Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
PYMBLE
,
New South Wales
Message
I am writing to formally object to the proposed residential development with in-fill affordable housing at 10-14A Stanhope Road, Killara (SSD-81890707). My concerns are outlined below:
Excessive Volume & Lack of Contextual Response
The development does not respond appropriately to the surrounding low-density fabric, which is mostly two-storey dwellings. Not only does it exceed height limits at the rear of the battle axe lot, but it also isolates No. 12 Stanhope Road by introducing pedestrian and vehicular access on either side. This inconsiderate planning will significantly damage solar access, privacy, and acoustic quality at both indoors and outdoors for surrounding residents, undermining the amenity residents currently enjoy.
Undermining of Municipal Heritage & Character
The proposal includes the demolition of No. 14 Stanhope Road to make way for access to the rear block, disregarding the public interest in preserving local heritage. This section of Stanhope Road is part of a Heritage Conservation Area, with numerous heritage-listed properties in the immediate vicinity. The design makes no effort to maintain streetscape continuity or protect the visual integrity of the area. The loss of this property would take away the historical and cultural value that residents and the greater community have cherished for over a century.
Poor Traffic Management
Stanhope Road is one of the busiest local roads, it is a key connection between the Pacific highway and central area of Killara across the railway. While the traffic report claims Stanhope Road is not yet at capacity and estimates only 20 additional car trips during peak hours, this assessment is unrealistic and flawed. Although the road itself may not be at full capacity, the turning bays onto the Pacific Highway are already insufficient, frequently causing congestion. If Stanhope Road reaches its capacity, the resulting traffic disruptions will extend far beyond the immediate area, serverely impacting the already oversaturated Pacific Highway.
Conclusion
This development does not comply with the planning controls set out in KLEP 2015 and represents poor planning and design and thus does not represent public interest. I urge the State to thoroughly consider these objections and reject the proposal in its current form.
Excessive Volume & Lack of Contextual Response
The development does not respond appropriately to the surrounding low-density fabric, which is mostly two-storey dwellings. Not only does it exceed height limits at the rear of the battle axe lot, but it also isolates No. 12 Stanhope Road by introducing pedestrian and vehicular access on either side. This inconsiderate planning will significantly damage solar access, privacy, and acoustic quality at both indoors and outdoors for surrounding residents, undermining the amenity residents currently enjoy.
Undermining of Municipal Heritage & Character
The proposal includes the demolition of No. 14 Stanhope Road to make way for access to the rear block, disregarding the public interest in preserving local heritage. This section of Stanhope Road is part of a Heritage Conservation Area, with numerous heritage-listed properties in the immediate vicinity. The design makes no effort to maintain streetscape continuity or protect the visual integrity of the area. The loss of this property would take away the historical and cultural value that residents and the greater community have cherished for over a century.
Poor Traffic Management
Stanhope Road is one of the busiest local roads, it is a key connection between the Pacific highway and central area of Killara across the railway. While the traffic report claims Stanhope Road is not yet at capacity and estimates only 20 additional car trips during peak hours, this assessment is unrealistic and flawed. Although the road itself may not be at full capacity, the turning bays onto the Pacific Highway are already insufficient, frequently causing congestion. If Stanhope Road reaches its capacity, the resulting traffic disruptions will extend far beyond the immediate area, serverely impacting the already oversaturated Pacific Highway.
Conclusion
This development does not comply with the planning controls set out in KLEP 2015 and represents poor planning and design and thus does not represent public interest. I urge the State to thoroughly consider these objections and reject the proposal in its current form.
Friends of Ku-ring-gai Environment Inc.
Object
Friends of Ku-ring-gai Environment Inc.
Object
LINDFIELD
,
New South Wales
Message
Please find attached the submission from Friends of Ku-ring-gai Environment Inc.
Attachments
Sarah Cameron
Object
Sarah Cameron
Object
ROSEVILLE
,
New South Wales
Message
A development of this size is completely unsympathetic to the surrounding area. It is out of context, in terms of bulk and scale, with a residential, heritage conservation area.
Rosemary Layman
Object
Rosemary Layman
Object
ST IVES
,
New South Wales
Message
I am a Kuringai resident of many years and a regular visitor to and user of Stanhope Road, Killara.
I am deeply shocked and saddened to think that this beautiful street, so typical of the lovely Kuringai heritage, faces potential over-development such as is contained in this application.
It is clearly completely inappropriate on many levels:-
1. Although there are multi-storey apartment buildings on the Pacific Highway at the end of Stanhope Road, there are none on Stanhope Road itself.
2. To allow buildings with up to ten storeys would be a travesty. They would stand out like a sore thumb. They would tower over the existing apartments of five storeys on Marian Street, which adjoin at the rear, and which are already at a lower street level. It would also tower over the other Stanhope Road properties, some of which are heritage listed. It will cause overshadowing and a loss of privacy to nearby residents and devalue their properties. Ten storeys would also significantly exceed the maximum height recommended by Kuringai Council. It is also contrary to the TOD proposed limits.
3. To add an additional 135 homes would create extra traffic and increase the burden on already overloaded local facilities such as schools, medical practices and other allied health services.
Over the last decade and more we have seen our lovely Kuringai heritage eroded with the destruction of many beautiful old homes, only to have them replaced by ugly, overly large apartment buildings. We have also seen a lowering of construction standards and oversight of such projects all over Sydney.
Infrastructure has failed to keep up with the increasing population. Quality of life is being eroded at an increasing pace.
Please let’s maintain the dignity of Stanhope Road.
I am deeply shocked and saddened to think that this beautiful street, so typical of the lovely Kuringai heritage, faces potential over-development such as is contained in this application.
It is clearly completely inappropriate on many levels:-
1. Although there are multi-storey apartment buildings on the Pacific Highway at the end of Stanhope Road, there are none on Stanhope Road itself.
2. To allow buildings with up to ten storeys would be a travesty. They would stand out like a sore thumb. They would tower over the existing apartments of five storeys on Marian Street, which adjoin at the rear, and which are already at a lower street level. It would also tower over the other Stanhope Road properties, some of which are heritage listed. It will cause overshadowing and a loss of privacy to nearby residents and devalue their properties. Ten storeys would also significantly exceed the maximum height recommended by Kuringai Council. It is also contrary to the TOD proposed limits.
3. To add an additional 135 homes would create extra traffic and increase the burden on already overloaded local facilities such as schools, medical practices and other allied health services.
Over the last decade and more we have seen our lovely Kuringai heritage eroded with the destruction of many beautiful old homes, only to have them replaced by ugly, overly large apartment buildings. We have also seen a lowering of construction standards and oversight of such projects all over Sydney.
Infrastructure has failed to keep up with the increasing population. Quality of life is being eroded at an increasing pace.
Please let’s maintain the dignity of Stanhope Road.
Natalie Dickinson
Object
Natalie Dickinson
Object
NORTH WILLOUGHBY
,
New South Wales
Message
Formal Objection to Proposed 10-Storey Development – Stanhope Road, Killara
I am writing to formally object to the proposed 10-story residential development on Stanhope Road, Killara. The proposal is fundamentally incompatible with the character, planning controls, environmental and heritage values of the area. My concerns are outlined below:
1. Excessive Height and Inappropriate Scale
The proposed building, at 10 story’s, is significantly out of scale with the surrounding built environment, which comprises single detached dwellings to the east, west, and south. This scale is extremely disproportionate and inconsistent with the R2 Low Density Residential zoning of the area.
2. Conflict with Heritage Conservation Area
The site is located within a designated Heritage Conservation Area and is in close proximity to at least nine heritage-listed properties along Stanhope Road. The proposal has not appropriately addressed or assessed the impact on these heritage assets. The building’s height and bulk would visually overwhelm and diminish the cultural and aesthetic significance of these properties, affecting their value and setting a damaging precedent for future development.
3. Encroachment on a Heritage-Listed Dwelling
The development envelops an existing heritage-listed home on the site, undermining its prominence, context, and architectural integrity. This is contrary to the objectives of heritage conservation and would irreparably alter the character of the property.
4. Loss of Natural Vegetation and Environmental Integrity
The proposal does not retain any of the naturally occurring Sydney Blue Gum trees, which are ecologically significant and contribute to the environmental character of the site and broader suburb. Their removal represents a significant environmental loss.
5. Inadequate Landscaping and Deep Soil Provision
The development offers only 7% deep soil, which falls well below acceptable benchmarks. This restricts the ability to plant large canopy trees, manage stormwater sustainably, and preserve green space within the development.
6. Amenity Impacts and Infrastructure Strain
The proposal will adversely impact the amenity of surrounding homes, including loss of privacy, visual outlook, and natural views. It also offers inadequate parking and constrained access to the Pacific Highway, which will place further pressure on local traffic and public infrastructure.
7. Inconsistent with Local Character and Planning Framework
Stanhope Road currently contains no apartment buildings, and the existing character is low-rise, low-density residential. In contrast, the proposed development would introduce a high-density, high-rise built form that is completely at odds with the prevailing streetscape. Notably, the maximum permissible height for apartment buildings in Killara is five story’s; this proposal doubles that figure and represents a substantial and unjustified departure from established planning limits.
This proposal fails to respect the environmental, heritage, and residential values of the site and surrounding area. Its scale, form, and lack of sensitivity to context render it wholly inappropriate. I urge the State Government to reject the application in its current form.
Kind regards, Natalie Dickinson
I am writing to formally object to the proposed 10-story residential development on Stanhope Road, Killara. The proposal is fundamentally incompatible with the character, planning controls, environmental and heritage values of the area. My concerns are outlined below:
1. Excessive Height and Inappropriate Scale
The proposed building, at 10 story’s, is significantly out of scale with the surrounding built environment, which comprises single detached dwellings to the east, west, and south. This scale is extremely disproportionate and inconsistent with the R2 Low Density Residential zoning of the area.
2. Conflict with Heritage Conservation Area
The site is located within a designated Heritage Conservation Area and is in close proximity to at least nine heritage-listed properties along Stanhope Road. The proposal has not appropriately addressed or assessed the impact on these heritage assets. The building’s height and bulk would visually overwhelm and diminish the cultural and aesthetic significance of these properties, affecting their value and setting a damaging precedent for future development.
3. Encroachment on a Heritage-Listed Dwelling
The development envelops an existing heritage-listed home on the site, undermining its prominence, context, and architectural integrity. This is contrary to the objectives of heritage conservation and would irreparably alter the character of the property.
4. Loss of Natural Vegetation and Environmental Integrity
The proposal does not retain any of the naturally occurring Sydney Blue Gum trees, which are ecologically significant and contribute to the environmental character of the site and broader suburb. Their removal represents a significant environmental loss.
5. Inadequate Landscaping and Deep Soil Provision
The development offers only 7% deep soil, which falls well below acceptable benchmarks. This restricts the ability to plant large canopy trees, manage stormwater sustainably, and preserve green space within the development.
6. Amenity Impacts and Infrastructure Strain
The proposal will adversely impact the amenity of surrounding homes, including loss of privacy, visual outlook, and natural views. It also offers inadequate parking and constrained access to the Pacific Highway, which will place further pressure on local traffic and public infrastructure.
7. Inconsistent with Local Character and Planning Framework
Stanhope Road currently contains no apartment buildings, and the existing character is low-rise, low-density residential. In contrast, the proposed development would introduce a high-density, high-rise built form that is completely at odds with the prevailing streetscape. Notably, the maximum permissible height for apartment buildings in Killara is five story’s; this proposal doubles that figure and represents a substantial and unjustified departure from established planning limits.
This proposal fails to respect the environmental, heritage, and residential values of the site and surrounding area. Its scale, form, and lack of sensitivity to context render it wholly inappropriate. I urge the State Government to reject the application in its current form.
Kind regards, Natalie Dickinson
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
CHATSWOOD
,
New South Wales
Message
This should not be approved until the Ku-Ring-Gai council's proposed scenario has been voted on.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
ROSEVILLE
,
New South Wales
Message
SSD's should not be approved until Ku-ring-gai Council's preferred scenario has been voted on and dealt with.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
KILLARA
,
New South Wales
Message
I believe that the proposal to construct a 10-storey residential building on Stanhope Road represents a significant disruption to the established urban fabric and community character of the area. Killara is renowned for its low-density housing and status as a Heritage Conservation Area—its unique identity is built upon the presence of single- and double-storey dwellings that harmonise with the natural environment. This development not only dramatically exceeds the height of surrounding buildings, but also introduces excessive density, increased population, and traffic pressure, all of which threaten the daily lives of local residents. A structure so vastly out of scale will inevitably lead to issues such as overshadowing, noise, loss of privacy, and reduction of green space, diminishing the overall quality of life for those living nearby. This proposal disregards the existing planning intent for the area and ignores the community’s legitimate expectations for environmental preservation and neighbourhood stability.