Ulrike Hamment
Object
Ulrike Hamment
Object
LANE COVE
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to the project as owner of 14/300B Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove for the following reasons:
1. The proposed height is not in line with the current allowance of building heights in this area
2. The proposed height will owershadow the 300B buildings who certainly in the lower appartments are fighting for light already
3. The access by car to this side of Burns Bay Road is challenging as is; adding more traffic will exacerbate the issue.
4. Public parking is already at capacity
5. Additional demand on public transport, open spaces, schools will impact the quality of life and the value of existing properties
1. The proposed height is not in line with the current allowance of building heights in this area
2. The proposed height will owershadow the 300B buildings who certainly in the lower appartments are fighting for light already
3. The access by car to this side of Burns Bay Road is challenging as is; adding more traffic will exacerbate the issue.
4. Public parking is already at capacity
5. Additional demand on public transport, open spaces, schools will impact the quality of life and the value of existing properties
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Surf Beach
,
New South Wales
Message
I write to formally object to the proposed redevelopment of the current SAS building site, as outlined in the submitted plans. While I acknowledge the need for thoughtful urban development, this proposal raises several significant concerns regarding its scale, impact on local infrastructure, environmental consequences, and overall compatibility with the existing character of the area.
The proposed increase in allowable building height from 21 metres to 51.5 metres, enabling construction of up to 15 storeys, represents a substantial and unjustified departure from the established built form of the neighbourhood. Such a structure would dominate the local skyline, overshadow surrounding properties, and result in a loss of visual amenity, including reduced access to natural light and diminished views for existing residents. This level of intensification is not congruent with the current low- to medium rise character of the area and sets an undesirable precedent for future overdevelopment.
The addition of 225 apartments, along with 225 parking spaces, will inevitably lead to a marked increase in local traffic volumes. The surrounding road network is not designed to accommodate such a significant uplift in density. Increased congestion will likely result in longer travel times, reduced road safety, and heightened risks for pedestrians and cyclists. Of particular concern is construction-phase traffic, which will introduce heavy vehicles, road obstructions, and noise, further compromising safety and accessibility for residents.
Although the proposal includes parking provisions, these are unlikely to fully meet demand, particularly given visitor parking and potential multi-vehicle households. Overflow parking will place additional strain on already limited on-street parking. Furthermore, there is no clear evidence that existing public transport infrastructure can adequately support the increased population density without substantial upgrades.
Both the construction phase and ongoing occupation will introduce elevated noise levels. Prolonged construction activity will significantly disrupt the daily lives of nearby residents, while increased population density will lead to ongoing ambient noise that is inconsistent with the current residential environment.
The proposal appears inconsistent with the existing availability and preservation of green space in the area. High-density development of this scale risks reducing urban greenery, increasing heat island effects, and placing additional pressure on local parks and recreational spaces. The lack of meaningful integration of green infrastructure is a significant shortcoming.
The development raises serious concerns regarding its potential impact on the nearby foreshore and waterways. Increased population density and construction activity may contribute to stormwater runoff, pollution, and degradation of sensitive aquatic environments. These impacts must be carefully assessed and mitigated, yet the current proposal does not provide sufficient reassurance that such environmental risks have been adequately addressed.
Rezoning to permit such a dramatic increase in building height risks setting a precedent for similar developments in the area. This could fundamentally alter the character of the neighbourhood over time, undermining planning controls designed to preserve amenity, environmental quality, and community identity.
In its current form, the proposed development is excessive in scale, inadequately supported by infrastructure, and likely to have significant adverse impacts on traffic, safety, environmental quality, and residential amenity. It is not consistent with the character or capacity of the surrounding area.
I respectfully request that Lane Cove Council refuse this application or require substantial modification to ensure compliance with the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2009, and to better reflect community expectations and local character.
The proposed increase in allowable building height from 21 metres to 51.5 metres, enabling construction of up to 15 storeys, represents a substantial and unjustified departure from the established built form of the neighbourhood. Such a structure would dominate the local skyline, overshadow surrounding properties, and result in a loss of visual amenity, including reduced access to natural light and diminished views for existing residents. This level of intensification is not congruent with the current low- to medium rise character of the area and sets an undesirable precedent for future overdevelopment.
The addition of 225 apartments, along with 225 parking spaces, will inevitably lead to a marked increase in local traffic volumes. The surrounding road network is not designed to accommodate such a significant uplift in density. Increased congestion will likely result in longer travel times, reduced road safety, and heightened risks for pedestrians and cyclists. Of particular concern is construction-phase traffic, which will introduce heavy vehicles, road obstructions, and noise, further compromising safety and accessibility for residents.
Although the proposal includes parking provisions, these are unlikely to fully meet demand, particularly given visitor parking and potential multi-vehicle households. Overflow parking will place additional strain on already limited on-street parking. Furthermore, there is no clear evidence that existing public transport infrastructure can adequately support the increased population density without substantial upgrades.
Both the construction phase and ongoing occupation will introduce elevated noise levels. Prolonged construction activity will significantly disrupt the daily lives of nearby residents, while increased population density will lead to ongoing ambient noise that is inconsistent with the current residential environment.
The proposal appears inconsistent with the existing availability and preservation of green space in the area. High-density development of this scale risks reducing urban greenery, increasing heat island effects, and placing additional pressure on local parks and recreational spaces. The lack of meaningful integration of green infrastructure is a significant shortcoming.
The development raises serious concerns regarding its potential impact on the nearby foreshore and waterways. Increased population density and construction activity may contribute to stormwater runoff, pollution, and degradation of sensitive aquatic environments. These impacts must be carefully assessed and mitigated, yet the current proposal does not provide sufficient reassurance that such environmental risks have been adequately addressed.
Rezoning to permit such a dramatic increase in building height risks setting a precedent for similar developments in the area. This could fundamentally alter the character of the neighbourhood over time, undermining planning controls designed to preserve amenity, environmental quality, and community identity.
In its current form, the proposed development is excessive in scale, inadequately supported by infrastructure, and likely to have significant adverse impacts on traffic, safety, environmental quality, and residential amenity. It is not consistent with the character or capacity of the surrounding area.
I respectfully request that Lane Cove Council refuse this application or require substantial modification to ensure compliance with the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2009, and to better reflect community expectations and local character.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Lane Cove
,
New South Wales
Message
Here’s a polished, formal submission you can use for a government planning board. I’ve written it in a tone that fits typical planning objections: clear, evidence‑based, and firm without being antagonistic. You can adjust the level of detail depending on the specific council or authority.
---
Submission Objecting to Proposed Development Application
To the Members of the Planning Board,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development currently under consideration for 300 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove NSW 2066.
While I support thoughtful growth in our community and welcome the inclusion of affordable housing within new developments, I have significant concerns about the scale and form of this particular proposal.
1. Excessive Building Height and Inappropriate Density
The proposed high‑rise residential towers are out of character with the existing built environment. The surrounding area is predominantly low‑rise, and the introduction of high‑rise structures would fundamentally alter the neighbourhood’s visual identity, overshadow existing homes, and create a sense of overdevelopment.
A low‑rise alternative—one that delivers housing without dramatically exceeding the prevailing height profile—would be far more appropriate and better aligned with the community’s expectations. I am not opposed to additional housing, including affordable housing, but the number of residences proposed is excessive for the site and should be reduced by at least half to ensure a more balanced and sustainable outcome.
2. Insufficient Local Infrastructure to Support Population Increase
The scale of the development raises serious concerns about the capacity of existing infrastructure. The locality is already experiencing strain in several key areas:
• Transport: Public transport services are limited, and road congestion is already significant during peak periods. A high‑rise development of this size would exacerbate these issues.
• Schools and childcare: Local educational facilities are at or near capacity, with long waiting lists in some cases.
• Healthcare and community services: There is no clear plan for how local medical, recreational, and community services will accommodate a substantial influx of new residents.
• Utilities: Water, sewage, and waste management systems have not been demonstrated to be capable of supporting the proposed density.
Without a comprehensive and credible infrastructure plan, the development risks placing an unsustainable burden on the community.
3. Support for Affordable Housing—But Not at This Scale or Height
I wish to emphasise that I support the inclusion of affordable housing in new developments. However, this objective should not be used to justify inappropriate building height or excessive density. A more modest, low‑rise development with a reduced number of dwellings would still deliver meaningful affordable housing outcomes while maintaining the character and liveability of the area.
---
Conclusion
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the planning board reject the proposal in its current form. I urge the board to require a revised design that is low‑rise, significantly reduced in scale, and supported by a clear and realistic infrastructure strategy.
Thank you for considering my submission.
---
Submission Objecting to Proposed Development Application
To the Members of the Planning Board,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development currently under consideration for 300 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove NSW 2066.
While I support thoughtful growth in our community and welcome the inclusion of affordable housing within new developments, I have significant concerns about the scale and form of this particular proposal.
1. Excessive Building Height and Inappropriate Density
The proposed high‑rise residential towers are out of character with the existing built environment. The surrounding area is predominantly low‑rise, and the introduction of high‑rise structures would fundamentally alter the neighbourhood’s visual identity, overshadow existing homes, and create a sense of overdevelopment.
A low‑rise alternative—one that delivers housing without dramatically exceeding the prevailing height profile—would be far more appropriate and better aligned with the community’s expectations. I am not opposed to additional housing, including affordable housing, but the number of residences proposed is excessive for the site and should be reduced by at least half to ensure a more balanced and sustainable outcome.
2. Insufficient Local Infrastructure to Support Population Increase
The scale of the development raises serious concerns about the capacity of existing infrastructure. The locality is already experiencing strain in several key areas:
• Transport: Public transport services are limited, and road congestion is already significant during peak periods. A high‑rise development of this size would exacerbate these issues.
• Schools and childcare: Local educational facilities are at or near capacity, with long waiting lists in some cases.
• Healthcare and community services: There is no clear plan for how local medical, recreational, and community services will accommodate a substantial influx of new residents.
• Utilities: Water, sewage, and waste management systems have not been demonstrated to be capable of supporting the proposed density.
Without a comprehensive and credible infrastructure plan, the development risks placing an unsustainable burden on the community.
3. Support for Affordable Housing—But Not at This Scale or Height
I wish to emphasise that I support the inclusion of affordable housing in new developments. However, this objective should not be used to justify inappropriate building height or excessive density. A more modest, low‑rise development with a reduced number of dwellings would still deliver meaningful affordable housing outcomes while maintaining the character and liveability of the area.
---
Conclusion
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the planning board reject the proposal in its current form. I urge the board to require a revised design that is low‑rise, significantly reduced in scale, and supported by a clear and realistic infrastructure strategy.
Thank you for considering my submission.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Lane Cove
,
New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir/Madam,, Having reviewed the available documentation, including the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) and supporting materials, I submit that the proposal, in its current form, does not adequately demonstrate compliance with key State Significant Development (SSD) assessment criteria, particularly in relation to built form, infrastructure capacity, and the broader public interest. Please find the details of my objection in the document attached.
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Lane Cove
,
New South Wales
Message
ISSUE 1 – TRANSPORT
The local bus routes around 300 Burns Bay Road only service Chatswood, North Sydney, Burwood and Gladesville. This is not sufficient for the diverse places of work of residents in the area as listed in the developers plans. Furthermore, these bus routes do not provide high frequency public transport at regular 10-15 minute intervals throughout the day. This is only provided in peak periods, which leaves shift workers, casual workers and young families using public transport during a cost of living crisis at the expense of unreliable transport options. The alternative is that people will continue to drive cars instead (despite the cost of living), having a greater impact on traffic, which has already been underestimated by the developer.
ISSUE 2 – TRAFFIC
Traffic along Burns Bay Road is already near capacity during peak periods, creating delays to the school and work commute on a daily basis. While the TIA stated the existing road network has “ample spare capacity”, this is based on limited modelling that does not reflect actual real-world delays. Further modelling needs to be done to properly understand the impact of this large-scale development.
A large-scale development like this also places implications on pedestrian safety. With the number of apartment buildings around 300 Burns Bay Road, pedestrian safety has not been prioritised. There are no safety islands or pedestrian crossings. Burns Bay Road down to Burns Bay Road Reserve and waterfront has no foot path at all. Families with prams and dogs have only one option but to walk on the road. Families attending the Montessori Day Care Centre at 2 Waterview Drive must navigate an unsafe and congested round-about at drop off and pick up times, which correspond with the AM and PM traffic peaks. Speeding is already a common issue for residents throughout the Burns Bay Road/Waterview Drive precinct.
ISSUE 3 – PARKING
The 223 parking spaces for residents across 225 apartments does not reflect the real world number of cars per apartment. Families often have more than one vehicle. Rental properties of 2+ bedrooms are also highly likely to have more than one car per apartment. The developers plans have not included sufficient resident parking. 14 visitor parking spots is also not enough for 225 apartments. This will ultimately lead to people parking cars illegal along the street in no stopping/no parking zones. This already occurs on a regular basis within the Waterview Drive precinct, which impacts on traffic flow and pedestrian safety.
ISSUE 4 – BUILDING HEIGHT
The building height is excessive and unreasonable for the surrounding area. It is more than double the height of current limits. This will impact on people’s privacy, impact local flora and fauna in a bushland setting and have negative environmental impacts with high density living. The increased height will impact on neighbouring apartments, significantly devaluing them. Allowing buildings of this height will set a precedent for further development in an area that already can’t cope without significant infrastructure change.
ISSUE 5 – OTHER LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE
The most local shopping area with supermarkets is located at Lane Cove with a Coles, Woolworths, Aldi and Harris Farm Market. Despite multiple car parks around these shops, these are at capacity on weekends and near capacity during weekdays. Without another “town centre” in Lane Cove, the additional large scale development will add further stress to shops and roads around Lane Cove. Plans to develop Lane Cove West would give many residents around the Burns Bay Road/Waterview Drive precinct and Lane Cove West the opportunity to shop more locally. This would relieve pressure on major roads all around Lane Cove.
The local bus routes around 300 Burns Bay Road only service Chatswood, North Sydney, Burwood and Gladesville. This is not sufficient for the diverse places of work of residents in the area as listed in the developers plans. Furthermore, these bus routes do not provide high frequency public transport at regular 10-15 minute intervals throughout the day. This is only provided in peak periods, which leaves shift workers, casual workers and young families using public transport during a cost of living crisis at the expense of unreliable transport options. The alternative is that people will continue to drive cars instead (despite the cost of living), having a greater impact on traffic, which has already been underestimated by the developer.
ISSUE 2 – TRAFFIC
Traffic along Burns Bay Road is already near capacity during peak periods, creating delays to the school and work commute on a daily basis. While the TIA stated the existing road network has “ample spare capacity”, this is based on limited modelling that does not reflect actual real-world delays. Further modelling needs to be done to properly understand the impact of this large-scale development.
A large-scale development like this also places implications on pedestrian safety. With the number of apartment buildings around 300 Burns Bay Road, pedestrian safety has not been prioritised. There are no safety islands or pedestrian crossings. Burns Bay Road down to Burns Bay Road Reserve and waterfront has no foot path at all. Families with prams and dogs have only one option but to walk on the road. Families attending the Montessori Day Care Centre at 2 Waterview Drive must navigate an unsafe and congested round-about at drop off and pick up times, which correspond with the AM and PM traffic peaks. Speeding is already a common issue for residents throughout the Burns Bay Road/Waterview Drive precinct.
ISSUE 3 – PARKING
The 223 parking spaces for residents across 225 apartments does not reflect the real world number of cars per apartment. Families often have more than one vehicle. Rental properties of 2+ bedrooms are also highly likely to have more than one car per apartment. The developers plans have not included sufficient resident parking. 14 visitor parking spots is also not enough for 225 apartments. This will ultimately lead to people parking cars illegal along the street in no stopping/no parking zones. This already occurs on a regular basis within the Waterview Drive precinct, which impacts on traffic flow and pedestrian safety.
ISSUE 4 – BUILDING HEIGHT
The building height is excessive and unreasonable for the surrounding area. It is more than double the height of current limits. This will impact on people’s privacy, impact local flora and fauna in a bushland setting and have negative environmental impacts with high density living. The increased height will impact on neighbouring apartments, significantly devaluing them. Allowing buildings of this height will set a precedent for further development in an area that already can’t cope without significant infrastructure change.
ISSUE 5 – OTHER LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE
The most local shopping area with supermarkets is located at Lane Cove with a Coles, Woolworths, Aldi and Harris Farm Market. Despite multiple car parks around these shops, these are at capacity on weekends and near capacity during weekdays. Without another “town centre” in Lane Cove, the additional large scale development will add further stress to shops and roads around Lane Cove. Plans to develop Lane Cove West would give many residents around the Burns Bay Road/Waterview Drive precinct and Lane Cove West the opportunity to shop more locally. This would relieve pressure on major roads all around Lane Cove.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
HUNTERS HILL
,
New South Wales
Message
Objection to Development Proposal
Height & Scale
The proposed building height significantly exceeds the established 6–7 storey character of the precinct. Such a tall structure disrupts the visual harmony and scale typical of our neighbourhood, leading to an overwhelming presence that feels out of place.
State Significant Development Pathway
Earlier lower-scale proposals were not supported by the local community, yet the current 15-storey scheme is now being pursued through a State planning pathway. This process bypasses typical local Council controls and allows a considerably larger development outcome than what the area can reasonably accommodate.
Density
The planned number of dwellings constitutes a substantial increase for a site of this size. This density does not appear compatible with the infrastructure and community capacity of the surrounding area, which may lead to overcrowding and strain on local amenities.
Setbacks & Building Footprint
The development extends close to the site boundaries, reducing the usual separation between buildings. This limits opportunities for landscaping and green spaces, which are vital for environmental quality and residents' well-being.
Privacy, Light & Views
Residents are likely to experience reduced sunlight in their homes, increased overlooking from the new building, and loss of established views, all of which contribute to a diminished quality of life.
Traffic & Parking
The addition of numerous dwellings and parking spaces will place further pressure on already congested roads. On-street parking is limited, and increased traffic volumes will negatively impact safety and amenity for current residents.
Infrastructure
Existing public transport services and essential community infrastructure are already operating near capacity. Without significant upgrades, the proposed population increase will exacerbate service strain and reduce accessibility.
Construction Impacts
An extended construction period involving noise, dust, and heavy vehicle movements will have a detrimental effect on the daily life of residents, including those working from home, families with young children, and elderly neighbours.
Environment
The development threatens to reduce tree canopy, green spaces, and may impact local waterways. These environmental features are important for biodiversity, temperature regulation, and community enjoyment.
Character of the Area
The scale and design of this proposal will permanently alter the character and amenity of the precinct, undermining the qualities that make it a desirable place to live.
As an owner of an apartment in this community, I am deeply concerned about how this development will affect my daily life and the neighbourhood I cherish. The disproportionate height and density will overshadow my apartment, blocking natural light and disrupting the peaceful environment I have enjoyed for years. Increased traffic and limited parking already cause daily frustration, and this development will only worsen the situation, making it harder to visit friends, access public transport, and safely walk in the area. The loss of green space and trees will diminish the beauty and livability of our streets, and the long construction period will bring constant noise and disruption to my family’s routine. I urge decision-makers to consider the real impact on residents like me and uphold the character and wellbeing of our community.
Height & Scale
The proposed building height significantly exceeds the established 6–7 storey character of the precinct. Such a tall structure disrupts the visual harmony and scale typical of our neighbourhood, leading to an overwhelming presence that feels out of place.
State Significant Development Pathway
Earlier lower-scale proposals were not supported by the local community, yet the current 15-storey scheme is now being pursued through a State planning pathway. This process bypasses typical local Council controls and allows a considerably larger development outcome than what the area can reasonably accommodate.
Density
The planned number of dwellings constitutes a substantial increase for a site of this size. This density does not appear compatible with the infrastructure and community capacity of the surrounding area, which may lead to overcrowding and strain on local amenities.
Setbacks & Building Footprint
The development extends close to the site boundaries, reducing the usual separation between buildings. This limits opportunities for landscaping and green spaces, which are vital for environmental quality and residents' well-being.
Privacy, Light & Views
Residents are likely to experience reduced sunlight in their homes, increased overlooking from the new building, and loss of established views, all of which contribute to a diminished quality of life.
Traffic & Parking
The addition of numerous dwellings and parking spaces will place further pressure on already congested roads. On-street parking is limited, and increased traffic volumes will negatively impact safety and amenity for current residents.
Infrastructure
Existing public transport services and essential community infrastructure are already operating near capacity. Without significant upgrades, the proposed population increase will exacerbate service strain and reduce accessibility.
Construction Impacts
An extended construction period involving noise, dust, and heavy vehicle movements will have a detrimental effect on the daily life of residents, including those working from home, families with young children, and elderly neighbours.
Environment
The development threatens to reduce tree canopy, green spaces, and may impact local waterways. These environmental features are important for biodiversity, temperature regulation, and community enjoyment.
Character of the Area
The scale and design of this proposal will permanently alter the character and amenity of the precinct, undermining the qualities that make it a desirable place to live.
As an owner of an apartment in this community, I am deeply concerned about how this development will affect my daily life and the neighbourhood I cherish. The disproportionate height and density will overshadow my apartment, blocking natural light and disrupting the peaceful environment I have enjoyed for years. Increased traffic and limited parking already cause daily frustration, and this development will only worsen the situation, making it harder to visit friends, access public transport, and safely walk in the area. The loss of green space and trees will diminish the beauty and livability of our streets, and the long construction period will bring constant noise and disruption to my family’s routine. I urge decision-makers to consider the real impact on residents like me and uphold the character and wellbeing of our community.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Lane Cove
,
New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally lodge my objection to the proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road. As a resident of 300B Burns Bay Road, my home is directly adjacent to the site, and I am deeply concerned about how this project will impact my property and the surrounding community.
While I understand the need for new housing in NSW, the scale of this specific proposal is far too large for this location. My objection is based on the following key issues:
1. Severe Loss of Sunlight and Amenity
My unit is on a lower level of a building recessed into the hillside. Because the ground level of the proposed site is much higher than my own, even the "shortest" 11-level building would effectively be as tall as a 17 or 18-level building from my perspective.
- Overshadowing: This project would completely block the limited winter sun my unit currently receives. Sunlight is a finite and vital resource for my property; the current proposal would essentially put my home in a permanent shadow, stripping away the few hours of natural warmth and afternoon light we rely on.
- Health and Quality of Life: A total loss of natural light will lead to significant dampness and mould issues, which are already a risk for units recessed into the hill. It will also mean a drastic increase in heating costs and a lower quality of life for my household. Even our cats would lose their favourite pastime of enjoying the sun for the short window it shines into our unit.
2. Excessive Scale and Height
We were originally led to believe this development would be around 7 to 8 levels, which would have been much more tolerable. Jumping to 11-15 levels is a massive change that will dominate the skyline and block water views for properties further up the hill. The sheer bulk of the building is simply out of character with the existing streetscape and the natural slope of the land.
3. Impact on the Local Area
I am also concerned that a project of this scale will negatively affect property values across the area by removing key features like sunlight and bay views. Furthermore, the local infrastructure and traffic on Burns Bay Road cannot easily accommodate such a massive increase in residents.
I ask the Council to please consider a much smaller-scale project that respects the topography of the site. The current plans will have a huge negative impact on the hundreds of residents who already live in the immediate surroundings.
Kind Regards,
Balazs Meszaros
I am writing to formally lodge my objection to the proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road. As a resident of 300B Burns Bay Road, my home is directly adjacent to the site, and I am deeply concerned about how this project will impact my property and the surrounding community.
While I understand the need for new housing in NSW, the scale of this specific proposal is far too large for this location. My objection is based on the following key issues:
1. Severe Loss of Sunlight and Amenity
My unit is on a lower level of a building recessed into the hillside. Because the ground level of the proposed site is much higher than my own, even the "shortest" 11-level building would effectively be as tall as a 17 or 18-level building from my perspective.
- Overshadowing: This project would completely block the limited winter sun my unit currently receives. Sunlight is a finite and vital resource for my property; the current proposal would essentially put my home in a permanent shadow, stripping away the few hours of natural warmth and afternoon light we rely on.
- Health and Quality of Life: A total loss of natural light will lead to significant dampness and mould issues, which are already a risk for units recessed into the hill. It will also mean a drastic increase in heating costs and a lower quality of life for my household. Even our cats would lose their favourite pastime of enjoying the sun for the short window it shines into our unit.
2. Excessive Scale and Height
We were originally led to believe this development would be around 7 to 8 levels, which would have been much more tolerable. Jumping to 11-15 levels is a massive change that will dominate the skyline and block water views for properties further up the hill. The sheer bulk of the building is simply out of character with the existing streetscape and the natural slope of the land.
3. Impact on the Local Area
I am also concerned that a project of this scale will negatively affect property values across the area by removing key features like sunlight and bay views. Furthermore, the local infrastructure and traffic on Burns Bay Road cannot easily accommodate such a massive increase in residents.
I ask the Council to please consider a much smaller-scale project that respects the topography of the site. The current plans will have a huge negative impact on the hundreds of residents who already live in the immediate surroundings.
Kind Regards,
Balazs Meszaros
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
LANE COVE
,
New South Wales
Message
To: The Assessing Officer
NSW Planning Portal – SSD-87925706
Date: 16/04/2026
Subject: Objection to proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove
We are the residents of Emerant Lane, 288 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove. We purchased our apartment off the plan in 2012 and moved in October 2013. We have poured our life savings into this home with a long term view to retire here. Emerant Lane is our dream home—its thoughtful floor plan, proximity to Lane Cove village, and the surrounding bushland and river have made it a place we deeply cherish.
We have lived in Lane Cove for a total of 24 years. Although we moved away in the early 2000s, we chose to return after a decade because of our strong connection to this suburb. When we came back, Emerant Lane was the development we fell in love with. It has allowed us to enjoy the best of Lane Cove: local parks, the river, shops, the Aquatic Centre, gyms, restaurants and the library—all within easy reach.
We strongly object to the proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road for the following reasons.
1. Excessive height and loss of local character
The existing precinct currently accommodates approximately 857 residential units, two thirds of which have been built since 2012. All these buildings comply with Lane Cove Council’s building and zoning controls, including a height limit of 21 metres (around 6–7 storeys).
In stark contrast, the proposal for 300 Burns Bay Road includes 14 storey buildings with a height of approximately 51.5 metres and more than 220 apartments. This represents a drastic and inconsistent departure from the established planning controls and built form in the area.
Such a significant increase in height and bulk will:
• Disrupt the established character of the precinct, which is currently defined by mid rise buildings integrated with open space and bushland.
• Permanently alter the leafy outlook that is a defining feature of this part of Lane Cove.
• Set a precedent for further over development that undermines the intent of existing height and zoning controls.
We chose this area, and invested our life savings here, on the understanding that the Council’s planning controls would be respected and that future development would be consistent with the existing built form.
2. Traffic, parking and road network constraints
The proposed development includes around 300 car spaces. Given the existing road layout and constraints at this end of Burns Bay Road, this scale of additional traffic and parking demand is deeply concerning.
Our concerns include:
• Increased congestion on Burns Bay Road and surrounding streets, particularly during peak hours.
• Overflow street parking, as visitors and potentially residents seek additional parking on already pressured local streets.
• Safety risks for pedestrians, cyclists and existing residents due to higher traffic volumes and more vehicle movements in and out of the site.
The current road network was not designed to support such a large additional development. Without substantial and clearly demonstrated upgrades and traffic management measures, the proposal will significantly worsen local traffic and parking conditions.
3. Bushfire and emergency access concerns
This end of Burns Bay Road is part of a Lane Cove bushfire prone area. Introducing a development of this scale raises serious questions about bushfire safety and emergency response.
We are particularly concerned about:
• Adequacy of bushfire planning for a high density, 14 storey development in this location.
• Emergency vehicle access, including whether multiple fire trucks can safely and efficiently manoeuvre around the new development in an emergency.
• Evacuation procedures for a large number of residents in the event of a bushfire or building fire, given the constrained road network.
Before any such development could reasonably be considered, there must be clear, detailed and independently reviewed plans demonstrating that bushfire risk, building fire safety and emergency access have been fully addressed and can be managed to an acceptable standard.
4. Cumulative impact on existing community
Since 2012, this precinct has already absorbed substantial residential growth, with two thirds of the current 857 units built in that time. Residents have accepted this growth on the basis that it complied with Council’s planning framework and maintained a balance between density, amenity and the natural environment.
This proposal goes far beyond that balance. The cumulative impact of:
• Excessive height and bulk
• Additional traffic and parking pressure
• Increased bushfire and emergency management complexity
would significantly erode the amenity, safety and character that make this part of Lane Cove so special.
Conclusion
We respectfully request that Council refuse the proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road in its current form. It is inconsistent with existing planning controls, out of scale with the surrounding precinct, and raises serious concerns about traffic, parking, bushfire risk and emergency access.
We ask that any future development on this site:
• Align with the established 21 metre height limit and surrounding built form;
• Demonstrate that traffic, parking and road safety impacts can be properly managed; and
• Provide robust, transparent bushfire and emergency access planning appropriate to this location.
Thank you for considering our submission. We would welcome the opportunity to provide further information or speak at any relevant meeting or hearing.
NSW Planning Portal – SSD-87925706
Date: 16/04/2026
Subject: Objection to proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove
We are the residents of Emerant Lane, 288 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove. We purchased our apartment off the plan in 2012 and moved in October 2013. We have poured our life savings into this home with a long term view to retire here. Emerant Lane is our dream home—its thoughtful floor plan, proximity to Lane Cove village, and the surrounding bushland and river have made it a place we deeply cherish.
We have lived in Lane Cove for a total of 24 years. Although we moved away in the early 2000s, we chose to return after a decade because of our strong connection to this suburb. When we came back, Emerant Lane was the development we fell in love with. It has allowed us to enjoy the best of Lane Cove: local parks, the river, shops, the Aquatic Centre, gyms, restaurants and the library—all within easy reach.
We strongly object to the proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road for the following reasons.
1. Excessive height and loss of local character
The existing precinct currently accommodates approximately 857 residential units, two thirds of which have been built since 2012. All these buildings comply with Lane Cove Council’s building and zoning controls, including a height limit of 21 metres (around 6–7 storeys).
In stark contrast, the proposal for 300 Burns Bay Road includes 14 storey buildings with a height of approximately 51.5 metres and more than 220 apartments. This represents a drastic and inconsistent departure from the established planning controls and built form in the area.
Such a significant increase in height and bulk will:
• Disrupt the established character of the precinct, which is currently defined by mid rise buildings integrated with open space and bushland.
• Permanently alter the leafy outlook that is a defining feature of this part of Lane Cove.
• Set a precedent for further over development that undermines the intent of existing height and zoning controls.
We chose this area, and invested our life savings here, on the understanding that the Council’s planning controls would be respected and that future development would be consistent with the existing built form.
2. Traffic, parking and road network constraints
The proposed development includes around 300 car spaces. Given the existing road layout and constraints at this end of Burns Bay Road, this scale of additional traffic and parking demand is deeply concerning.
Our concerns include:
• Increased congestion on Burns Bay Road and surrounding streets, particularly during peak hours.
• Overflow street parking, as visitors and potentially residents seek additional parking on already pressured local streets.
• Safety risks for pedestrians, cyclists and existing residents due to higher traffic volumes and more vehicle movements in and out of the site.
The current road network was not designed to support such a large additional development. Without substantial and clearly demonstrated upgrades and traffic management measures, the proposal will significantly worsen local traffic and parking conditions.
3. Bushfire and emergency access concerns
This end of Burns Bay Road is part of a Lane Cove bushfire prone area. Introducing a development of this scale raises serious questions about bushfire safety and emergency response.
We are particularly concerned about:
• Adequacy of bushfire planning for a high density, 14 storey development in this location.
• Emergency vehicle access, including whether multiple fire trucks can safely and efficiently manoeuvre around the new development in an emergency.
• Evacuation procedures for a large number of residents in the event of a bushfire or building fire, given the constrained road network.
Before any such development could reasonably be considered, there must be clear, detailed and independently reviewed plans demonstrating that bushfire risk, building fire safety and emergency access have been fully addressed and can be managed to an acceptable standard.
4. Cumulative impact on existing community
Since 2012, this precinct has already absorbed substantial residential growth, with two thirds of the current 857 units built in that time. Residents have accepted this growth on the basis that it complied with Council’s planning framework and maintained a balance between density, amenity and the natural environment.
This proposal goes far beyond that balance. The cumulative impact of:
• Excessive height and bulk
• Additional traffic and parking pressure
• Increased bushfire and emergency management complexity
would significantly erode the amenity, safety and character that make this part of Lane Cove so special.
Conclusion
We respectfully request that Council refuse the proposed development at 300 Burns Bay Road in its current form. It is inconsistent with existing planning controls, out of scale with the surrounding precinct, and raises serious concerns about traffic, parking, bushfire risk and emergency access.
We ask that any future development on this site:
• Align with the established 21 metre height limit and surrounding built form;
• Demonstrate that traffic, parking and road safety impacts can be properly managed; and
• Provide robust, transparent bushfire and emergency access planning appropriate to this location.
Thank you for considering our submission. We would welcome the opportunity to provide further information or speak at any relevant meeting or hearing.