Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
NARRABEEN
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission Objecting to DA SSD-76220734 — “Indigo by Moran”, 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen
To: NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
SSD Planning Assessments
Re: Objection to State Significant Development Application, “Indigo by Moran”
Address: 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen NSW
DA Number: SSD-76220734
Submitted by: Kylie & Tony
Date: 30/10/25
1. Introduction
We are long-term residents of Malcolm Street, Narrabeen, and wish to formally object to the proposed Indigo by Moran development at 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen (SSD-76220734).
While we support quality, well-planned accommodation for seniors, this proposal represents a significant overdevelopment of the site, entirely out of scale with the surrounding residential character and infrastructure capacity of Narrabeen. The impacts on traffic, parking, safety, and neighbourhood amenity would be severe and ongoing.
2. Traffic and Parking Impacts
The proposal includes three basement levels with 192 car spaces (only seven of which are for visitors). This design will inevitably force a large number of visitor vehicles to park on surrounding local streets such as Lagoon Street, Albemarle, Loftus, Octavia & Tourmaline Streets, and Ocean Street.
These streets already experience high levels of parking demand, particularly on weekends during spring and summer when the Narrabeen Lagoon Trail and beach attract large numbers of visitors. Local residents frequently struggle to find on-street parking, and this development would exacerbate that problem significantly.
Furthermore, all vehicular access is proposed from Lagoon Street, a narrow, heavily used road that lacks capacity for such an increase in traffic volume. The proposed continuous in-and-out flow from a three-level underground carpark will create congestion, delays, and safety risks for both drivers and cyclists.
3. Cycling and Road Safety Concerns
The Traffic Report supporting this DA incorrectly suggests that Lagoon Street has a dedicated cycling path. This is inaccurate, cyclists currently share the road with vehicles, and the road width is limited. The increased vehicle movements from this development, including service vehicles and residents’ cars, would create a serious safety hazard for cyclists, pedestrians, and residents accessing driveways.
Given the popularity of the Lagoon Trail and Narrabeen’s cycling routes, this is a critical safety concern that must not be overlooked.
4. Scale, Height and Visual Impact
The proposed 5 to 6 storey building would be a visually dominant structure sitting atop a hill, looming over surrounding low-rise residential homes. It would create significant overshadowing, loss of privacy, and an overbearing presence entirely inconsistent with the coastal village character of Narrabeen.
This design is comparable in mass and bulk to the Northern Beaches Hospital, an institutional-scale development wholly inappropriate for this sensitive, low-rise coastal environment. The proposal fails to respect the established character and topography of the area.
5. Congestion and Access Constraints
Traffic flow along Lagoon Street and connecting roads such as Malcolm Street is already constrained. The section of Lagoon Street near Malcolm Street narrows to a single car width, regularly causing bottlenecks and queues, particularly during peak periods. This also includes the section of Malcolm Street from Ocean Street. Any additional volume from this development would worsen congestion and impede access for residents, emergency vehicles, and visitors.
The cumulative impact of this development, in conjunction with existing congestion during weekends and summer months, would significantly reduce the livability and safety of the surrounding community.
6. Conclusion
For the reasons outlined above, we strongly object to the Indigo by Moran proposal in its current form. The scale, bulk, and traffic generation far exceed what can be safely and reasonably accommodated within the existing road and community infrastructure of Narrabeen.
This development would:
• Intensify already severe parking and congestion issues
• Compromise cyclist and pedestrian safety
• Visually dominate and overshadow surrounding residential areas
• Disrupt the existing low-rise coastal character of Narrabeen
We respectfully request that the Department refuse this development application or require substantial redesign to reduce height, density, and traffic impacts in line with the existing scale and safety of the neighbourhood.
Yours faithfully,
Kylie & Tony
Malcolm Street, Narrabeen NSW
To: NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
SSD Planning Assessments
Re: Objection to State Significant Development Application, “Indigo by Moran”
Address: 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen NSW
DA Number: SSD-76220734
Submitted by: Kylie & Tony
Date: 30/10/25
1. Introduction
We are long-term residents of Malcolm Street, Narrabeen, and wish to formally object to the proposed Indigo by Moran development at 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen (SSD-76220734).
While we support quality, well-planned accommodation for seniors, this proposal represents a significant overdevelopment of the site, entirely out of scale with the surrounding residential character and infrastructure capacity of Narrabeen. The impacts on traffic, parking, safety, and neighbourhood amenity would be severe and ongoing.
2. Traffic and Parking Impacts
The proposal includes three basement levels with 192 car spaces (only seven of which are for visitors). This design will inevitably force a large number of visitor vehicles to park on surrounding local streets such as Lagoon Street, Albemarle, Loftus, Octavia & Tourmaline Streets, and Ocean Street.
These streets already experience high levels of parking demand, particularly on weekends during spring and summer when the Narrabeen Lagoon Trail and beach attract large numbers of visitors. Local residents frequently struggle to find on-street parking, and this development would exacerbate that problem significantly.
Furthermore, all vehicular access is proposed from Lagoon Street, a narrow, heavily used road that lacks capacity for such an increase in traffic volume. The proposed continuous in-and-out flow from a three-level underground carpark will create congestion, delays, and safety risks for both drivers and cyclists.
3. Cycling and Road Safety Concerns
The Traffic Report supporting this DA incorrectly suggests that Lagoon Street has a dedicated cycling path. This is inaccurate, cyclists currently share the road with vehicles, and the road width is limited. The increased vehicle movements from this development, including service vehicles and residents’ cars, would create a serious safety hazard for cyclists, pedestrians, and residents accessing driveways.
Given the popularity of the Lagoon Trail and Narrabeen’s cycling routes, this is a critical safety concern that must not be overlooked.
4. Scale, Height and Visual Impact
The proposed 5 to 6 storey building would be a visually dominant structure sitting atop a hill, looming over surrounding low-rise residential homes. It would create significant overshadowing, loss of privacy, and an overbearing presence entirely inconsistent with the coastal village character of Narrabeen.
This design is comparable in mass and bulk to the Northern Beaches Hospital, an institutional-scale development wholly inappropriate for this sensitive, low-rise coastal environment. The proposal fails to respect the established character and topography of the area.
5. Congestion and Access Constraints
Traffic flow along Lagoon Street and connecting roads such as Malcolm Street is already constrained. The section of Lagoon Street near Malcolm Street narrows to a single car width, regularly causing bottlenecks and queues, particularly during peak periods. This also includes the section of Malcolm Street from Ocean Street. Any additional volume from this development would worsen congestion and impede access for residents, emergency vehicles, and visitors.
The cumulative impact of this development, in conjunction with existing congestion during weekends and summer months, would significantly reduce the livability and safety of the surrounding community.
6. Conclusion
For the reasons outlined above, we strongly object to the Indigo by Moran proposal in its current form. The scale, bulk, and traffic generation far exceed what can be safely and reasonably accommodated within the existing road and community infrastructure of Narrabeen.
This development would:
• Intensify already severe parking and congestion issues
• Compromise cyclist and pedestrian safety
• Visually dominate and overshadow surrounding residential areas
• Disrupt the existing low-rise coastal character of Narrabeen
We respectfully request that the Department refuse this development application or require substantial redesign to reduce height, density, and traffic impacts in line with the existing scale and safety of the neighbourhood.
Yours faithfully,
Kylie & Tony
Malcolm Street, Narrabeen NSW
Justin Roberts
Object
Justin Roberts
Object
NORTH NARRABEEN
,
New South Wales
Message
I have lived in Narrabeen for 49yrs the development is in no way sympathetic to the area or character, parking is already minimal let alone in summer with narrow streets throughout. lack of transport options, impact on surrounding residents is huge with no compensation for loss of value. The precedent this could set could have the potential to destroy the area and village nature. Dee Why has been lost and destroyed. Traffic is already horrendous through the Wakehurst parkway Pittwater road and Powderworks road as all are clogged every morning. The six story height is purely for greed not necessity this in no way helps the so called housing crisis as it is age specific.
Cheryl Rae
Object
Cheryl Rae
Object
Sydney
,
New South Wales
Message
The proposal is to have a six story building. There are no buildings in our area taller than 3 stories. It is absolutely going to ruin our neighbourhood. It is going to increase traffic and put a load on parking (the proposed building is not going to have sufficient parking for its residents), especially in summer. Narrabeen is a quiet, low key residential area. Up to now the current retirement home (that the developers are proposing to pull down to put their six floor opulent building on) blended into our neighbourhood. Having a senior housing development is not the issue it is the size & scale of the proposal that is the issue. I think it is pure greed. Thank you. Cheryl Rae. Concerned resident
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
WARRIEWOOD
,
New South Wales
Message
No local benefit, private luxury development with no affordable housing. Overdevelopment completely out of character and scale with the location . Visual intrusion and overshadowing pf neighbourhood. Traffic and safety hazards with more than 300 additional cars on local streets. Development located in flood and erosion zone. Will require removal of mature trees destroying habitat and coastal screening. A threat to fragile dune systems and bird habitats. Destroys the beaches character that attracts tourists to visit and holiday at local caravan park. No local consultation by developers.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
NARRABEEN
,
New South Wales
Message
HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS. Under WLEP 2011 for land zoned R3 Medium Density Residential clause 4.3, the objective is "to ensure that buildings are compatible with the height and scale of surrounding and nearby development,” and “minimise visual impact, disruption of views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access”. This project runs in contradiction to the objective. By seeking to increase the height over the permitted 8.5m, the development will have a major visual impact, major disruption of view, major loss of privacy and will be in no way compatible with the height and scale of surrounding and nearby developments/properties. In seeking a variation, the developer has shown in the circumstances no reasonable justification. The variation would not represent an orderly and economic use of the land in a manner that is appropriate when considering the site’s context, and as such, is not justified on environmental planning grounds. According to Part 5 (Housing for seniors and people with a disability) of Chapter 3 of the Housing SEPP part b "a height of not more than 3.8m above the maximum permissible building height" is not automatically providing the developer an extra 3.8m of height to build, it is potential development consent for additional floor space ratio IF (emphasis added) the development will result in a building with "a height of not more than 3.8m above the maximum permissible building height". The SEPP does not provide exception/consent to override the maximum height of buildings by the LEP and doesn't provide an automatic building height bonus. Under the Objectives of the Standard - the proposed development a) does not ensure that buildings are compatible with the height and scale of surrounding and nearby development, b) does not minimise visual impact, disruption of views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access, c) does not minimise adverse impacts of development on the scenic quality of Warringah’s coastal and bush environments, d) poorly manages the visual impact of development when viewed from public places such as parks and reserves, roads and community facilities. The developer states “the fundamental purpose of the development is to renew an existing closed (and therefore unfeasible) aged care facility with a contemporary and high-quality seniors living development that will provide this essential housing typology in the northern beaches and within private market expectations”. Given there are already approximately +70 nursing homes/ aged-care homes on the Northern Beaches it can be inferred this is not an undersupplied area with regards this type of facility. A compliant development could potentially deliver a high number of Living Units (ILU) and aged care facility for seniors. The underlying objective or purpose would not be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is reasonable. The elements that sit above the height control, including 28 seniors living units, and amenity elements such as the rooftop communal space are not essential for the successful delivery of a sensible, community engaged project. The developer then tries to use a different justification by saying without these elements, the development would not be delivered, which would not achieve a now different underlying objective and purpose of “delivering additional and diverse housing in the current housing ‘crisis’ of NSW”. Again, given the number of aged care facilities on the Northern Beaches the generic use of an all-in NSW housing ‘crisis’ to help justify a height control variation is misleading. A subject scheme that breaches the height control has a number of impacts that result in a poorer design outcome for local residents/community when compared to a height compliant scheme (that is why there are height restrictions in place by LEPs). None of the elements of the design above the height control, are essential to successfully achieve a development that meets the objectives of the zone and deliver seniors living housing in Narrabeen. As such, the breach of the height control is not consistent with local community, council, state or federal objectives and should not be supported in this instance. Although there are residential apartment buildings that are above the current height control these are old developments and few/far between - some dating back to the 1960s. The current controls have been carefully considered by local government with the Narrabeen topology, groundwork, traffic, amenities, power/water infrastructure and coastal land area in mind. The design of the proposed development is in no way keeping with the demographics of the area. Sufficient consideration has not been made to protect the amenity of the neighbouring properties or surrounding residents. The development establishes a negative design response for the future built environment of Narrabeen. The elements that sit above the current height control can easily be incorporated under the height control on a large site such as this. Non-compliance with the development standard will result in adverse planning impacts beyond those anticipated in a strictly compliant development. There will be loss, significant and iconic views; adverse privacy impacts; adverse visual impacts and overshadowing to residential properties, particularly related to the building elements that sit above the building height control. The development has not been designed to carefully protect the environmental amenity of surrounding properties, and it does not create a contemporary form that establishes the future desired character for the medium density residential zone in the area through design futures. Surrounding developments are impacted by such a large project and significant view loss and high visual impact. For the reasons discussed above, it is contended that there are insufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention to the development standard in the circumstances of the case, particularly given that the design does not provide a tailored and well considered response to the site’s constraints and articulation. The assessment above confirms that compliance with the maximum Height of Buildings development standard contained in Clause 84 is reasonable. It is also noted in Clause 84 section (iii) If the development results in a building with more than 2 storeys, additional storeys must be set back within 45° planes from all side and rear boundaries. The proposal delivers a development that is not appropriate for its context considering the breaches to development standards and therefore has insufficient environmental planning grounds to permit a variation. Therefore, compliance with the development standard is reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.
PRACTICAL CONCERNS. The increased population density from this development will put pressure on an already struggling local traffic system. It adds risk to all who travel in the area, including pedestrians and cyclists, who frequent our streets.
NORFOLK PINES. The developer states "The most unique and defining feature of this site is the presence of numerous large important Norfolk pine trees running along the entire Ocean St frontage.” They are planning to remove mature native pine trees along Lagoon Street. These trees are a critical part of our natural ecosystem, and their removal would be a considerable loss to our community's natural landscape. Such actions echo disregard towards environmental preservation, which should be at the forefront of urban planning.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. It should be noted the community feedback sessions were marketed/promoted as promotion for potential buyers/residents as opposed to a constructive consultation with existing residents and the community. The strength of feeling evident in current petition and quality of online submissions to this portal will provide council and local government feedback to this effect. Comments to the developers during the community information session supports a compliant height build and less imposing project:- “Size or scale of buildings(height) so that it blends with the surroundings (not overscale).”, “Keeping it low, not too high-rise.”, “I am not interested in a highrise property.”, “open space”, “Maintaining the ‘laid back’ style of the Northern Beaches”, “the building should be welcoming and encourage the wish to be a resident”, “Location, security, amenities, social, brand new, single level.”, “A space which is socially and environmentally friendly which blends into the local area.”. The only comment relating to justification for height was “I look forward to some height for views”. It is also noted that the photomontages used in the developer’s documents use overlays that are grey/translucent, use wide angles and do not accurately represent the visual impact of such a large, oversize building on the local area. Effective decision-making requires engaging with and respecting the voices of local residents, not circumventing them. No direct consultation/engagement has been had with adjacent homeowners (i.e. east side of Ocean Street for example).
CONCLUSION. Whilst a sensible project that remediates / redevelops the existing site within current planning controls and engages the local community would be welcome, the plans for this current project are a huge overreach and will negatively impact the local community. I object to the current project.
PRACTICAL CONCERNS. The increased population density from this development will put pressure on an already struggling local traffic system. It adds risk to all who travel in the area, including pedestrians and cyclists, who frequent our streets.
NORFOLK PINES. The developer states "The most unique and defining feature of this site is the presence of numerous large important Norfolk pine trees running along the entire Ocean St frontage.” They are planning to remove mature native pine trees along Lagoon Street. These trees are a critical part of our natural ecosystem, and their removal would be a considerable loss to our community's natural landscape. Such actions echo disregard towards environmental preservation, which should be at the forefront of urban planning.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. It should be noted the community feedback sessions were marketed/promoted as promotion for potential buyers/residents as opposed to a constructive consultation with existing residents and the community. The strength of feeling evident in current petition and quality of online submissions to this portal will provide council and local government feedback to this effect. Comments to the developers during the community information session supports a compliant height build and less imposing project:- “Size or scale of buildings(height) so that it blends with the surroundings (not overscale).”, “Keeping it low, not too high-rise.”, “I am not interested in a highrise property.”, “open space”, “Maintaining the ‘laid back’ style of the Northern Beaches”, “the building should be welcoming and encourage the wish to be a resident”, “Location, security, amenities, social, brand new, single level.”, “A space which is socially and environmentally friendly which blends into the local area.”. The only comment relating to justification for height was “I look forward to some height for views”. It is also noted that the photomontages used in the developer’s documents use overlays that are grey/translucent, use wide angles and do not accurately represent the visual impact of such a large, oversize building on the local area. Effective decision-making requires engaging with and respecting the voices of local residents, not circumventing them. No direct consultation/engagement has been had with adjacent homeowners (i.e. east side of Ocean Street for example).
CONCLUSION. Whilst a sensible project that remediates / redevelops the existing site within current planning controls and engages the local community would be welcome, the plans for this current project are a huge overreach and will negatively impact the local community. I object to the current project.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
WARRIEWOOD
,
New South Wales
Message
No local benefit, private luxury development with no affordable housing.
Overdevelopment completely out of scale with local area.
Visual intrusion and overshadowing of neighbourhood.
Traffic and safety hazards with more than 300 additional cars on local streets.
Development located in a flood and erosion zone.
Will require removal of mature trees destroying habitat and coastal screening.
A threat to fragile dune systems and bird habitats.
No local consultation by developers
Overdevelopment completely out of scale with local area.
Visual intrusion and overshadowing of neighbourhood.
Traffic and safety hazards with more than 300 additional cars on local streets.
Development located in a flood and erosion zone.
Will require removal of mature trees destroying habitat and coastal screening.
A threat to fragile dune systems and bird habitats.
No local consultation by developers
RORY KIRKPATRICK
Object
RORY KIRKPATRICK
Object
NORTH NARRABEEN
,
New South Wales
Message
The size of the proposed development footprint upon the land allotment is excessive in the extreme.
The rise in storeys is completely out of keeping with the surroundings.
No consideration has been given to the inevitable increase in traffic in local streets.
There has been no contribution to local infrastructure in the development proposal to support such a massive development.
This site has significant cultural history being the site of ‘The Narrabeen Man’ and excavation to this site on the scale proposed may like have devastating results for such an important historic site.
Removal of long established trees with destroy wildlife habitat as well as shade and street scape.
The rise in storeys is completely out of keeping with the surroundings.
No consideration has been given to the inevitable increase in traffic in local streets.
There has been no contribution to local infrastructure in the development proposal to support such a massive development.
This site has significant cultural history being the site of ‘The Narrabeen Man’ and excavation to this site on the scale proposed may like have devastating results for such an important historic site.
Removal of long established trees with destroy wildlife habitat as well as shade and street scape.
Belinda Cummings
Object
Belinda Cummings
Object
MONA VALE
,
New South Wales
Message
Submission: Formal Objection to Proposed Development in Narrabeen
To the Assessing Officer,
I am writing to lodge a formal objection to the proposed six-storey, 149-apartment development in Narrabeen. After reviewing the plans, I believe this proposal is inconsistent with key planning principles that protect neighbourhood character, environmental values, and community amenity.
1. Visual and Scenic Impact
The proposed building exceeds a scale appropriate for this area and will dominate the surrounding landscape. Narrabeen’s headlands and escarpments form part of a recognised scenic corridor and are valued for their coastal views and natural skyline. A structure of this height and density will be visible from multiple public vantage points, undermining the visual amenity and sense of openness that define the suburb.
This is inconsistent with the Northern Beaches Local Environmental Plan (LEP) objectives relating to neighbourhood character, visual quality, and the preservation of natural landforms.
2. Environmental and Biodiversity Concerns
The removal of established trees and vegetation represents a significant environmental loss. Mature trees contribute to local biodiversity, provide natural cooling, and play an essential role in managing stormwater and air quality. The proposed vegetation clearing appears incompatible with the environmental objectives of both the LEP and the Development Control Plan (DCP), which encourage protection and enhancement of existing canopy cover and habitat corridors.
3. Traffic, Parking, and Infrastructure Capacity
Traffic congestion and parking availability are already major challenges in Narrabeen, particularly around beach access routes and residential streets. The scale of this proposal far exceeds what the existing infrastructure can support. The limited provision of visitor and resident parking fails to meet the likely demand, leading to increased on-street parking pressure and safety risks.
This directly conflicts with DCP transport and access provisions, which require developments to ensure adequate parking and minimal disruption to surrounding road networks.
4. Lack of Affordable and Diverse Housing
While the need for additional housing is acknowledged, this development does not contribute to genuine housing diversity or affordability. Instead, it proposes high-density dwellings that do not meet the needs of local key workers, young families, or long-term residents. True sustainable development must align with the social objectives of the LEP, which include providing equitable access to affordable housing and maintaining community cohesion.
Conclusion
This proposal fails to demonstrate compliance with the key principles of good urban planning is a poor fit to the character of the local area and the likely significant impact of the proposal on the at or near capacity of street parking, respect for local character, environmental stewardship, and social responsibility. I urge NSW Planning to reject this application in its current form and request that any future proposal for this site reflect the scale, form, and environmental sensitivity that Narrabeen deserves.
Sincerely,
B. Cummings
To the Assessing Officer,
I am writing to lodge a formal objection to the proposed six-storey, 149-apartment development in Narrabeen. After reviewing the plans, I believe this proposal is inconsistent with key planning principles that protect neighbourhood character, environmental values, and community amenity.
1. Visual and Scenic Impact
The proposed building exceeds a scale appropriate for this area and will dominate the surrounding landscape. Narrabeen’s headlands and escarpments form part of a recognised scenic corridor and are valued for their coastal views and natural skyline. A structure of this height and density will be visible from multiple public vantage points, undermining the visual amenity and sense of openness that define the suburb.
This is inconsistent with the Northern Beaches Local Environmental Plan (LEP) objectives relating to neighbourhood character, visual quality, and the preservation of natural landforms.
2. Environmental and Biodiversity Concerns
The removal of established trees and vegetation represents a significant environmental loss. Mature trees contribute to local biodiversity, provide natural cooling, and play an essential role in managing stormwater and air quality. The proposed vegetation clearing appears incompatible with the environmental objectives of both the LEP and the Development Control Plan (DCP), which encourage protection and enhancement of existing canopy cover and habitat corridors.
3. Traffic, Parking, and Infrastructure Capacity
Traffic congestion and parking availability are already major challenges in Narrabeen, particularly around beach access routes and residential streets. The scale of this proposal far exceeds what the existing infrastructure can support. The limited provision of visitor and resident parking fails to meet the likely demand, leading to increased on-street parking pressure and safety risks.
This directly conflicts with DCP transport and access provisions, which require developments to ensure adequate parking and minimal disruption to surrounding road networks.
4. Lack of Affordable and Diverse Housing
While the need for additional housing is acknowledged, this development does not contribute to genuine housing diversity or affordability. Instead, it proposes high-density dwellings that do not meet the needs of local key workers, young families, or long-term residents. True sustainable development must align with the social objectives of the LEP, which include providing equitable access to affordable housing and maintaining community cohesion.
Conclusion
This proposal fails to demonstrate compliance with the key principles of good urban planning is a poor fit to the character of the local area and the likely significant impact of the proposal on the at or near capacity of street parking, respect for local character, environmental stewardship, and social responsibility. I urge NSW Planning to reject this application in its current form and request that any future proposal for this site reflect the scale, form, and environmental sensitivity that Narrabeen deserves.
Sincerely,
B. Cummings
Attachments
Fabian Natoli
Object
Fabian Natoli
Object
NARRABEEN
,
New South Wales
Message
To whom this may concern,
I object to the proposed Indigo By Moran development at 156 Ocean Street. The scale and density of this project are excessive and completely out of character with the nature of Ocean Street.
The building’s height, bulk and footprint would dominate the streetscape, create privacy and overshadowing issues, increase traffic and parking pressure, and strain local infrastructure. It does not align with the character of the area.
I urge Council to refuse this proposal in its current form and require significant reductions in scale and height to ensure any development fits the residential context of Ocean Street and protects neighbourhood amenity.
Regards,
Local resident
I object to the proposed Indigo By Moran development at 156 Ocean Street. The scale and density of this project are excessive and completely out of character with the nature of Ocean Street.
The building’s height, bulk and footprint would dominate the streetscape, create privacy and overshadowing issues, increase traffic and parking pressure, and strain local infrastructure. It does not align with the character of the area.
I urge Council to refuse this proposal in its current form and require significant reductions in scale and height to ensure any development fits the residential context of Ocean Street and protects neighbourhood amenity.
Regards,
Local resident