This proposal has caused a great deal of stress and anxiety for my family. What was meant to be a peaceful transition into a new home on a quiet, leafy street has now turned into weeks of worry and sleepless nights since we found out about the proposal. Stanhope Road is a beautiful, character-filled street and developments like this threaten to permanently change the nature of the area.

We are extremely concerned about the overshadowing and the loss of privacy that this development would bring. The proposal’s excessive height and scale would impose directly on neighbouring properties, blocking light and overlooking private open spaces. That kind of intrusion is simply unacceptable, especially in a residential area like this.

Living here was meant to provide our family ,including elderly relatives with a sense of calm and comfort. This development undermines that entirely.

Surely someone with common sense and genuine regard for community interest would not approve such a plan.

Hello,

I am writing to object to SSD-81890707, as I have concerns relating to its ecological and heritage impacts.
Firstly, the proposed development will result in the removal or disturbance of significant vegetation, including Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine-Ironbark Forest — both of which are classified as endangered and contains biodiversity significance. These native species are ecologically critical, not only for their rarity but for the habitat they provide to local fauna. The survival of these trees through excavation and construction is highly unlikely. Deep excavation for basement levels and site regrading typically results in root loss, soil compaction, and changes to hydrology — all of which are incompatible with the long-term survival of mature native canopy trees. Losing these trees would be a permanent damage to local biodiversity and contradicts the principles of ecologically sustainable development.
Secondly, I wish to highlight the heritage value of No. 14 Stanhope Road. While the property has undergone some rear alterations, its street-facing façade remains largely intact and consistent with its original early 20th-century architectural form. Many of the key features — including the roofline, materials, and decorative details — appear period-correct and contribute to the character of Stanhope Road as a whole. As such, the building has representative value as a surviving example of its era and context, and should not be dismissed merely because of non-visible changes at the rear.
In light of these concerns, I consider that it is inappropriate for the state to approve such development at the cost of heritage and ecological damage.

Resident in north shore.

I am over 90 years old and although I now live in a nursing home, Stanhope Road is still very special to me. I’ve always loved the leafy, peaceful nature of the street, it has a character that’s hard to find these days. I often visit and still enjoy gardening there as part of my daily exercise. It keeps me active and connected to the place I’ve called home for many years.

The idea of such a large construction project on this quiet street is deeply upsetting. The noise, dust, and disruption will make it difficult for me to continue gardening when I visit. More importantly, I fear that the peaceful charm of the area will be permanently lost.

Please consider the impact this development will have on elderly residents like me, and on the quiet, natural beauty of Stanhope Road that so many of us value.

I am an elderly resident, and my family plans to care for me in our home at Stanhope Road so I can enjoy a peaceful retirement surrounded by nature and the familiar character of our neighbourhood. However, this proposed development has caused me great distress.

The scale, noise, and disruption from such a large project would take away the quiet enjoyment of my home in my later years. The street has always been a calm and beautiful place, with heritage homes and trees that make it special. And I worry that will be lost.
This is not just about a building — it is about protecting the quality of life for people like me who have called this place home. I ask that you please consider the human impact of this development and reject the application in its current form.

I forgot to attach my submission a few seconds ago.

I hope I get it right now.

Please see attached.

Hi council,
I am writing to you today not just as a resident, but as a deeply concerned long-standing member of the family who calls 12 Stanhope Road, Killara, home. It is with considerable alarm and outright dismay that we object in the strongest possible terms to the proposed 10-storey apartment development in such close proximity to my relatives property.

This isn't just a house; it's a heritage building, a significant part of Killara's historical fabric. Its architectural integrity and historical value are undeniable. To allow a towering, modern apartment block to overshadow a property of such cultural significance is not only architecturally incongruous but also a gross dereliction of the Council's duty to preserve our local heritage. Such a development would irrevocably diminish the character and setting of a building that should be protected, not dwarfed into insignificance.

Furthermore, let's talk about privacy – or the complete lack thereof that this development would inflict upon us. Our home, like many in Killara, was designed with a certain expectation of space and seclusion. We have a private backyard, complete with a tennis court and swimming pool – amenities that are fundamental to our family's enjoyment of our home and our quality of life. The notion of a 10-storey apartment building peering directly into our private recreational spaces is utterly unacceptable. It's an egregious invasion of privacy that would render our backyard unusable and transform our cherished home into a fishbowl for hundreds of new residents. This is not just an inconvenience; it is a profound infringement on our right to enjoy our own property in peace.

Finally, and perhaps most immediately impactful for the entire neighborhood, are the traffic concerns. Stanhope Road is, to put it mildly, a narrow street. It was never designed to accommodate the sheer volume of vehicles that a 10-storey apartment complex housing a staggering 192 car spaces would generate. The idea of nearly 200 additional cars trying to navigate our already constrained local roads is frankly terrifying. We foresee immediate and severe traffic congestion, increased noise pollution, significant safety risks for pedestrians and cyclists, and a drastic reduction in the quality of life for every single resident on Stanhope Road and surrounding streets. The existing infrastructure simply cannot cope, and the thought of perpetual gridlock in our quiet, residential area is an absolute nightmare.

In conclusion, this proposed development poses an unacceptable threat to our heritage, our privacy, and the fundamental liveability of our community. We urge you, to consider the profound and negative ramifications of this project and to reject the development application. Please prioritize the preservation of Killara's unique character and the well-being of its long-standing residents over the interests of developers.

Thank you for your time and serious consideration of these critical issues.

Sincerely,

I object to SSD-81890707 — the proposed residential flat buildings at 10, 14, and 14a Stanhope Road, Killara.
What concerns me most about this proposal is how it exploits the state’s TOD policy not to deliver good planning outcomes, but to justify excessive density and poor design in an established heritage conservation area. It does so while ignoring the joint efforts of Ku-ring-gai Council and the State Government to develop a more sensible and balanced alternative TOD plan , one that better accommodates local character, community feedback, and environmental constraints.
The council’s Preferred Scenario has been publicly exhibited and is widely supported. It aims to deliver housing in a way that respects built heritage and local context. Yet the EIS for this SSD proposal makes no mention of this plan. It’s hard not to view that silence as a deliberate attempt to avoid compliance with more appropriate planning standards — particularly the lower FSR and a more sensible urban design controls. Instead, the developer appears to be using the minimum provision of affordable housing as a parachute to land overdevelopment into Killara, prioritising financial gain over thoughtful design outcomes.
The impact on the heritage value of Stanhope Road is particularly distressing. The adjacent property at No. 12 is a listed heritage item, yet the Heritage Impact Statement fails to offer any real analysis of how its setting and amenity will be degraded. Nor did the HIS adequately assess the dwelling’s (No. 12) contribution to the broader Heritage Conservation Area.
This kind of development does not reflect the collective benefit of our community or competent planning. I urge you to reject SSD-81890707 and support a vision for Killara that balances growth with character, heritage, and genuine public interest.

Submission attached