I am a resident of Narrabeen and live within 100m of the proposed development. I wish to lodge an objection to the Proposed Development – Over 55s Housing (5 Storeys, 3 Basement Levels, Height 21.1m) at 156 Ocean St, Narrabeen due to the following reasons:

1. It is inconsistent with Surrounding Character and Built Form.

The proposed development is grossly inconsistent with the prevailing character of the surrounding area, which is defined by:
    •    Single and two-storey residential dwellings, and
    •    Low-rise residential flat buildings predominately of two to three storeys.

A 5-6 storey building with three basement levels introduces an inappropriate level of intensity, bulk and scale that is out of context with the established built environment. The height, form, and massing are inconsistent with the pattern of development in the locality and detract from the visual harmony and human scale of the streetscape.

This proposal will dominate its surroundings, disrupt the visual transition between buildings, and erode the established residential character contrary to the planning objectives for the zone.

2. Non-Compliance with Height Controls

The proposed height of 21.1 metres exceeds the permissible height limit by 8.8 metres, even after accounting for the increase allowed under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Such a substantial variation:
    •    Represents an unjustifiable breach of planning controls,
    •    Results in significant visual intrusion and view loss, and
    •    Undermines the integrity of the local planning framework.

The excessive height produces unreasonable overshadowing, bulk, and scale, inconsistent with the height objectives of the Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and Development Control Plan (DCP), which seek to ensure new development is compatible with its context and protects neighbouring amenity.

3. View Loss for Neighbours and Public Areas

The development will cause substantial view loss to neighbouring residents and members of the public.
Specifically:
    •    The height and bulk of the proposal will obstruct existing private views to key vistas and landscapes.
    •    The building will impede public view corridors available from streets and nearby open spaces.
    •    The photomontages provided by the applicant are misleading, as they fail to accurately depict the relationship between the proposed height (RLs) and existing neighbouring dwellings, incorrectly suggesting that a 21m building is similar in height to a 6m two-storey dwelling. The proposed development of 5-6 storeys, can in no way look anywhere remotely similar to the height limit of the 2 storey shop on the north east corner opposite this site. Height shadow images within the submission, make it appear visually similar in height. This is one of many examples that can be given of images being misleading in the proposal.

This misrepresentation of scale and visual impact significantly underplays the true extent of view obstruction the proposal will cause.

4. Inadequate Setbacks and Failure to Provide Height Transition

The proposal incorporates inadequate side and rear setbacks, which:
    •    Exacerbate the perception of bulk and massing,
    •    Fail to provide an appropriate transition in scale to neighbouring lower-density dwellings, and
    •    Lead to unreasonable amenity impacts (visual dominance, overshadowing, and privacy loss).

There has been no attempt to step the building or articulate façades to reduce perceived bulk and scale. This approach results in a structure that dominates its surroundings rather than integrating sensitively with them. Three street frontages will be affected.

5. Removal of Significant Vegetation

The proposal involves the removal of a large number of established and significant trees, some of which may hold heritage or ecological value.
This loss:
    •    Erodes the landscape character and natural setting of the area,
    •    Removes valuable habitat and urban canopy, and
    •    Eliminates screening vegetation that currently softens the visual impact of built form.

The unnecessary extent of tree removal demonstrates poor site planning and disregard for the environmental and aesthetic value of existing vegetation.

6. Adverse Microclimatic Impacts (Wind and Heat)

The development’s excessive bulk and placement will alter local airflows, resulting in:
    •    Reduced natural ventilation for surrounding dwellings,
    •    The elimination of prevailing breezes that currently mitigate summer heat, and
    •    A stagnant microclimate likely to exacerbate urban heat island effects.

These impacts will diminish residential amenity for neighbouring properties and reduce environmental sustainability outcomes for the locality.

7. Insufficient Car Parking and Traffic Impacts

The proposal includes inadequate parking provision for both residents and staff, contrary to the requirements of the SEPP and Council’s DCP.
This shortfall will:
    •    Force overflow parking onto surrounding residential streets,
    •    Exacerbate existing parking scarcity, and
    •    Increase traffic congestion and safety risks on local roads not designed to accommodate higher volumes.

The proposed three basement levels may also result in construction disturbance, noise, and traffic management issues over an extended period.

8. Overdevelopment and Over-Intensification of the Site

The proposal represents a clear overdevelopment of the site, with a density, height, and scale far exceeding what is suitable for the locality.
The development:
    •    Fails to respond to the site constraints,
    •    Over-intensifies the use under the guise of “Over 55s housing”, and
    •    Does not deliver genuine benefits or design excellence that would justify such an excessive variation.

Rather than enhancing housing diversity, the proposal compromises residential amenity, environmental quality, and visual character. Current Council regulations do not allow developments over maximum 2-3 storeys in height.

9. Cumulative and Precedent Impacts

Approval of this proposal would create a highly undesirable precedent, encouraging other developers to seek similar non-compliances in height, bulk, and scale.
Over time, this would erode the established low-density character of the locality and diminish the visual and environmental quality of the broader area.

10. Visual Impacts

Many of the images and shadowing projected, are extremely misleading. They do not appear to depict what the true impact will be of how this will appear to affect the streetscape, and immediate community area. Assessments within the report of “Negligent” in relation to Viewpoint Sensitivity is an extremely subjective use of language. There is a constant presence within the development submission, that it is in some way positive to the streetscape. This is not achievable at 5-6 storey’s.

Conclusion

In summary, the proposed Over 55s development is:
    •    Excessively tall and bulky,
    •    Inconsistent with the existing and desired character of the area,
    •    Non-compliant with height and setback controls,
    •    Environmentally destructive, and
    •    Likely to generate significant amenity, parking and traffic impacts.

The application represents an over-intensification of the site and should therefore be refused.
If Council is minded to consider approval, the proposal must be significantly redesigned to:
    •    Comply with the maximum height and setback controls,
    •    Retain significant vegetation,
    •    Reduce visual and environmental impacts, and
    •    Provide adequate parking and genuine height transitions to adjoining properties.

Reasons for objection
1. Traffic and Road Safety Concerns
The proposed development will significantly increase local traffic volumes on Ocean Street and the surrounding residential roads. This area already faces congestion, limited parking, and safety concerns due to narrow street layouts and proximity to local schools and amenities. The addition of vehicles from staff, residents, visitors, service deliveries, and emergency vehicles will place further strain on local infrastructure

2. Construction Impacts on Surrounding Homes
The proposal for a six-storey complex will involve deep excavation and heavy construction equipment operating over an extended period. Surrounding properties are in very close proximity, raising several concerns:
• Noise pollution: from machinery and pile-driving during excavation, affecting sleep and daily life.
• Dust and air pollution: impacting health, especially for children, elderly individuals, and those with respiratory issues.
• Vibration and structural risk to surrounding buildings: Prolonged vibration during deep foundation works can compromise the structural integrity of adjacent buildings, leading to cracking or movement in foundations and walls.
• Access and safety: Construction vehicles and machinery will occupy limited street space, further restricting parking and pedestrian safety.

3. Height, Overshadowing, and Environmental Impact
The surrounding homes and developments in this neighbourhood are predominantly two to three storeys high, forming part of the low-rise, unique coastal character of Narrabeen. The proposed six-storey building would be entirely inconsistent with the local built environment.
Such an oversized structure will:
• Block natural sunlight to neighbouring homes and gardens.
• Reduce passive solar access, increasing residents’ energy use and carbon footprint.
• Alter the local microclimate and disrupt natural ventilation patterns.
• Diminish the area’s visual and environmental amenity by overshadowing public and private open spaces.
This represents a clear case of overdevelopment, likely to cause both environmental degradation and reduced quality of life for surrounding residents.

4. Suitability for Elderly Residents and Community Connection
The Indigo by Moran website promotes luxury amenities including a heated 25-metre pool, resident cinema, temperature-controlled cellar, fitness centre, library, landscaped gardens, and a rooftop pavilion for entertaining and social activities. While these features may sound attractive, they raise serious concerns when applied to a small, 9,234 m² site (less than one hectare).
Facilities of this scale are suitable for a large, low-density retirement village built on expansive land, not for a compact site in a residential street surrounded by family homes.
Fitting so many features onto a small parcel of land necessitates vertical expansion to six storeys, leading to overcrowding and disconnection from the local community.
It is also important to recognise that this is not an aged-care facility, but an independent retirement living complex. Residents, typically aged 60 and over, are generally healthy and active. They benefit most from regular interaction with the community, visiting local shops, engaging in outdoor recreation, and maintaining social links.
However, a high-rise, enclosed structure with extensive on-site facilities risks isolating them from the wider neighbourhood.
This model creates a “self-contained bubble” rather than encouraging integration with the community, which is essential for older adults’ mental and emotional wellbeing.
Scaling down the facilities to a more community-focused level would remove the need for excessive building height. A three-storey design, in keeping with surrounding buildings, would still deliver comfortable, accessible housing for seniors while promoting connection to nature, sunlight, and local life.

5. Inconsistency with Local Character and Planning Intent
The Narrabeen area is characterised by low-rise residential dwellings with coastal charm and natural light. The scale and intensity of this proposed development are out of harmony with that character.
The proposed six-storey structure will dominate the streetscape, alter the visual aesthetic, and set a concerning precedent for future high-density developments in low-rise areas.
This conflicts with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 principles of maintaining local amenity, character, and sustainability.

6. Cumulative Environmental and Social Impacts
The Environmental Impact Statement does not adequately address the cumulative effects of this project. The increase of residents, staff, and visitors will increase strain on:
• Local traffic and parking capacity.
• Waste collection and management services.
• Water and energy infrastructure.
• Noise levels and air quality during and after construction.
Furthermore, the loss of sunlight, increased density, and reduced open space will affect both human health and urban biodiversity, contradicting the NSW Government’s environmental sustainability goals.

Conclusion
This project, while described as a premium seniors’ living development, raises significant issues relating to:
• Traffic congestion and road safety;
• Noise, dust, and structural risks during construction;
• Overshadowing and environmental degradation;
• The wellbeing and community connection of elderly residents; and
• Destroy the unique low-rise, coastal character of Narrabeen.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure reject this proposal

The large size of this project will have a negative impact on many members of the community.
I am apposed the the size of this project building for a number of reasons;
1. Disruption to Aboriginal Burial Grounds and artefacts. Digging to such a depth that are proposed on the plans over such a large area is of great concern regarding the high likelihood of Aboriginal Burial Sites and artefacts.

In 2005, an Aboriginal Ancestral burial was accidentally exposed during cable installations on Ocean Street, Narrabeen. The skeletal remains, belonging to an adult male known as Narrabeen Man, were dated to approximately 4,000 years before present. Seventeen stone artefacts were also recovered from this burial, several of which were found imbedded in the man’s spine. This is one of the most significant sites in Sydney and has informed us of Narrabeen’s deep Aboriginal Past.

The proposed works area is approximately 30 meters from where Narrabeen Man was discovered, and within the same deep sand-body. This landscape has a high potential to contain more burials and other Aboriginal artefacts. It is therefore imperative, as recommended by GML’s (2025) Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment of the site, that further archaeological investigation be undertaken through test excavations. However, it is equally important that any excavations include the engagement of a qualified and experienced biological anthropologist or bioarchaeologist.

This person must have extensive expertise in the identification, excavation, and analysis of Ancestral remains,and work closely with the Aboriginal Community. If Aboriginal Ancestral remains or objects are identified, all measures should be taken to leave them where they have been found and provide long term conservation and protection. This also must be done in consultation with the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council who have a statutory obligation to protect Aboriginal cultural heritage. Too much has already been lost through unmitigated development. It is our responsibility as a community to protect the fragile and important final resting place of Aboriginal Ancestors, and protect what is left of Aboriginal heritage culture in the area.

2. Parking.
The proposed plans are for 149 two to three-bedroom units with only 192 car spaces and 7 visitor spaces. This is extremely inadequate and the development should be required to allow for at least 2 parking spaces per unit and provide a much larger number of visitor parking spaces. There is already a problem with limited street parking with the current residential buildings so a development this size with such limited parking will impact all local residents and, further, visitors to the beautiful beaches.
With government guidelines and policies in place to encourage greater uptake of electric vehicles, the parking plans must ensure that electric vehicles can be charged legally (and safely) within the designated parking areas.

3. Traffic congestion.
The traffic on Lagoon and Ocean Street (and the surrounding streets) is already congested. The addition of an extra 149 people and cars (potentially 300 or 400 people if each unit is filled) permanently with limited access and exit points to the building is of further concern.

4. Affordable Housing
This development does not assist with government efforts to provide affordable housing. This development provides financial rewards to developers pushing through high density living inconsistent with local government guidelines and the unique Northern Beaches area. This development is a reflection on the disgraceful policies that the NSW state government has rushed through to solve the housing crisis. Ignoring local planning and development guidelines and overdeveloping the coastal areas risks losing visitors to not only the Northern Beaches but the wholeNSW coastline which is world renowned.

I wish to lodge an objection to the proposed development being progressed by Retirement by Moran (Indigo by Moran) at 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen. My objection is submitted in my capacity as an owner‐occupier residing in Ocean Street and reflects concerns relating to the scale, impact and process of the proposal.

Grounds of Objection

1. Excessive scale and out of character
The proposal for a 5–6 storey building with 149 units and extensive basement parking is significantly larger than the existing built context and out of scale with the rest of Ocean Street. Such scale risks overwhelming the coastal, open feel streetscape of Ocean Street and setting an undesirable precedent for the neighborhood.

2. Loss of light, privacy, views and character
The building’s height and bulk will block sunlight, reduce privacy and interrupt views for nearby homes. The visual dominance of such a large structure may reduce the open character of the area and impact on the “beachside village” feel of Narrabeen. It goes against the sense of space and light that makes this part of Narrabeen so special.

3. Traffic, parking and local infrastructure pressure
With its size and basement carparks, this project would bring much more traffic, both during construction and once residents move in. Ocean Street is already a busy area, and extra cars, service vehicles and visitor parking demand will make things worse for everyone living here.

4. Construction disruption and noise
A large‐scale development of this sort will generate major construction impacts, including noise, dust, vibration, heavy vehicle movements and prolonged onsite works.

In addition to the incompatibility with the existing neighborhood character, I would also like to raise serious concerns about the proposed balance of residential uses, bed numbers, and parking provision within the development.
Firstly, the planned number of residential care beds — reportedly only 10 — appears inadequate and not reflective of the growing community need for accessible and supported housing options for older residents. This limited provision suggests the proposal has been shaped more by commercial and density considerations than by genuine planning for demographic and social needs within the area.

At the same time, the proposal includes a large number of three-bedroom units, which does not align with current housing pressures. At a time when younger families and first-home buyers are struggling to access smaller, more affordable dwellings, the proposed mix appears poorly balanced and unlikely to contribute meaningfully to local housing diversity or affordability.
Finally, the development’s provision of only seven visitor parking spaces is clearly inadequate for a project of this scale and mixed-use nature. Ocean Street and surrounding roads are already under significant parking strain, and this shortfall would exacerbate congestion and parking conflicts for existing residents, visitors, and service vehicles.

Overall, the proposal fails to demonstrate that it has been planned with the real and long-term needs of the community in mind — both in terms of residential care provision and housing diversity — and does not adequately mitigate the traffic and parking impacts it will generate. From what I’ve seen and heard, there has been little genuine consultation with local residents. Many in the community feel that their concerns about height, traffic and neighbourhood character have not been properly heard or addressed.

While I recognise that providing more housing options for older Australians is a valid goal, this proposal is too large, too dense and too out of place for this part of Narrabeen and gives rise to significant adverse impacts for nearby residents, the local streetscape, amenity and character of Narrabeen. It risks permanently changing the look and feel of our neighbourhood and reducing the quality of life for existing residents. For those reasons I respectfully submit that approval should either be refused or only granted subject to substantial modifications.

Dear Planning Officer,

I wish to formally object to the proposed development to construct a six-storey building on Ocean Street Narrabeen. I am a long-term resident and owner-occupier and my objection is based on serious concerns about the scale, impact, and appropriateness of this proposal for our area.

1. Incompatible scale and breach of local height limits
Our street currently has a three-storey height limit, which is appropriate for its size, character, and location. Allowing a six-storey building would set an unacceptable precedent, completely out of scale with the surrounding environment and the established streetscape.

2. Traffic and parking congestion
Parking and traffic are already strained in this small street. Adding approximately 150 new units will significantly increase the number of vehicles entering and exiting, creating congestion, safety risks, and stress for existing residents. There are already insufficient parking spaces, and this proposal would make the situation unmanageable.

3. Noise and loss of residential amenity
The increase in vehicle and delivery traffic will substantially raise noise levels and disrupt the quiet, residential atmosphere that residents value. This street is currently a calm, family-friendly area, and such a large development would permanently alter that character.

4. Overshadowing and loss of natural light
A six-storey building will cast extensive shadows on neighbouring properties and even the beach, reducing sunlight and affecting both amenity and environmental quality. This impact is contrary to the principles of responsible coastal development.

5. Lack of genuine community support
The only parties benefiting from this proposal appear to be the developers and investors, not the residents who live here. The overwhelming sentiment among local residents is opposition, as we value the unique, low-density character of our street and community.

6. Inappropriate location for high-density housing
While I understand that Sydney faces a housing shortage, this issue should be addressed through responsible urban planning, not by overdeveloping small, already dense coastal streets. There are many other locations better suited to higher-density housing, where infrastructure and transport can support it.

For all these reasons, I urge the Council to reject this proposal and uphold the existing planning controls that protect the character, livability, and environment of our community. Please do not allow short-term profit to destroy what is one of the most beautiful and peaceful streets in the Northern Beaches.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Kind regards,
Diogo Villamur

This project will drastically alter the whole character of our neighbourhood/community.The proposed height compares to no other development in our immediate and wider area.The impact on traffic/parking/safety of children in the area due to increased traffic will be significant.
To call this project 'Senior Housing' seems to be contradicted by the fact that the majority of the units will be well out of the financial range of most seniors.I would argue the plan for 5 to 6 storeys is all about making the most profit for the company at the expense of consideration for the character and environment of the area.
A project of 2 to 3 storeys would be in keeping with the area and still provide significant senior housing.

Proposal in Favor of the New Indigo by Moran Project
Retirement by Moran is a leading organization in the design and management of retirement living, renowned for delivering exceptional standards of senior care. Their recently developed retirement village in Cronulla is a prime example of their commitment to excellence, setting a new benchmark for quality and innovation in senior housing. With a strong reputation for creating vibrant, well-managed communities, Indigo brings a level of professionalism and care that significantly enhances the wellbeing of residents.
Our community is facing a growing deficit of appropriate housing options for aging residents. Many seniors are still living in spacious family homes that no longer accommodate their physical, social, or lifestyle needs. As upkeep becomes increasingly challenging, these residents risk social isolation and diminished autonomy. Conversely, limited opportunities for downsizing hinder younger families from finding suitable housing within the area.
The upcoming Narrabeen development aims to directly address these issues. It proposes thoughtfully designed, accessible, and comfortable residences that allow older adults to stay within their community—remaining close to friends, local services, and social networks. By facilitating ageing in place, the project promotes improved wellbeing, safety, and overall quality of life for its residents.
The architectural approach of the development respects its context, utilizing materials, scale, and landscaping that align with the existing neighborhood aesthetic. Design elements have been thoughtfully chosen to blend seamlessly with the surroundings and to reduce visual impact on neighboring homes. Additionally, the inclusion of communal and green spaces encourages social interaction while preserving privacy and a sense of openness.

I have lived in this area for over 60 years and Narrabeen has always been an area of low density development. The Northern Beaches Council has a ruling that projects of this height can only be on the western side of Pittwater Road due to the sensitivity of the soil, proximity to the beach, local flooding and erosion etc. This is total overdevelopment being six stories high, a visual intrusion on and over the neighbouring homes, it will create traffic plus safety hazards with 300+ vehicles in Lagoon & Ocean Streets. It will cause the removal of mature trees destroying the habitat of sea eagles, kookaburras and the Powerful Owl. There was no consideration given to the Local Council as this project went straight to the State Government who know nothing of the area.

I know this development sight very well having lived most of my life on the northern beaches. The majority of my family ,all of whom are are retirees, still live in the area. I also hope to return to my roots once I retire.
The design and layout of Indigo by Moran is very sensitive to the needs of the over 55's. It is very appealing to me as an over 55 person..
I have no objection to the height which is considerably less than the ugly high rise development that has occurred in Dee Why and surrounding areas. Yes, there may be an increase in traffic. However, from what I can see parking will be more than adequate to accommodate all future residents.