It appears that even the Architect of the proposed development considers the final submission inappropriate for the site as evidenced by their concept sketch which shows a building 8 storeys in total above ground, compared to their final submission which increased to 10 storeys.

This is an enormous development offering a minimum of 106 extra cars ultimately to be using what are already busy, narrow and hilly streets. The impact on local traffic will be extensive and is not encouraging people to use public transport.
The concept of a poor door is abhorent.
Previous ideas of attempting not to disadvantage housing that is already built appear to now be abandoned. A 10-storey high rise development will affect many living quite some distance away.
This will be a blot on the landscape to be regretted in years to come as were the blocks of units built in the 1970's at Cremorne and Mosman. Until now we thought there were better planning restrictions so this could not happen again.
It is extremely concerning that the proposal has been listed as compliant. this project is not compliant with basic controls

-The scale of the development is not appropriate for the residential setting it sits within. It's too big!
-The development dwarfs the heritage properties adjacent making a mockery of all the objectives of retaining heritage items.
-This is a Scenic Protection Area that has been carefully considered for the retention of buildings and environs due to the significance of the heritage items and streetscape. Demolition of the existing 5 houses within the Scenic Protection Area will forever negatively impact the Heritage streetscape and at odds with the statutory requirements of that area.
-The development pays no respect to view sharing, privacy, overlooking and overshadowing, with " severe and devastating" impacts on all nearby properties.
-This scale of development is more appropriate for the geographical ridge line namely Military Rd and Spit Rd, where impacts of such a large development can be better minimised.
-Impact on local services and facilities will be detrimentally affected and have not been considered especially in light of the multiple developments being proposed under the LMR Guidelines. This includes, traffic congestion, schools, storm water, sewerage, transport and community facilities.
-The use of Redan lane as the only pedestrian and car access to some units in the development is inappropriate as there is no footpath, which puts pedestrians safety in danger.
-I REQUEST THAT THE PROJECT BE REJECTED.
Robert Ferguson Architect

I strongly object to the propsed development at 40-48 Redan Street Mosman. This development is not in keeping with the area and is inappropriate in height and bulk. It also violates the Scenic Protection Zone that has been put in place to maintain the beauty of Sydney Harbour and surrounds for the benefit of all residents and visitors. If such a development is allowed it will set a precedent for the future which will be detrimental to all.
The 'affordable housing' component of this development is not in the spirit of the legislation and is simply a means for the developer to add more height and more apartments and make more money. I fail to understand how developments such as this can even get to this stage with no thought of town planning and the overall impact on residents and the longer term problems on infrastructure and amenties that developments such as this would create.
The traffic in Mosman is already an issue. The public transport system in Mosman is already under extreme pressure. Adding this many apartments in this location will put pressure on both traffic and transport and there is no suggested resolution to this issue, it's just swept under the carpet.
I appreciate that Sydney has a housing problem. There are many ways we can increase the number of dwellings in Mosman and include more affordable housing - this type of development is not one of them, it is simply creating further issues. For the State Government to allow these types of developments to bypass local councils seems very short-sighted and I implore you to take the time to understand the negative impact such developments will have now and into the future.

This project will cause chaos with traffic on a small lane where many locals stroll and walk their dogs. Its size alone is a concern, with the excavation requiring hundreds of tonnes of sandstone to be broken up using excavators with breaker hammers, causing massive vibrations through the heritage-listed houses nearby.
The traffic management plan is almost impossible to carry out given the width and bends in Redan Lane. The streets in Mosman are already jam-packed, and more traffic is going to have a significant impact.
The sheer height of the project is also a concern, as it will block views and create shadows for many existing homes. I find it hard to believe that the “affordable housing” included will truly be affordable. It appears that the proposal to extend the project’s height with a penthouse and additional upper floors is driven by their high value, which is why the developer is attempting to include additional so-called affordable apartments.
I hope that those responsible for approving major projects can recognise what is really happening and address the non-compliance issues in this proposal

I submit that the Proposed building is of excessive height and bulk and is in an inappropriate location in the suburb and will cause visual intrusion to the surrounding properties and landscape .
The area has anumber of heritage house and this building size and position in not in character witht he surrounding properties or amentity of the area.
The building is unnesseccary to achieve an increased number of affordable properties in the Mosman area. The provision of additional affordable housing could more effectively be provide by high rise construction on the Spit junction /Military road precint where there are existing 9 storey buidlings . This building would be in character if located in this precinct.
Fron a State Significance point of view this proposal does not provide any advantage to the suburb or surrounding properties and the objectives for the afforable housing which is a stated objective of State Significant proposals could be better achieved in a different location.

I strongly and passionately object to this excessively large development in this location. See details in letter.