OBJECTION TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT 100 EDINBURGH RD CASTLECRAG

Our home is in the Conservation area on the block next to the development. We have original Burley Griffin designed homes just a few houses away from our home. Heritage groups visit our block to view these unique homes on a regular basis.

I object to this proposal on the following grounds:

LOSS OF ENJOYMENT/COMFORT/VISUAL DOMINANCE
This project will be visible from every west facing window of our home, including our private lounge/recreation area and back yard. Future residents at 100 Edinburgh Rd will be able to see right into our home, bedroom and yard. Our home will require extra heating in winter and spring months because of the long shadow (mentioned later) cast by the huge buildings. The bushland aesthetic and character of the suburb will be erased for our home as the proposed large buildings will be visible from every west facing room and recreational space.

I urge the Minns Government to reduce the scale and bulk of the project to a more modest size to lower the visual and other impacts to our home.

OVERSCALE
The project scale is overwhelmingly tall and will dominate the landscape. It will sit well above any future treeline and overwhelm surrounding houses and shops. At the top of the hill it will be visible to many hundreds of houses and buildings with a window or recreation space facing it.

I urge the Minns Government to insist that the developer brings down the height so that it sits within the landscape, not dominating it.

INCREASED SHADOW
Our home at 128 Edinburgh Rd will be in afternoon shadow from the huge bulk of this development in winter/spring, blocking our light and requiring extra heating in the afternoon/early evening. It will spoil our comfort both inside and in the outdoor area and garden, and increase household costs for a large period of the year.

I urge the Minns Government to require the developer to lower the scale, bulk and height of the project so that it doesn’t raise the cost of heating in our home or cut the light and sun in the afternoon and evening to our home and yard.

LOSS OF HERITAGE
The project sits at the entrance to a unique bushland suburb designed by world renowned architects. It is next to two heritage areas; the Griffin Centre and the Conservation area, which are visited regularly by history and heritage groups. We have no footpaths, no fences, no garages and large green space limitations among other planning requirements to preserve the unique features of this suburb. The development is completely out of character with its bulk, dominance, and there is a lack of an architectural design link to the environment or its unique architectural heritage.

I urge the Minns Government to insist the developer redesign the project to a modest scale in keeping with the Burley Griffin ethos, which is to be “subordinate” to the landscape. I urge the Minns Government to require the developer to submit a design that ties in thematically with the Burley Griffin design aesthetic, and to the unique bushland ridgetop setting.

TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS
Living as close to the development as we do, I am concerned about traffic safety. With one main road into the suburb, Edinburgh Rd is already choked at peak times with long queues to exit the suburb. With so many luxury units proposed at the entry to the suburb, extra cars from the units would add to the traffic density and increase queuing at peak times. It is already difficult to exit our home by car at peak times. I am concerned about the safety of exiting our home and the suburb, especially in an emergency.

I urge the Minns Government to reduce the number of units in the proposal to lower the impact to the traffic at this already busy intersection on the grounds of traffic safety, and to consider the impacts to traffic especially during emergencies.


NOT A TRANSPORT HUB OR TOWN CENTRE
The site is too far from a town centre or train station to justify such a large-scale development. It is more than 2 km to Chatswood or Crows Nest train stations, and public transport to those centres is impractical and infrequent. It is more than 800 metres to Northbridge shopping precinct. Buses from this intersection are scarce during the day, and often overcrowded or cancelled. To justify this scale on the grounds that this intersection is a functioning town centre is disingenuous at best. Future residents will have to use cars to access transport hubs and shopping centres.

I urge the Minns Government to reduce the number of apartments in the development as the site does not act as a town centre or transport hub, and will require residents to use cars to access trains and shopping centres, thereby increasing traffic choking at this busy intersection. This will also put pressure on emergency services as there is only one main road in and out of the suburb.

I’m writing to support the SSDA for the former Quadrangle site. The proposal makes effective use of a long-underutilised brownfield location and thoughtfully combines commercial revitalisation with new housing. Activating the ground floor with retail while locating residential uses above reflects well-established mixed-use planning principles. Overall, the project offers clear public benefits, including the return of key services, the addition of affordable housing, and upgrades to the public domain, with impacts appropriately focused around a major transport hub.

I strongly object to the project as presented.

I am a resident of Northbridge for 14 years, with 6 of those living in central London. I therefore have both the perspective of living in the area immediately adjacent to Castlecrag as well as living in one of the busiest capital cities in the world along with the dense pollution that comes with that. At the outset I am not opposed to medium density housing and do not qualify for NIMBY status. I am a realist and pragmatic and it has been evident for some time that something needs to be done at Local, State and Federal levels to address the current housing crisis. However the submission by the Developer for 100 Edinburgh Rd will not serve any purpose other than to be a permeant scar on the horizon and landscape and line the pockets of said Developer. If approved by the NSW Government it will be a decision which I believe will have intended and unintended consequences and one that will be deeply regretted.

It is evident that the submission by the Developer has been lodged with complete disregard for current development rules, is grossly incompatible on a number of levels with the community and environment, will be an eyesore on the ridge line, and if it is allowed to proceed, will cause irreparable harm and I suggest the Governmentwill regret the decision to allow it to proceed in this current social and political setting.

I highlight some key points below

- the site is clearly OUTSIDE the designated area for LMR and is therefore NOT eligible for the associated height and density benefits proposed . Critically they have seized upon the Northbridge scenario which is a designated growth centre to seek to justify the proposed development. The development fails at the first hurdle.
- the site is NOT serviced by train or metro only buses ,which based on real experience are irregular and infrequent.
- the height, scale and bulk of the proposed development does not comply with the current zoning and statutory controls. What is proposed is in flagrant disregard and dismissive of the E1 Local Centre standards in place and in turn the expectations of the Willoughby Council and community
- the nearest buildings that are of the same height proposed 13-15 levels, are located in Chatswood, St Leonards, Crows Nest and North Sydney. All of those suburbs are serviced by rail and the metro and have current zoning and statutory controls in place to consider and accommodate high rise developments such as this.
-At the moment this is a unicorn for Castlecrag. I suggest other suburbs will quickly find themselves in the same situation if it is approved as it will serve as a precedent which other developers will seize upon to justify other ill considered and unintended developments.
- the heritage significance of Castlecrag is well known. This development completely flies in the face of the long established, adopted and practiced philosophy of landscape integrated development in the area. The EIS has seemingly deliberately glossed over the heritage impacts or sought to obfuscate the obvious reality that this bulky high rise development will have on the gateway to Castlecrag
-increased traffic issues will obviously arise with the creation of 150 units and 376 car spaces , not just in the immediate vicinity but in the already congested arterial roads in and around Castlecrag, Northbridge and Willoughby. To state the obvious there is one road in and out of Castlecrag. The busy intersection with Eastern Valley Way is often gridlocked during weekly peak hours and on weekends particularly on Saturdays. The added volumes of people and cars will undoubtedly increase the risk of unsafe traffic behaviour, create rat running, and give rise to pedestrian safety concerns.
- Affordable housing is an important issue and needs to be addressed at a Local State and Federal level. This development allows for just 6.7% of units to be earmarked as affordable which is below policy expectations. Notwithstanding that, the high market rates for rental properties in the area ,even factoring in the marginal discounts will unlikely be affordable for low - medium income earners. The development is marketed as high end luxury which will come with the commensurate price tag - this will not assist first home buyers or those seeking affordable rental accommodation. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.
- environmental impacts on the site insofar far as tree removal and overshadowing to numerous homes to the southern elevation is alarming. The reports are factually incorrect and inconsistent.
- there has been a distinct lack of genuine interaction and engagement with the community and none with the broader community ie Northbridge. The level of obfuscation, disregard, bordering on arrogance on the part of the developer is instructive and deeply concerning
- the loss of genuine community and public space is of significant concern. There will be no genuine community gathering space which if done well can be a real asset to large scale developments. The side walk next to commercial tenancies cafes, restaurants etc is not the same as a well considered, centrally and safely located designated community space . Again this lack of genuine consideration for by the Developer for the community is instructive .

In summary I object to this Development as it fails on so many levels - it does not comply with the current planning rules, it will create irreversible harm to the landscape, will be an eye sore, cause traffic and pedestrian chaos, won't service the community adequately, won't assist the housing crisis, and more concerning if approved it will set a precedent for other developers to do the same in every suburb in the Sydney Metropolitan area.

I therefore implore the Government to do the right thing and reject the Development Proposal of 100 Edinburgh Rd Castlecrag in its current form.

I support additional housing options for Australians particularly younger Australians. Howver I find this proposal way out of proportion for the Castlecrag area which has limited car traffic options and is far away from any rail link. The proposed size of this development would so much larger than any other recent developments.
It also seems to ignore any heritage aspects of the area.
Lastly it alos apprears that it will be a high end developments o the price of the apartments will be way out of range for those that have limited housing options.

I write in strong support of the proposed mixed-use development at 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag, from a commercial and retail leasing perspective.
This site represents the only genuine village core within Castlecrag. Its performance is critical to the delivery of local services and the overall functionality of the suburb. The current proposal provides a commercially viable pathway to achieving this outcome.

Public and Economic Benefit to the Area
The proposed mixed-use development at 100 Edinburgh Road delivers clear, tangible benefits to Castlecrag by addressing both existing gaps in local amenity and the long-term functionality of the village centre.
1. Strengthening the Local Village Core
This site already functions as the suburb’s focal point, but it lacks the scale and mix of uses required to operate as a true, self-sustaining village centre. The proposed development formalises and strengthens this role by introducing a critical mass of activity, ensuring the centre is consistently active and commercially viable.
2. Delivering Essential Local Services
The inclusion of appropriately scaled retail and service-based tenancies will provide day-to-day convenience for residents, reducing reliance on surrounding centres. This is particularly important for a suburb like Castlecrag, where access to local, walkable services is currently limited.
3. Supporting Local Businesses and Employment
The development creates a platform for small businesses and local operators to establish within the suburb. By aligning tenancy sizes and formats with proven demand, it increases the likelihood of long-term occupancy and stable trading conditions.
Importantly, the proposal will directly increase local employment opportunities across retail, hospitality, and service sectors. These are accessible, community-based jobs that support the local economy
4. Enhancing Daily Activation and Safety
A mix of residential and retail uses ensures the site is active throughout the day and into the evening. This increased activation improves passive surveillance, strengthens perceptions of safety, and contributes to a more engaged and usable public domain.
5. Aligning with the Local Lifestyle
The proposal responds directly to Castlecrag’s bushland character and outdoor-oriented community. By enabling retail and hospitality uses that integrate with outdoor spaces and informal gathering, the development reinforces—not detracts from—the suburb’s identity.
6. Reducing Travel and Supporting Walkability
By consolidating services within a central, accessible location, the development reduces the need for residents to travel the suburb for everyday needs. This supports a more walkable, sustainable local environment and reduces traffic pressure on surrounding roads.
7. Delivering a Sustainable Long-Term Outcome
Importantly, the proposal is not just well-designed—it is commercially viable. This ensures the centre will be occupied, maintained, and active over the long term. An under-scaled or compromised development would risk vacancy and underperformance, ultimately failing to deliver these same community benefits.
Conclusion
This application represents a commercially viable, strategically aligned, and site-appropriate outcome. It has been calibrated to meet both market demand and the unique characteristics of Castlecrag.
Council should be mindful that reducing or diluting the proposal carries real and lasting consequences—namely, the risk of underdevelopment, vacancy, and a failure to realise the site’s role as the suburb’s functional centre.
I strongly support the application in its current form and encourage Council to approve a scheme that delivers a sustainable, activated, and economically resilient village core.

As a local Castlecrag resident, I am writing this submission to strongly object to the proposed development at 100 Edinburgh Rd Castlecrag.

The proposed development of 12-14 storeys will irreparably change the character and amenity of the Walter Burley Griffin Conservation area which is unique in Sydney and Australia. It is irreplaceable and is therefore unacceptable.

Additional information is in the attachment.

The proposal aligns with NSW housing policy direction, the Greater Sydney Region Plan, and the intent of the Housing SEPP: deliver new supply in well-serviced, established suburbs rather than on the urban fringe. With only around eleven apartments among Castlecrag's 1,000 dwellings, the site offers a rare and appropriate opportunity to broaden housing choice without encroaching on heritage or bushland areas.

I am totally opposed to the scale of the newly proposed 13-14 story twin tower development which is suited to a Town Centre or a City Centre and not a Local Centre such as Castlecrag, all the more so given the uniqueness of Castlecrag. The already approved 2-3 story development is the appropriate scale given the nature of Castlecrag.

In the last ABS data Castlecrag had only 2965 residents and 1060 homes. Hence 150 apartments with 376 car spaces would comprise a 15% increase in homes, approximately 25% in vehicles and about 10% in residents which is not something the suburb can physically support.

The site zoned Local Centre E1 abuts the Griffin Conservation area C4 and low density residential R2 on the south side both of which would be totally overshadowed and dominated by the proposed development. It is noteworthy that the 2 other adjacent developments on the E1 zoning, one old and one recent, are 2-3 stories which enables them to fit in appropriately with being in a Local Centre and with the R2 and C4 adjacent properties.

The adjacent land on the northern side of Edinburgh Road is also zoned E1. Together the two sites should form an appropriate low scale entry into this unique peninsular suburb.

Castlecrag is a national, state and local treasure and adjacent development must be sensitive to this and what Walter and Marion Griffin and the Griffin Conservation Area stand for- low rise, flat roofs, fitting in with nature, pathways and parks. In fact the suburb has celebrated the 150 year anniversary of Walter Burley Griffin’s birthday with visitors coming from all over Australia and beyond.

In fact one of the Griffin reserve pathways ends into the site which has always provided connectivity through the site to Edinburgh Road and Eastern Valley Way from the walkways from further down Castlecrag, these public access pathways are a major feature of the suburb. The adjacent pathway now very sadly ends obstructed by fencing around the site. Why has this been blocked?

The proposed scale of the development apart from being ugly and inappropriate for the area will make traffic congestion getting out of and into the Castlecrag peninsular which relies almost entirely on Edinburgh Road as the single point of access, almost impossible given the proposed 25% increase in vehicles. A few years ago NSW Transport spend a very long time getting the sequence of traffic lights to work at the adjacent intersection of Edinburgh Road and Eastern Valley Way given the amount of traffic after a near fatal accident. Vehicles trying to enter and exit the site would find it impossible to do so due to the banked up traffic waiting on Edinburgh Road at the lights during peak hours.

The scale of development is inappropriate for the area which relies on only buses for public transport. Development of this scale should be in Chatswood and St Leonards where Willoughby Council has already provided for significant development adjacent to train and Metro transport options and which has enabled the Council to have met its NSW Planning target for housing density.

Because of the unique scale of Castlecrag and its existing village, 100 Edinburgh Road must maintain the appropriate 2-3 story scale of the approved development which will adequately provide for local residents and not try to be of such a scale appropriate for a big Town Centre.

The proposed development is nothing more than a private equity bid to build and sell very expensive appartments with minimal affordable housing provided below policy expectations in order to maximise profit at the expense of this unique gateway site to this historic suburb and its local community.

Please do not allow this beautiful, unique and historic Sydney suburb be ruined.