To: NSW Department of Planning, Housing & Infrastructure
Re: SSD-85869467 – Anzac Village Seniors Housing
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed Anzac Village Seniors Housing development (SSD-85869467).
While I support the provision of appropriate housing for seniors, I have significant concerns about the scale, impacts, and suitability of this proposal in its current form.
1. Traffic and Road Safety Impacts
The proposed development is likely to substantially increase traffic volumes in the surrounding local road network. This area already experiences congestion, and additional vehicles will:
Increase travel times and traffic pressure on Mona Vale Road and surrounding streets
Create safety risks, particularly at local intersections and access points
Impact pedestrians, cyclists, and vulnerable road users
Given the scale of the development, the existing road infrastructure appears insufficient to safely accommodate this increase.
2. Overdevelopment and Scale
The development appears excessive in scale and intensity for its location. Concerns include:
Building bulk and height inconsistent with the surrounding character
Overcrowding of the site beyond what is appropriate for a seniors living facility
Visual impact on neighbouring properties and surrounding landscape
The exceptionally long time that this building work will take and the adverse effect this will have on the lifestyle and health of the elderly residents there
This level of density is not consistent with the established character of the area and represents overdevelopment.
3. Environmental and Bushland Impacts
The proposal raises serious environmental concerns, including:
Loss of native vegetation and habitat
Impacts on local biodiversity
Increased stormwater runoff and potential erosion
Given the proximity to bushland, the development may also increase pressure on sensitive environmental areas.
4. Bushfire Risk
This site is located within a bushfire-prone area. The proposal raises concerns regarding:
Adequate evacuation capacity for elderly residents
Access for emergency services
Safety during extreme fire conditions
The safety of vulnerable residents must be given the highest priority, and it is not clear that this has been adequately addressed.
5. Infrastructure and Services Capacity
The surrounding infrastructure may not be sufficient to support the increased population, including:
Health services and emergency facilities
Public transport capacity
Water, sewer, and utilities
Without clear upgrades, the proposal risks placing strain on already limited local services.
6. Amenity Impacts
The development will negatively affect the amenity of surrounding residents through:
Increased noise during construction and operation
Reduced privacy due to building height and proximity
Loss of outlook and overshadowing
These impacts are significant and have not been adequately mitigated.
7. Inadequate Community Consultation
There appears to have been insufficient engagement with the local community. A project of this scale requires:
Meaningful consultation with residents
Transparency regarding impacts
Consideration of community feedback in the design

Conclusion
For the reasons outlined above, I strongly object to the proposed development in its current form.
I respectfully request that the Department:
Reject the application, or
Require significant modifications to reduce its scale and impacts
Any future proposal should better reflect the character of the area, ensure safety, and protect the local environment and community amenity.
Thank you for considering this submission.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Maitland
11/155-157 Darley St Mona Vale 2103

I write to strongly object to the State Significant Development Application SSD-85869467 at 90 Veterans Parade Narrabeen NSW 2101.

I lived at Collaroy Plateau for 34 years until very recently, my children attended primary school and played sport there, we shopped, socialised and dined out there, I still own a property in a nearby street to the proposed development, and both my parents and mother-in-law at various times resided in aged care at RSL Lifecare/ANZAC Village Narrabeen aka “The War Vets”. I have very much been part of the community at Collaroy Plateau for many years and have lived experience and therefore real knowledge of the immense detrimental impacts this overdevelopment will have on the local community.

Visual Impact:
The RSL Lifecare/ANZAC Village site, although officially falling within the Narrabeen suburb, is locally considered to be part of Collaroy Plateau. I highly disagree with the assertion that the visual impact of the development is acceptable in scale. The overall development of this site is proposing almost 30 new buildings, some at 8 storeys high, and will most definitely emerge from the treeline. It would effectively be a new town centre looming large high atop of the Collaroy Plateau escarpment, which is highly visible from the surrounding areas of Narrabeen and Elanora Heights. It would be completely dominating and out of character with the surrounding area and in my and many of the community’s opinion, an eyesore.

Bulk and scale:
The two residential flat buildings of 5 and 6 storeys proposed in Stage 1 are too large in bulk and scale. The site is adjacent to a low density residential area with low scale detached dwellings dominant. The light pollution, overshadowing and loss of privacy to existing residents by these towers is a concern. The proposed townhouses in stage 1 will receive no solar access during the winter solstice nor the associated communal area, rendering the communal area effectively unusable throughout the winter solstice. This is not acceptable for a wellness and mental health point of view, bushland views from these townhouses do not make up for lack of sunlight during the coldest months of the year.

Traffic impact:
The RSL Lifecare/ANZAC Village has only one road access. Traffic surveys undertaken by TTW indicating that “the surrounding network currently operates well within capacity during peak periods, with modest background growth anticipated over the coming years” flies in the face of my lived experience. In the 34 years I lived there the local traffic got significantly worse and continues to do so. It is very difficult to obtain a parking spot at the nearby “Augusta Shops”, and traffic on Veterans Parade and Rose Ave at school times are gridlocked due to “kiss and drop zones” at the nearby Wheeler Heights Primary and St Rose Primary schools. Due to the steep terrain of the Collaroy Plateau escarpment and the RSL Village site itself, residents are very reliant on car transport to the local shops. Parking in nearby residential streets is at a premium causing issues with safety due to a lack of clear sight lines, in particular necessitating parking in the adjacent Lantana Ave being limited to one side of the street. The large increase in new independent living units at the development site will only exacerbate this problem which cannot be alleviated by the small shuttle bus that the complex currently runs.

The application states that “Intersection Veterans Parade/Pittwater Road modelled in SIDRA showed no significant queuing or delays”. As this intersection does not even exist it shows that this modelling is flawed.

There would be significant issues with haulage traffic. There is a 3T load limit on the very steep and narrow Nioka Road and Alexander Street rendering them dangerous and unsuitable for large trucks, resulting in all demolition and constructions trucks having to pass through the Collaroy Plateau local shopping village and unavoidably through the school zones of at least one or all three primary schools located on Collaroy Plateau.

The “Implementation of a Construction Worker Transport Strategy to encourage carpooling and use of public transport” is not feasible in that no direct public transport is available north of Collaroy Plateau, other routes would require multiple changes in public transport modes other than those directly from the CBD.

Social Impact:
I strongly disagree with the premise that the development will have low negative social impact due to construction being temporary. As there are 5 stages proposed over 15 years this is hardly temporary. Residents moved to RSL Lifecare/ANZAC Village Narrabeen due to its tranquil village atmosphere and it is very distressing that they could be living out their twilight years in a construction zone with noise and vibration impacts, basement earthworks, dust, asbestos removal, heavy vehicle movement throughout the Village, etc. Proposed construction hours are Mon-Sat 7am to 5pm. The residents did not choose this, is this any way to treat our seniors and war veterans?

The impact of demolition and construction noise and dust, increase of residential traffic in a locally constrained area such as Collaroy Plateau and the demolition and construction trucks rumbling through the local streets to and on Collaroy Plateau and through the local shopping village and local primary school zones over 15 years would have a significant negative safety and social impact on the broader community.

Aged care beds:
Our local hospital suffers significant bed block due to our aging population and shortage of local residential aged care beds. My mother is currently in residential aged care and previously resided in a retirement village so I have a strong understanding of the difficulties of senior living. While I acknowledge the very real need for updating the residential aged care facilities at RSL Lifecare/ANZAC Village Narrabeen, the loss of 54 aged care beds during stage 3 of the proposed development will have a large impact on the local aged care sector. Although 104 new beds will eventually be built there has already previously been a loss of 150 beds at this complex. Instead of those sites being renewed previously, a preference for developing new independent living units with lagoon and ocean views commanding price tags in the millions of dollars will remove diversity of housing and affordability and will actually result a net loss of 100 residential aged care beds overall.

A lot of residents who chose to live at the “War Vets” did so with the knowledge that they would be able to age in place and transition to the next stage in their own environment. Those residents would lose access while the proposed development is underway causing distress and uncertainty.

Environment:
In the proponent’s own EIS statement it states, “The site is adjacent to the Narrabeen Lagoon, located to the north and west. This area is a key natural landscape characterised by its expansive waterbody, surrounding bushland, and ecological corridors. It forms a defining element of the local landscape, contributing to the area’s visual quality, biodiversity, and sense of place.” I therefore object to the loss of 131 trees during stage 1 and the estimated 478 trees altogether across the 5 stages of the proposed development which provide 13,202 sqm of tree canopy, including 126 high value trees and 8 hollow bearing trees. This will put additional pressure on the 3 threatened species present within the site and will contribute to the ongoing urban heat island effect. The replanting of 151 immature trees does not alleviate this damage - will they be replanted onsite or off-set elsewhere?

Lived experience in the area tells me that run off to Narrabeen Lagoon with such a large scale development is inevitable, potentially impacting rock shelter aboriginal art site at Pipeclay Point as well as indirect vibration during demolition and construction which is of a particular concern to me. It’s all very well to have mitigation efforts in place but once the damage is done there is no going back on such an important indigenous archaeological site. Also any resultant silt build up in Narrabeen Lagoon will ultimately become the responsibility of our local council to remedy by potentially having to dredge which would be at the local ratepayers’ expense.

Bushfire:
The “War Vets” is indicated as “prone” on the Northern Beaches Council bushfire prone map. Being located on sloping land at the top of a steep escarpment in a known fire path makes the site especially vulnerable. The site is subject to ember attack which was particularly apparent in the 1994 bushfires when some buildings on the site were damaged due to bushfire, and residents needed to be evacuated with the assistance of the local community. Increasing the density and scale of the site puts even more future residents in harm’s way. Evacuation and emergency vehicles would be dangerously impacted on-site by the large scale development.

RSL Lifecare’s charter is to provide compassionate care, housing and support services to veterans and seniors, and extend these welcoming services to the wider public. I acknowledge the need for incremental growth and the upgrading of facilities at RSL Lifecare/ANZAC Village Narrabeen but this should be done by smaller scale development and renewing of existing sites that had already been closed to preserve the village atmosphere at the “War Vets” and protect the amenity of existing residents in their twilight years, not the large scale proposed overdevelopment causing distress to a lot of existing residents and the wider community by building what is effectively a town centre sitting on the edge of a high escarpment dominating the skyline of the surrounding local area. I therefore do not support SSD-85869467 in its current form.

19 May 2026

Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
By submission via the NSW Planning Portal

Dear Sir/Madam


RE: OBJECTION TO STATE SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Application No: SSD-85869467
ANZAC Village Seniors Housing - Concept & Stage 1 Development
90 Veterans Parade, Narrabeen NSW

Dear Planning Assessment Officer,

I wish to object to the above State Significant Development Application submitted by RSL Lifecare Limited for the redevelopment of the ANZAC Village at 90 Veterans Parade, Narrabeen NSW.

While I acknowledge the importance of providing appropriate seniors housing, I believe the proposal, in its current form, is excessive in scale, incompatible with the surrounding low-density residential environment, and likely to result in significant adverse impacts on neighbouring residents and the broader community.

I respectfully request that the Department refuse the application or require substantial modifications prior to any approval being considered.

GROUNDS OF OBJECTION

1. Excessive Density and Scale

The proposal seeks approval for a maximum gross floor area of 72,000 square metres across 15 building envelopes, delivering approximately 399 independent living units, 104 residential care beds, seven townhouses, and a café and represents an excessive level of density for its location, entirely disproportionate to the surrounding residential context. The concentration of so much development on a single site, on a low-density residential street, will fundamentally and irreversibly alter the character of the area. The scale of this project is more appropriate for a major town centre, not a suburban residential neighbourhood.

2. Incompatibility with Streetscape

Lantana Avenue is a quiet, low-density residential street, characterised by low-density residential development, predominantly of one and two storeys set within generous landscaped lots. This represents the community standard which has been established and managed by Council over many decades. The proposed development, with its multi-storey towers, high-density land use, and urban-scale infrastructure, when viewed from and along Lantana Avenue, will present a built form that is completely alien to the existing streetscape. It is fundamentally at odds with the established and desired future character of Lantana Avenue and its environs and would set a devastating precedent for the erosion of the low-density residential character that defines this neighbourhood.

The current proposal makes no attempt to provide an appropriate transition in building height, scale and bulk between the development site and the adjoining low-density residential neighbourhood. This is unacceptable and must be rectified. Buildings visible from or adjoining Lantana Avenue should be limited to a maximum of two storeys in order to maintain consistency with the established streetscape.

3. Negative Traffic and Transport Impacts

Already Lantana Avenue has been adversely impacted by changes due to the ANZAC Village. Parking conditions were varied permitting parking only on one side of Lantana Avenue. It is understood that this change was primarily driven by the Village in conjunction with Keolis Downer who provide the public bus service to the Village, a service that already brings excess traffic to the street given the limited numbers who use that service. Despite objections of the residents parking is now permitted only on the southern side of the street resulting in a significant loss of public parking spaces, a considerable concern to the residents given the number of properties in the street which include numerous battle-axe blocks.

The proposal now put forward will generate a significant increase in traffic movements on already congested local roads. The provision of up to 1,600 basement and at-grade car parking spaces, combined with 399 independent living units, a 104-bed residential care facility, seven townhouses, and a cafe, will result in unacceptable traffic volumes on Veterans Parade and surrounding streets including Lantana Avenue which is a quiet residential street.

The existing road network in this area is not designed to accommodate traffic of this scale.

No meaningful traffic impact assessment has been shared with the community, and the cumulative traffic impact of all five proposed stages has not been adequately addressed. The introduction of greater ILU density combined with the previously imposed parking restrictions permitting parking only on the southern side of the street will place even greater strain on the already non-existent on street parking. Consideration should be given to requiring the ANZAC village widen Lantana Ave on its northern side in order minimise traffic impacts and to facilitate parking on both sides of the street.

4. Negative Impact of Prolonged Years of Construction

The adverse impacts will continue over the period of some 15 years of construction given the scale and size of the development. There will be an extensive period of disturbance due to the large construction trucks and other vehicles which will continue to impact upon available parking and traffic in addition to the likely noise, dust and other negative impacts of construction. The impact to residents over such a prolonged period is unacceptable.

Consideration ought to be given to require the applicant to limit access to the site during construction to the main entries on Veterans Parade in order to limit adverse impact on residents of Lantana Avenue.

5. Unacceptable Visual Impact

The concept plan proposes buildings ranging from one to eight storeys across 15 building envelopes. Buildings of up to eight storeys are entirely out of keeping with the surrounding low-density residential environment. The visual bulk and mass of this development will dominate the skyline and create an oppressive urban form that is wholly inconsistent with the established neighbourhood.

The visual impact on residents of Lantana Avenue and surrounding streets will be severe and permanent.

6. Loss of Views

The proposed multi-storey buildings will cause significant and permanent view loss for residents on Lantana Avenue and surrounding streets who currently enjoy views over the lower scale ANZAC Village site. Views to the north, east and surrounding landscape from private dwellings will be substantially impeded by buildings of four to eight storeys. View loss of this nature represents a direct diminution of property values and the amenity of established residents and has not been adequately addressed in the application.

Already the ANZAC village has had a negative impact on Lantana Avenue in this regard due to the approval of a mobile phone tower a few years ago over the objections of residents. The valid considerations as to the impact on residents of the newly proposed development should not again ignore the considerations of the residents of Lantana Avenue.

7. Significant Tree Loss and Environmental Harm

Stage 1 alone proposes the removal of up to 131 established and mature trees. This represents an enormous loss of established tree canopy, biodiversity habitat, and urban green infrastructure in a locality that values its natural environment. The loss of mature trees will have lasting negative consequences for local ecology, urban heat, stormwater management, and the amenity of the area. While the proposal claims to replant 151 trees, small replacement plantings cannot substitute for the environmental value of mature established trees. Across all five stages of the concept plan, the total tree loss will be far greater.

8. Bushfire and Emergency Evacuation Concerns

Given the scale and density of the proposal, together with the bushfire-affected nature of the site, significant concerns arise regarding emergency access and evacuation procedures for residents, staff and surrounding properties.

REQUESTED ACTIONS

I respectfully request that the Department:

(a) Refuse the application in its current form;
(b) Require genuine and meaningful community consultation prior to any further assessment;
(c) Limit building heights visible from or adjoining Lantana Avenue to a maximum of two storeys;
(d) Require a comprehensive traffic and parking assessment, including impacts on Lantana Avenue and consideration of requiring the Applicant to widen the street on the Northern side in order to reinstate parking on both sides of the street;
(e) Require a substantial reduction in the overall density and scale of the proposal so as to be consistent with the low-density residential character of the neighbourhood;
(f) Require an independent ecology report and a significant reduction in the number of trees to be removed and to require the development to remain below the existing tree canopy on the site;
(g) Require detailed view impact and streetscape character assessments from affected properties on surrounding streets including Lantana Avenue;
(h) Require a comprehensive bushfire evacuation and emergency management plan.


I trust the Department will give careful consideration to the concerns raised by affected residents and the significant adverse impacts this proposal would have on the surrounding community.

When rain falls on a natural landscape, the ground acts like a sponge. However, replacing soil and plants with concrete completely disrupts this natural cycle, turning a gentle absorption process into a fast-moving engineering challenge. Here is exactly how concrete transforms rainfall from a natural resource into urban runoff. 1. The Barrier Effect (Infiltration vs. Imperviousness)In a natural environment, soil, roots, and rocks are porous. They allow water to seep into the ground—a process called infiltration—which replenishes groundwater and keeps soil hydrated. Concrete is an impervious surface. Because it is highly compacted and sealed, it acts as a solid barrier. Instead of soaking into the ground, 100% of the rainfall stays right on top of the surface.2. The Creation of Surface Runoff Because the water cannot move downward, it has no choice but to move laterally. This creates surface runoff. IN nature: Only a small fraction of heavy rainfall becomes surface runoff; most is absorbed or slowed down by vegetation. On concrete: Virtually every drop of rain immediately becomes runoff. Dictated by gravity, this water pools and flows toward the lowest point at a highly accelerated rate.3. Disruption of the Hydrological Cycle by blocking infiltration, concrete alters the local water table and water cycle in three major ways. No Groundwater Recharge: Water that should be filtering down to replenish underground aquifers is diverted away. This can cause local water tables to drop. Reduced Evapotranspiration: In nature, plants absorb water and release it back into the atmosphere as vapor (transpiration), while moist soil evaporates water naturally. Concrete prevents this, which can alter local microclimates and contribute to the "urban heat island" effect. Altered Stream Flow: Instead of water slowly trickling through the earth into rivers over days or weeks, concrete dumps massive volumes of water into local waterways within minutes.4. The Urban Infrastructure Burden because concrete creates so much instant runoff, cities cannot just let the water sit. This forces the reliance on artificial drainage systems Feature Natural Landscape Concrete / Urban Landscape Water Movement Slow, absorbed, filtered through soil fast, channeled, unfiltered destination underground aquifers and plant roots storm drains, pipes, and concrete channels speed to waterways delayed (hours to days)Immediate (minutes)Peak Flow Volume low and manageable high and sudden (creates flash flood risks)When storm drains are overwhelmed by the sheer volume and speed of water rushing off concrete streets and parking lots, it results in urban flash flooding.5. The pollution factors as rain runs off concrete, it doesn't stay clean. Concrete surfaces accumulate pollutants like car oil, heavy metals, trash, and fertilizers. Because the water moves so fast and cannot be filtered by soil, the runoff sweeps these toxins directly into storm drains, which usually empty straight into local rivers and oceans without being treated.

Objection to SSD-85869467 – ANZAC Village Seniors Housing
Location: RSL ANZAC Village, Narrabeen NSW
I am writing to formally declare my strong objection to the State Significant Development
Application SSD-85869467 for the proposed redevelopment of the RSL ANZAC Village in
Narrabeen.
While the developer frames this $772 million proposal as a "modernisation" and "renewal,"
the actual human cost of this 15-year masterplan is unconscionable. The scale, intensity, and
protracted timeline of the development will directly displace, distress, and endanger some of
the most vulnerable members of our society—elderly citizens and war veterans who have
contributed over their lifetimes to our nation.
To subject an aged demographic—where the average age is 85 years old—to 15 years of
continuous heavy construction, displacement, and environmental disruption is a failure of
social sustainability and duty of care. This submission outlines the profound social,
psychological, and logistical impacts that warrant the rejection or comprehensive revision of
this application.
Key Grounds for Objection
Severe Psychosocial Impact and Displacement of a Vulnerable Demographic
The residents of the ANZAC Village are not standard residential tenants; they are elderly
citizens, many of whom are frail, living with age-related illnesses, or carrying the invisible
scars of military service.
• Forced Displacement: The demolition of existing low-rise structures to clear the path
for multi-storey towers up to eight storeys high will force the physical relocation of
residents. For an individual in their 80s or 90s, being uprooted from a home they
spent their life savings to secure is deeply traumatic.
• Mental Health and Anxiety: Residents are currently enduring a period of extreme
stress, anger, and anxiety due to the ambiguity surrounding their future living
arrangements. The developer's assurances of "managing relocations internally" do
little to ease the profound dread of not knowing what their ultimate plight will be.
The Inhumane Timeline: 15 Years of Continuous Construction
A 15-year, five-stage construction timeline is a lifetime for someone who is already 85 years
old.
• The "Distance" Reality: Tragically, many of the current residents will not survive to
see the completion of this project. Instead of spending the final, precious years of their
lives in the peace, dignity, and serenity they paid for and earned, they are being asked
to endure a decade and a half of dust, heavy vehicle traffic, noise, and visual
pollution.
• Erosion of Peace and Quiet Enjoyment: Seniors housing is legally and ethically
predicated on providing a quiet, stable environment. Introducing heavy earthmoving
equipment, structural drilling, and constant industrial disruptions directly violates the
core purpose of a retirement and veterans’ village.
Disregard for Resident Financial and Emotional Investment
The developer is acting purely as an institutional owner, showing a distinct lack of regard for
the people who have poured their time, emotional energy, and substantial financial capital
into this specific community.
• Residents chose the War Vets village precisely for its low-rise, open, bushland-and-
lagoon character.
• Replacing this supportive, horizontal community layout with high-density, multi-
storey apartment blocks fundamentally changes the contract under which residents
invested their life savings.
Net Loss of Critical Infrastructure (Aged Care Beds)
Despite the developer's claim of expanding housing, the transition toward independent living
units (ILUs) has coincided with the closure of vital residential care facilities on site
(including the Catalina, Milne Bay, Tobruk, and Wirraway facilities).
• As residents age over the next 15 years, their mobility will decrease, and their need
for high-care nursing beds will drastically rise.
• Prioritising high-density independent units over accessible, low-rise aged care beds
fails to meet the actual trajectory of the village's aging population.
Failure against NSW Planning Principles
Under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, a State Significant
Development must demonstrate a positive social impact and satisfy the public interest.
Objects of the Act – Section 1.3(a) & (c): Development must promote the social and
economic welfare of the community and provide a safe and healthy environment.
SSD-85869467 fails this legislative benchmark. It prioritises long-term yield and density over
the immediate health, safety, and psychological welfare of the existing community. The
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) severely undervalues the cumulative trauma of a 15-
year staging plan on an octogenarian cohort.
Conclusion & Requested Action
The veterans and seniors of the ANZAC Village have given their youth, their labour, and
their dedication to building and protecting Australian society. They do not have 15 years to
give away to a developer's construction schedule. They deserve to live out their lives with
certainty, dignity, and peace.
I urge the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to:
• Reject the Application in its current high-density, multi-stage format.
• Mandate a Comprehensive Revision that reduces building heights (limiting towers
to a maximum of 3–4 storeys) to preserve the low-rise village character.
• Enforce Strict Legally Binding Protections that guarantee no resident is forcefully
relocated against their will, and that construction noise and timelines are drastically
compressed to mitigate the risk to resident health.
Thank you for considering this submission. I object to this development i

To remove 500+ trees and kill all the wildlife that lives in them is unacceptable. Laws for wildlife should apply across proposals, not just everywhere else.
The proposal to stage this over years should take into account the 1600 car spaces and the traffic hazard they will cause to local roads - not allow this aspect to be negated through staged proposals that will not require that as a threshold has not been reached. This allows developers to foist traffic problems on communities without having to address the problems they create.

I write in objection to the proposed redevelopment of the ANZAC Village at 90 Veterans Parade, Narrabeen. The following matters are of particular concern due to potential direct impacts upon my property:

• Impact upon sewer infrastructure
The presented Utilities Impact Assessment (Donnelley Simpson Cleary, dated 12.01.2026) identifies that the proposed development is to connect to the sewer network on Lantana Avenue that is directed downslope, towards the west. Whilst this assessment is supported by “in-principle” support from Sydney Water (20 February 2025), this was issued on the proviso that further modelling be produced to confirm that a downstream high-risk category 1 overflow weir will not be affected by the proposal. Should such modelling confirm that an impact is unavoidable, the system will need to be redesigned to avoid this impact.
Delaying the assessment of the capacity of the downstream infrastructure is unacceptable in circumstances where the existing sewer network to the north of the site is also at capacity. The north-eastern corner of the ANZAC Village connects to this network, and despite assurances that the previous development of the site would not overload this system, there have been two recorded significant sewerage spills that have occurred in the past 12 months alone. This sewer network runs directly adjacent to my property and untreated sewerage washed through my dwelling on both occasions causing considerable damage to my property.
This overflow of untreated sewerage also resulted in extremely high levels of pollution in Narrabeen Lake, which is presently identified by the Beachwatch division of the NSW Government to have a Beach Suitability Grade of “Poor”, which means:
The Beach Suitability Grade of Poor indicates microbial water quality is susceptible to faecal pollution, particularly after rainfall and occasionally during dry weather conditions, with several potential sources of faecal contamination including from elsewhere within the lagoon.
It is noted that the correspondence from Sydney Water was produced more than 15 months prior to the lodgement of this SSD application, and the two most recent recorded overflow spills occurred after this time. In my opinion, the required modelling must be produced prior to determination in order to ensure capacity of the local system and avoid damage to private property and contamination of the downslope waterway.

• Traffic
A significant proportion of residents driving to and from the site will travel along Nioka Road: a two-lane, steep and winding road. Traffic along Nioka Road has significantly increased over recent years and will undoubtedly increase as a result of the 400 new dwellings proposed across the site. This impact should not be dismissed, as it has in the accompanying Transport Impact Assessment (TTW, dated 4 February 2026), simply because the residents are “seniors” that are said not to travel in peak hours.
Traffic will also increase in the interim as a consequence of tradespeople and construction vehicles attending the site. Whilst vehicles in excess of 3 tonnes are prohibited from travelling on Nioka Road, I note that the Traffic Impact Assessment identifies this as the nominated path of travel for all construction vehicles arriving from or departing to the north.
I have no ability to manoeuvre a vehicle within my site. Due to the steepness and angle of my driveway relative to the road, reversing from my driveway onto Nioka Road is extremely dangerous with limited visibility in either direction. As such, I must reverse into my driveway in order to exit in a forward direction. However, entering and exiting my site is becoming increasingly difficult due to increased traffic, which will undoubtedly increase at all times of the day due to both the additional density at ANZAC Village and also construction and trades vehicles over the many years that construction is intended to occur.

In addition to these matters, I also have more general concerns in relation to:
• Loss of habitat for wildlife as a direct impact of proposed clearing of established vegetation, with inadequate compensatory landscaping proposed.
• Loss of habitat for wildlife as an indirect impact of proposed construction (noise and vibration), disturbing areas of habitat on the site and in the adjacent reserves.
• Bushfire risk, noting that the site was subject to an evacuation order during the 1994 bushfires.
• Limited access to the site, particularly in emergencies.
• General degradation of the roadways arising from increased traffic movement, particularly heavy vehicles during construction. Nioka Road is already in a state of disrepair, which gets worse after every storm event.

Should you have any questions in relation to the concerns raised, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

I am writing to express my concern and strong opposition to Lifecare’s proposed Renewal Project for “Reimagining the Village’.

I am 72 years old and have lived in this Village since 2016. My Aunt and sister also moved into Anzac Village. I invested all of my savings to join this community in good faith with the expectations of stability, safety and a reasonable quality of life in my later years. I am currently managing a range of chronic health conditions and had intended to remain in place if my health declined and avoid the need for further relocation.

I came to this village with the expectation of being able to enjoy the remainder of my life peacefully in bushland surroundings and protected by residents’ rights afforded under the Retirement Villages Act and other relevant legislation.

I am now potentially facing up to 15 years of sustained construction activity in close proximity to my home. This raises serious concerns about my health and wellbeing, including prolonged exposure to noise, dust, vibration, restricted access, and the cumulative psychological stress of living in what will effectively be a long-term construction environment.

In addition, the redevelopment will result in the loss or disruption of current services and facilities, e.g. TLC and Pool, access to Lantana Avenue bus service, access to my lockup garage. The disruption of these services will directly affect my health and wellbeing and also my confidence, independence, accessibility, and sense of security.

Our current low-density Village will be replaced by a high-rise urban jungle. Our beautiful trees will be removed, including habitat for the many native animals who also live here. Replacing single storey buildings with 5 – 8 storey buildings in close proximity to elderly residents’ homes is cruel and unreasonable. Forcing them to relocate is the same as evicting them – also cruel and unreasonable at our advanced age.

Given the scale and duration of the proposed works, there is a serious question as to whether prolonged exposure to construction over many years constitutes an unreasonable interference with residents’ rights. This is of particular concern for all residents currently living in Anzac Village, who are both financially unable to relocate and physically less able to adapt to such disruption. I am deeply concerned that the current approach does not adequately safeguard the rights, dignity, and quality of life of existing residents.

There are many aspects of this Village in its current state that require attention from the Operator, such as aging infrastructure, substandard dwellings, insufficient care facilities, footpaths, and poor signage etc. These should be addressed before subjecting existing residents to an unwanted renewal project that few of us will live to see completed and derive any benefit from.

This renewal project must not be permitted to proceed as currently proposed and I urge you to note my concerns and opposition.

I am 75 years of age. I lived in Penrith for 63 years before moving to the Village, with the promise from Management that I would be looked after until the end. I moved here in 2016 just before Christmas. I sold my home in Penrith and was looking forward to a nice, peaceful life in the village. I was promised that when I was unable to care for myself I would be moved to the Dementia Ward and then if really unwell, to the Care Ward. With the redevelopment plans as such, this does not look like it will happen. I worked as a Practice Manager for 6 Surgical Specialists in Penrith, for 30 years, until my retirement.
I had great expectations of living out my life in peace and quite of the Village, which I was promised.
I am very stressed all the time now, (as are others in the Village), as I have been told my Unit, along with 6 neighbours, will be demolished in Stage II. I have not been told where they will re-allocate me when this happens.
The noise, dust and traffic flow of trucks in and out of the Village and getting around the Village, make things very stressful. Up to 15 trucks coming and going every day we have been told.
The effects of all this stress has impacted on my health, both physically and psychologically. I sometimes am awake until the early hours of the morning. I have had to revert to taking sleeping pills at night just to be able to fall asleep and function the next day. I have sought medical advice for this.
They are talking about building 5 to 8 storey buildings. This means the elderly will have to use lifts, which tend to break down more often than not. The expense of servicing them is also very high, which means this expense will be passed onto the elderly pensioners.
We were told the development will take up to 15 years to complete, all of this time in disruption to the current residents.
I have had a bilateral knee replacement and I can't do stairs. I need level ground access to and from my unit, which I have at the moment. This is a major concern to me.
Another factor of great importance is - a few years ago we all were told to evacuate the Village due to the fires coming up the gully behind us. If we have 8 storey builldings, what happens if the lifts go out and the disabled elderly people have trouble getting out!!
There is a lot of bush at the end of Lantana Avenue, which is a "No through road", so this is a major issue. As it is a dead end street leading to the bush, the issue of access to and from is a major problem for emergency services, police and fire vehicles. There is limited evacuation access, which endanges future residents and emergency services.

Also there is a lot of wild life in the Village - bush turkeys, possums, wallabies, bandicoots, rainbow lorikeets, parrots, and kookaburras. They won't survive the large scale works.
Neither will all the aged residents, who are all currently STRESSED.

Another issue - there are 2 schools along Veterans Parade, children coming and going all day long from school. Parents dropping off and picking up their children, parking will be a problem also. Trucks will need to constantly go past the schools, risking children's lives. There is also a shopping centre along the route the trucks will need to take.

Please consider the residents and support our objections to this major stressful development.

I think this will add way too much traffic during construction and after construction for this peaceful family and seniors area.
This will also have a big environmental impact for runoff and pollution in Narrabeen Lake. While measures will be taken to avoid this during and after construction, this will still have an environmental impact on this ecosystem for years to come.
This does not outweigh the advantages of making this village larger by no means. I think the village that is there now is more than adequate for the surrounding environment. There are many other places the RSL can build a new seniors village that isn't over a pristine environment like the Narrabeen Lake. This will also have a huge impact on the quiet and family friendly neighbourhood that many call home. Please reconsider and build this new village in a more suitable area. Thank you.