous adherence to local planning controls be applied.

Thank you for considering this submission.

I strongly object to the proposed 32m tall apartment building. It is too large and will take away our sunlight. With balconies and rooftop areas all around, it will invade everyone's privacy.
I fear that it will also negatively affect the creek running through the lot. I worry that downstream properties will be flooded.
The water dragons who live on the property will be displaced.
On the TOD map, only 1 Nelson Road is included, but 3 and 5 are not, hence it should not be allowed to build 32m high. Also I find it questionable whether there is a genuine intent to build "affordable" housing.

Please leave the east side conservation area alone, we need to keep our precious heritage and Lindfield identity. Lindfield village hub is a great place to accommodate the needs for housing, either expand the area or go higher is better than ruining all the areas. By the way, building something unique rather than the same concrete boxes everywhere, architecturally aesthetic is more important than builders profit,copy and paste building designs are really sad to see.

This is yet another example of over-development in Lindfield, which will create a whole new set of problems in the area. These include excessive traffic flows, more local road damage, overcrowding of Lindfield Railway station and amenity loss by local residents, including schools. We do not need another Chatswood in this area. Although it is stated that there will be assisted housing in these new developments, the history of the area is that residential flats are often bought by wealthy overseas buyers, many of whom do not live in the apartments, and do not rent them out, but use them as "bolt-holes" for occasional trips to Australia. This is not an area with easy access for, say, nurses to their work at RNSH, "fireys" or paramedics to their stations etc. In my opinion, introducing large numbers of new residents into the North Shore is a political stunt to change the voting demographics of the North Shore in favour of Labor.
However, the local traffic problem is the major one. There are already two further high-rise proposed developments within 100 metres of this one...at 29-31 Tryon Rd (9 storeys) and 24-26 Russell Ave ( 7 storeys). These properties will use little Tryon Lane for access, which is entirely unsuitable for large traffic volumes and is already used as a rat run to east Lindfield. It is highly likely that, because of excessive traffic in Tryon Rd, occupants of the Nelson Rd building will also attempt t use Tryon Lane, turning it into a traffic nightmare. The local roads in the area have already had significant pothole and other damage, due to excessive traffic use and rain damage. This development will make that worse, especially during construction phase.
Around 7 years ago we were promised upgrades to Pacific Highway access from Havilah Rd and Stanhope Road...nothing has happened.
Another important objection to a massive project right across the road from Cromehurst School for disabled children is the distress from noise etc that will affect the children during construction.
The idea that we can bring a million migrants into Australia every couple of years and turn Sydney into another Hong Kong is absolute madness. We do not have the infrastructure...already all over NSW the roads are not upkept, there are insufficient public schools, poor public amenities, hospital waiting lists are blowing out...this is not the "Lucky Country" anymore.
In my opinion, this project has absolutely nothing to recommend it.

I support the NSW government's policy to accelerate the building of apartment buildings within 500m of certain railway stations including Lindfield. However, I oppose this development application because:
1) The site is more than 500m from Lindfield station.
2) The proposed height is more than 6 floors (9 floors/32 metres high).
3) The design is discordant/incompatible with the adjacent low rise neighbourhood.
4) It will exacerbate already heavy traffic around Tryon Rd, Nelson Rd and Lindfield station area.
5) The two main high schools serving the area (Killara HS & Chatswood HS) are both full.

Subject: Objection to Proposed Development at [Site Address, if known]
Dear NSW Planning Department,
I am writing as a concerned resident to formally object to the proposed development located at 1-5 Nelson Road, Lindfield. While I appreciate the importance of development in our community, I believe this proposal is unsuitable for several critical environmental, safety, and amenity-related reasons.
1. Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Concerns
The intersection at Nelson and Tryon Road is already heavily congested, particularly during peak hours. The proposed development will significantly increase traffic volume, making it even more hazardous for families and children to cross safely. The increased vehicle activity in an already busy area poses a serious risk to pedestrians.
2. Inadequate Consideration of Natural Waterways and Flood Risk
There is an unnamed creek running along the north-eastern border of the proposed site which receives minimal mention in the development application. This creek experiences substantial water flow during even light rain, and the “Middle Harbour Southern Catchments Flood Study” (2023) already identifies it as over capacity. Any additional runoff from the proposed development could severely increase flood risks for downstream properties, particularly on Lightcliff Avenue and Slade Avenue, impacting those communities adversely.
3. Inconsistencies with Flood Zoning Regulations
Particularly concerning is the intention to excavate a three-level underground car park at Number 5 Nelson, a property located within a Category 1 flood zone. The Council's own planning controls designate Category 1 zones as suitable for only limited development. The omission of the probable maximum flood level from the proposal is unacceptable, especially given this data is publicly available on Council’s website. Approval of a nine-storey structure in this flood-prone area contradicts our Council’s stated flood management guidelines.
4. Excessive Scale and Poor Urban Transition
The scale and bulk of the proposed nine-storey development is wholly inappropriate for this low-density residential neighbourhood. Its height and built form are visually dominant, entirely out of character with the surrounding streetscape. This poor transition undermines the area's established character and harms the visual amenity.
5. Amenity and Privacy Impacts on Surrounding Residents
Residents will experience a substantial loss of privacy, especially those whose homes back onto or face the site. Increased noise levels, overshadowing, and loss of outlook will significantly impact quality of life for current residents in what is otherwise a quiet and peaceful area.
In light of these serious concerns, I urge the NSW planning department to reject the development application in its current form. It poses unacceptable environmental risks, contravenes existing planning controls, and fails to respect the scale, character of our local community.