Please see my submission attached below.

The proposed development is fundamentally inconsistent with the established character of the surrounding locality. The area is defined by low-density housing, modest building heights, and a cohesive streetscape that reflects a stable and well-considered planning framework. The introduction of this development represents a significant departure from this character and is an example of loopholes being exploited in government policy to the benefit of the developers and vendors of the existing properties.

Beyond character considerations, the proposal raises serious concerns regarding the loss of amenity for existing residents. Increased building height and density will result in severe overshadowing to our property, reduced privacy, increased noise, and a general decline in the quality of living conditions currently enjoyed by residents. These impacts are not minor but represent a substantial and permanent degradation of residential amenity.

Furthermore, there are legitimate concerns regarding the capacity of existing infrastructure to support the increased population density. Local roads, public transport, utilities, drainage systems, and community facilities are already operating at capacity. The proposed development will place additional strain on this infrastructure, resulting in congestion, reduced service levels, and broader community impacts unless significant upgrades are undertaken. No clear or adequate provisions have been demonstrated to address these demands.

Noting that the LMR policy is aimed at providing 'well-designed and sustainable homes in well-located areas within walking distance of shops, services and frequent public transport'. The public transport system is already at capacity within the area and this has not been addressed. The development will only benefit the population who can afford apartments worth more than $5million. Not the working class citizens whom the LMR policy is aimed at helping!

Attachment

I object to proposal based on the comments in the attached file.

Subject: Objection to Proposed Residential Development 40-48 Redan Street, Mosman
I formally object to the proposed development due to the following concerns:

Excessive planning concessions
The proposal relies on multiple stacked mechanisms—Low and Mid-Rise Housing Policy, a 30% affordable housing uplift, and a Clause 4.6 variation via the SSD pathway—to reach 12 storeys. The need for a Clause 4.6 variation even after applying all incentives demonstrates the development exceeds the planning framework and intent.

Questionable affordable housing claim
The project is predominantly luxury housing, with 42 large apartments (129–321 sqm), including high-end penthouses. The 11 “affordable” units are limited to 15 years with no long-term scope, are located on lower levels with separate rear lane access, and lack evidence of genuine affordability. The public benefit is unclear.

Heritage impacts
The demolition of five Federation-era homes and the severe scale of the proposed building will permanently damage the character of Redan Street and adversely impact neighboring heritage-listed properties.

No local oversight
Assessment under the SSD pathway excludes Mosman Council, removing local input and scrutiny.
It does not take local amenity, local heritage into account and local consultation by the developers has been limited and questionable.

In Conclusion
This proposal represents overdevelopment, with insufficient public benefit and unacceptable impacts on heritage, character, and amenity. I request that it be refused.

Additional writings regarding Objection