I have many objections to the proposal. Firstly, the Bulk and height are extremely excessive when compared to the adjoining dwellings, which have a height limit of 8.5 meters. Within this bulk are to be 8 bedsit "Affordable apartments" with access to the lane and not to the main building entrance of the 42 luxury apartments. It is apartment apartheid!
The other major objection is traffic and access. If the proposal was to proceed, the existing dwellings in this vicinity of Redan Street would be numbers 30 to 54 on the west side and 17 to 45 on the east side of Redan Street. This is then to Upper Almora Street. If we to assume each of these dwellings possessed 2 cars, this is a total of 106, and this part of Redan Street is already parked out. What will a further 106 vehicles and their visitors/trades, etc., add?
To go from the proposed entrance of the development to the Mosman P.O. is some 600 metres, and to Bridgepoint Shopping Mall, 1,000 metres. Are the residents going to walk? Definitely No. The stretch between Redan and Muston Streets is quite steep, with many steps. No, the residents are going to drive. This will add to the already severely congested entrance into Military Road and, of course, add to the overall congested roads in Mosman. This congestion is compounded not only by other SSD in the Mosman locality, but also by the developments in the Northern Beaches. And yet the Government refuses to proceed with the planned Northern Beaches tunnel. This proposed development is contrary to the ideals of the SSD. It is intended for areas adjacent to excellent public transport, such as rail, where the residents will not be dependent on a vehicle. The proposed Glebe Island development is an example

I object to this development firstly because it is clearly out of scale with the surrounding houses, apartments and shops, as well as exceeding allowable height for this area. Moreover, Mosman Junction is not a major transport hub and is already congested with traffic during on weekdays and weekends. This development, and subsequent similar developments that appear to be planned, would add substantially to this congestion, which surrounding roads are not equipped to handle. Developments of around four stories already exist in this area and the current proposal should be in line with this height, and not overwhelm nearby heritage homes. The future impact on the community of such eyesores, loss of vegetation and increased traffic need to be considered as well as the profitability of the development.

Please see enclosed attachment (3 pages).
Peter M. Wargent

I strongly appose this development
There is so many points to make against this
It is completely out of character with the street and area.
Apart from the obvious there is also the non compliance and misleading claims by the developers

What a Monstrosity on Balmoral Slopes please save our lovely suburb from this madness let common sense prevail. Please reject this proposal.

To the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,

I object to the proposed development at Redan Street, Mosman (SSD-93020230).

The proposal is disproportionate and inconsistent with the principles of reasonableness and practical compliance that underpin planning law. It represents an overdevelopment of a site that, on its own merits, does not support the scale and intensity proposed.

Although the application includes an affordable housing component, this public benefit does not justify a development of this magnitude. A 10-storey, 53-apartment building with 106 car spaces is excessive for this location. The scale, bulk, and intensity are incompatible with the surrounding context and raise significant concerns about local character, traffic, and infrastructure capacity. Design quality cannot offset or justify such an excessive scale.

The proposal relies on affordable housing provisions to secure concessions that enable this outcome. Without these concessions, the site would not support development at this scale. In this context, the process is being used to facilitate an outcome not justified by planning merit. The limited public benefit does not reasonably balance the extent of the uplift sought.

The scale of the Redan Street proposal will materially increase pressure on an already-constrained local road network, and the documentation does not demonstrate that this impact is appropriately mitigated. Proximity to amenities does not justify a scale of development that exceeds the site’s physical and infrastructural capacity.

There are more suitable and strategically aligned locations within Mosman to accommodate increased density. The Middle Head precinct, in particular, offers an opportunity for development of this nature without compromising established residential areas and better aligns with community interests.

The proposal provides a clear private benefit while placing additional strain on an already constrained local environment. It therefore fails to satisfy the public interest.

This is not a proposal that can be refined. It is fundamentally unsupported and should be refused in its entirety. Approval in these circumstances would call into question the consistency, integrity, and public confidence in the planning framework and its administration.

Yours faithfully,
Laura Downe

My objection letter is attached.