Dear NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed rezoning of 33–43 Marion Street, Parramatta. As a concerned local resident, I believe this proposal fails to adequately consider the impact on sunlight access, residential amenity, infrastructure, safety, and heritage. I respectfully request that the Department reconsider the proposal or require amendments to address these significant issues.
1. Overshadowing and Loss of Sunlight Access
The proposed rezoning would facilitate a large increase in building height and density on the site. This would result in substantial overshadowing of neighbouring properties, particularly during winter months. Under Clause 4.3 of the Parramatta LEP 2011, the protection of sunlight access is critical to ensuring that development does not unduly reduce residential amenity.
According to Parramatta DCP 2011, Part 3 - General Controls, solar access (referred to in DCP as "sunlight") to primary living spaces and private open spaces is essential, particularly during the key hours of 9am to 3pm in winter. The proposed development risks failing to meet these guidelines, which would result in diminished sunlight access for existing properties, affecting the quality of life for current residents.
2. Impact on Mental Health and Wellbeing
Natural sunlight plays a key role in supporting physical and mental health. Research has shown that a lack of sunlight can lead to conditions such as Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), general depression, and other mood disorders. As referenced in Parramatta DCP 2011, Part 3 - General Controls, maintaining sunlight access is crucial not just for physical comfort, but for community wellbeing. The proposed development, which would block sunlight from key areas of surrounding residential properties, could exacerbate mental health concerns, particularly in an already dense urban environment.
3. Increased Living Costs
The loss of natural light would result in increased reliance on artificial lighting and heating, leading to higher energy costs for residents. Given the current economic climate and the ongoing increase in cost-of-living pressures, the potential for higher utility bills is a significant concern. The Parramatta DCP 2011, Part 3 - General Controls, highlights the importance of energy-efficient design to reduce household expenditure, yet this proposal disregards these principles by blocking natural light, thereby forcing existing residents to increase their reliance on artificial sources of energy.
4. Traffic Congestion and Infrastructure Strain
The rezoning proposal, which allows for nearly 300 additional apartment units on the site, raises concerns about the capacity of existing infrastructure. According to Clause 7.2 of the Parramatta LEP 2011 (Traffic, Transport, and Parking), new developments should ensure that local roads, pedestrian paths, and public transport systems can accommodate increased demand.
The addition of 300 new units will generate a significant increase in vehicle traffic, exacerbating congestion and pressure on an already strained infrastructure network. Without sufficient upgrades to roads and transport systems, this development will likely compromise the safety and convenience of both current and future residents.
5. Safety Concerns Due to Narrow Access Lanes
The development's design raises concerns about the adequacy of access for emergency services and daily traffic. Parramatta DCP 2011, Part 4 - Site Planning and Design, emphasizes that adequate vehicular access and circulation, especially for emergency vehicles, is critical to ensuring safety in new developments. The proposed development's reliance on narrow access lanes presents a clear risk to safety, as these lanes may not be suitable for accommodating increased traffic volumes or emergency vehicles, which could delay response times and increase safety risks for residents.
6. Impact on Heritage and Local Character
Parramatta is home to a rich cultural and architectural heritage. According to Clause 5.10 of the Parramatta LEP 2011, the preservation of heritage items and conservation areas is a primary consideration in any development application. The proposed rezoning risks undermining the heritage value of surrounding areas, particularly in terms of visual amenity and the preservation of Parramatta’s distinctive architectural character.
There is a need to balance development with the protection of the local heritage fabric to maintain the identity and sense of place that residents and visitors value.
________________________________________
Conclusion
In light of the significant overshadowing, the loss of sunlight, the mental and physical health impacts, the strain on local infrastructure, and the risk to heritage, I strongly urge the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to reconsider the proposed rezoning of 33–43 Marion Street, Parramatta.
I respectfully ask that the Department require amendments to the proposal to:
• Address the overshadowing and sunlight access issues as per the Parramatta LEP and DCP guidelines.
• Include adequate infrastructure upgrades to support increased traffic and ensure safety.
• Preserve the heritage values of the surrounding area.
Thank you for considering my submission. I trust that these concerns will be given full consideration as part of the assessment process.
Yours sincerely,
Krutartha and Ishita Patel
Owners of Unit 15. 27 Station Street West, Harris Park, NSW 2762

I support this project. If it is to assist our own elderly, providing a better place for them to spend their twilight years, then there must be some good in it. This project will also create local job opportunities for the younger generation to get into the job market.

I believe the Northern Beaches is crying out for over 50’s living apartments and Moran have a great reputation for building quality projects.
The site at Narrabeen is appropriately sized and the size of the buildings will not detract from the surrounding area.
It will enable our older locals to live in an appropriately sized dwelling with some great amenities hopefully making for a comfortable retirement surrounded by likeminded individuals.

I strongly object to the project.
The proposal is a gross overdevelopment in accordance with the current zoning of the site, under Warring LEP 2011.
The height of buildings under this zone is limited to 3 storeys, whereas the proposal is for 6 storeys.
The proposal would result in overshadowing and visual intrusion.
The number of proposed parking spaces would lead to increased traffic congestion, and reduced pedestrian safety.
There is no genuine affordable housing for the elderly under this proposal. The proposed apartments are primarily of a premium nature, comprising 2/3 bedrooms, with asking prices said to be in the order of $2 million to $3 million.
The proposal appears to be using SSD NSW to enhance their development profit, and to circumvent the more appropriate development guidelines of the Northern Beaches Council, as set down in the Warringah LEP.
The scale of the proposal is considered totally unreasonable. It will detrimentally affect the local amenity and the dynamics of the Narrabeen community, whilst it will likely impact on the nesting of both the endangered Ospreys and Sea Eagles.

I would like to oppose the proposed development SSD-76220734: INDIGO BY MORAN – 156 OCEAN STREET NARRABEEN.

I am a resident of Narrabeen and have lived on the northern beaches my whole life. I have lived in Narrabeen since 1987. I do not own my property but rent. I use Ocean Street on a daily basis.

Increased Traffic
This proposal will substantially increase the traffic flow on this street and from the surrounding feeder streets, Ocean Street, Waterloo Street, Narrabeen Park Parade. Recently the local Council considered a motion to reduce the speed limit in this street to 50km /hour because of the existing traffic issues. Adding more cars to this location will only exacerbate the issue.

Car parking
Ocean Street is already full of units with limited parking available. It is already extremely difficult to find parking in and around this proposed development. This proposal consists of 149 (2&3 bed) apartments and only 178 car spaces so that means potentially 120 additional cars will be parking on ocean st, lagoon st, octivia and loftus st. Add to this the summer influx of non-residents trying to access the beach and parking their cars in and around this very same street and the parking issues will become a nightmare.

Height
Whilst there are many unit building along Ocean St, they are generally across one block and are generally limited to 3-4 stories, so that there is space around each unit block and in some instances you can see the ocean between the blocks. This proposal of one complete building across several blocks of land with a substantial height increase is inconsistent with the character and neighbourhood of Narrabeen. This size building will stand out across the neighborhood and will look imposing and feel completely out of character.

Accessibility
This building is not close to grocery stores or shopping centers and would require residents to either drive or bus to do shopping. The local Mona Vale hospital would have been close, if the state hadn’t closed it so now the closest hospital for this proposed aged care facility is Frenchs Forest - a 30 minute drive/ambulance ride away. The street/building is built on a sandy ismus, the construction work will impact the local streets and buildings surrounding the development and the streets themselves will move due to the fact that they are built on sand.

Aged Care facility classification
This proposal is marketed as a seniors living facility, yet only has one proposed assisted living room, whilst the others are all 2-3bed room units. If this was truly built for purpose, there would be more assisted living rooms and 1-2bedroom units proposed, elderly people generally live as a couple or single and don’t require the amount of 2-3bedroom units proposed. At an estimated cost of over 3M per unit this development seems to be more focused on getting as much money as possible given the location rather than providing true aged care facilities.

Demand
There is already a huge demand for units on the northern beaches - with a studio apartment (no actual bedroom) recently selling for 1.3M - you can see there is demand. However there is also need for REAL seniors living, our elderly can not afford $3M per unit. If this proposal is truly about providing housing and support for our elderly, cap the price on each unit in accordance with your own state government housing guides, ensure that any age 60+ rules are enforceable - ie no one under 60 can live on the property - how can this be enforced? Ensure that owners must meet the requirements for medical housing assistance - eg they have a chronic medical condition that requires nursing care - either in independent units or partial and fully assisted living.

In summary please consider the huge impact this proposal will have on the residents and neighbors of this development and the greater Narrabeen area. Please consider the increased, traffic, parking issues, height incompatibility, purpose and design and reject this proposal.

Thank you

Nichole

This project is totally out of sync with the area it is being proposed to be built.
We have been unable to view all specifications because we are not considering purchasing so therefore feel it is being pushed under the “guise” os State significant.
A 6 level structure will dominate the area and dwarf other ‘blended’ developments which have always been in unison with the suburb, it’s amenities, it’s traffic and pedestrian flows and no prior constructions have been intended to dominate the landscape as this development will.
It will become a dominating intrusion into the suburb and its surrounds.
Traffic will become a real issue in what is already a dangerous “through” traffic area for the beaches and put at risk the ability of the community to move around safely and live in an area free from the risks associated with over development in suburbs such as Dee Why.
This sort of development should remain in the area where they have been planned previously and NOT thrust upon quiet suburban beachside areas with NO community consultation.
I cannot object strongly enough to the absolute absurdity of this ridiculous intrusion into an area totally unsuited and planned to cope with the size and scope of this development

Build it

Please see attached submission.
The crux of which is that the proposal cannot reasonably be considered State Significant Development. The application does not meet the capital investment threshold, fails to deliver diverse or affordable housing outcomes, and is inconsistent with the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Housing SEPP 2021.
The development represents an overdevelopment of the site, with unacceptable environmental and social impacts. It should be refused and redirected for assessment at the local level where appropriate scrutiny and community engagement can occur.

I strongly object to the Indigo by Moran project in Narrabeen. Due to the following factors:
1. The proposed 5-6 storey building height far exceeds that of neighbouring properties. This combined with the sheer size of the development is not in keeping with the local character of the suburb.
2. The low percentage of high care beds proposed will not adequately serve the local communities needs.