I wish to object to this development on the grounds that due to its scale, height and non-compliances it will have an unacceptable negative impact on other residents in the neighbourhood, will negatively impact the local biodiversity and conservation values of the local area, and will increase pressure on already stretched public services. Hence I believe that it is not in the public interest. It appears that the height of the proposal is excessive and exceeds relevant standards; negatively impacts heritage listed residences and the local tree cover, green surface and biodiversity; impacts a large number of adjacent residences through being high rise rather than low or medium rise (exceeds 12m maximum height) and will cause knock on consequences through overshadowing etc.

I object to this development on the grounds that due to its scale, height and non-compliances it is not fair to other residents in the neighbourhood who will be significantly and detrimentally impacted and hence not in the public interest.
E.g. The height is excessive and exceeds standards; impacts heritage listed residences; impacts a large number of adjacent residences being high rise rather than low or medium rise (see preferences for 12m maximum height).

The proposal will overload local facilities - schools, medical and other health facilities
The project height is inconsistent with existing dwellings
The project is at odds with the councils preferred development scenarios regarding height restrictions etc
The proposal overlooks existing dwellings some of which are heritage listed and local historical significant
The proposal is completely incompatible with the local area and is not in the public interest

I object to this development on the following grounds -

1. Excessive height compared with the surrounding buildings causing shadowing, loss of privacy and visual changes not in keeping with the existing street scape of Stanhope Road. The height proposed actually exceeds the TOD proposal by over 22% and significantly breaches the height limits for the R2 Low Rise Residential Zoning (by almost 4 times)
2. The development isolates and towers over adjacent homes some of which are Heritage listed. Stanhope Road currently has no unit blocks so the change will be dramatic. 3. The overshadowing, loss of privacy and loss of amenity issues affect more than 50 residences directly to the north, south, east and west of the proposed development. While the Government’s aim was to develop low/medium-rise buildings around transport hubs this is a high-rise development which is completely incompatible with the locality and hence, is not in the public interest.
4. Proposal is not consistent with the Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Scenario which recommends a maximum height of 12 meters in this area rather than the 35 meters proposed in this application.
5. The development will cause further overloading of services including local schools (enrolments in numerous schools in Ku-ring-gai already above their maximum designated maximum numbers) as well as medical and other health services.

This development is completely out of character with the local area due to the height of the proposed buildings and the number of dwellings proposed. It is an absurd approach to planning to have Kuringai Council stating it wishes to maintain the Heritage Conservation Areas such as Stanhope Rd whilst developments such as this are deemed permissible, indeed desirable, by the State Govt.
The amount of time and money put into this development proposal and project application, along with the several other proposed DSS in Kuringai by the same development group is astounding, yet their consideration of the negative impact on the amenity, quality of life, privacy and property value of neighbouring properties is virtually non-existent. The research, data and conclusions drawn detailed in the project application read like a work of fiction when it comes to providing a true indication of the impact of this development on neighbouring properties.
The development will cause significant overshadowing of neighbouring properties - the shadow diagrams provided show that some neighbouring properties will receive virtually NO direct winter sunlight in their back gardens which will affect vegetation and tree health impacting native flaura and fauna.
The development will cause significant issues for all residents with regard to traffic levels and parking along Stanhope Rd.
The pedestrian access proposed via the existing driveway of 10 Stanhope Rd will mean that the residents of 8 & 12 Stanhope Rd will have a public, illuminated thoroughfare running beside their homes which will significantly affect their privacy, amenity and security.
This development, in it's current form, should be rejected outright by the NSW State Govt.

1 June 2025
Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Via Online Submission Portal
Subject: Objection to SSD-81890707 – 10, 14 & 14A Stanhope Road, Killara
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to object to the proposed development at 10, 14 and 14A Stanhope Road, Killara (SSD-81890707).
Although I do not live on Stanhope Road, I visit family there regularly and have spent a great deal of time in the area over the years. I have always admired the quiet, tree-lined street, the well-preserved Federation and interwar homes, and the overall character that makes this part of Killara so special.
This development would change all of that.

The proposed buildings—10 storeys tall—are simply far too big for this neighbourhood. The current height limit is 22 metres, and these towers are over 35 metres high. That’s nearly double the height of most buildings in the area. Nothing in Killara comes close to that scale, and it would completely overwhelm the surrounding homes and streetscape.

This part of Killara is a Heritage Conservation Area, and for good reason. The houses, gardens, and streets have been carefully preserved for decades. Introducing massive apartment towers right in the middle of this area would do irreversible damage to its historic value and charm. It would also directly affect several nearby heritage-listed homes.

Stanhope Road is already narrow and busy, especially during school drop-off and pick-up times or when there are rail replacement buses running. Adding 135 apartments would lead to hundreds of extra car movements every day. It’s just not safe or practical on such a constrained street. This will also create serious problems for nearby intersections like Stanhope Road and Pacific Highway, which are already struggling to cope.

One of the things I value most about this part of Killara is the tree canopy and natural setting. Birds and native animals are a common sight in this area. This proposal would involve clearing a large number of mature trees—some over 50 years old—destroying habitat and reducing the area’s green cover.

Finally, I’m very concerned that this development is being pushed through under the State Significant Development pathway, bypassing local planning rules and community consultation. I understand that Ku-ring-gai Council is working with the State Government on a better, more suitable plan for areas like this. Approving this development now would be premature and unfair to both residents and the planning process.

Please Reject This Proposal
This development is not in keeping with the character of Killara. It’s too big, too intrusive, and too damaging to the heritage and environment of the area.
I urge you to reject SSD-81890707 and instead support a development approach that respects the heritage, scale, and natural setting of this beautiful and much-loved part of Sydney.
Yours sincerely,

This development is completely out of keeping with this beautiful suburb. As an owner in an adjoining suburb, all applications of this nature should be assessed by local council in accordance with council's alternative plan to the TOD.

The proposed height of the building is a complete invasion of privacy for the current residents of the street and in particular those that are on the direct boarders. The street is so beautiful to drive down and see lovely tall trees and heritage houses - an apartment block would completely ruin this. This will also cause an excess amount of traffic (on an already too busy street). The extreme size of the proposed plan will also be a huge strain on the local services .

As a resident of Stanhope Road for the last 3 years, I was drawn to this area by its charm, intact Federation architecture, and residential character. I formally object to State Significant Development Application SSD-81890707 for residential flat buildings at 10, 14, and 14A Stanhope Road, Killara. The proposed 135 apartments and 10-storey buildings are fundamentally inconsistent with established planning controls and the existing character of Killara.
________________________________________
My objection is based on the following critical planning concerns:
1. Excessive Scale and Character Inconsistency: The proposed 10-storey height is fundamentally inconsistent with Killara's predominantly 1-2 storey residential character and existing tallest building (5 storeys). The proposed towers would become the tallest structures in Killara, dominating the built environment and contravening the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (KLEP 2015) and State Government's TOD rezoning controls which provide for maximum height of 22 metres.
2. Irreversible Heritage Damage: The development is situated within the Stanhope Road Heritage Conservation Area (HCA). The proposal will irrevocably damage the HCA's character and negatively impact adjacent heritage-listed dwellings, including 12 Stanhope Road.
3. Significant Environmental Degradation and Loss of Tree Canopy: The application proposes the removal of endangered and mature trees, many integral to the Ku-ring-gai tree canopy, a recognized ecological and visual asset. This action would:
o Contradict the aims of the Ku-ring-gai Urban Forest Policy and Biodiversity Strategy 2030.
o Destroy habitat for protected and locally significant fauna, including Kookaburras, Galahs, Rosellas, Echidnas, and Ringtail Possums.
o Accelerate urban heat island effects and significantly reduce the suburb’s environmental resilience.
4. Unacceptable Traffic and Road Safety Impacts: Stanhope Road, Werona Avenue, and Culworth Avenue are already narrow and congested. The projected 195 additional daily vehicle movements will severely exacerbate congestion, create safety hazards for pedestrians and vehicles, and impede emergency services. Stanhope Road's role as a vital train replacement bus route means the development will detrimentally affect public transport. The proposed "no right turn" signage is inadequate and will merely displace traffic issues to other unsuitable local streets. The absence of comprehensive traffic impact studies for a necessary intersection signal at Stanhope Road/Pacific Highway highlights a critical planning deficiency.
________________________________________
Conclusion
This SSD application is flawed, non-compliant with planning controls, and inappropriate for Killara. It will result in permanent damage to the area's heritage and character, degrade the local environment, and create unsustainable traffic impacts.
For these reasons, I urge the NSW Department of Planning to refuse SSD-81890707 in full.
Thank you for your consideration.

1. Excessive height compared with the surrounding buildings causing shadowing, loss of privacy and visual changes not in keeping with the existing street scape of Stanhope Road. The height proposed actually exceeds the TOD proposal by over 22% and significantly breaches the height limits for the R2 Low Rise Residential Zoning (by almost 4 times)
2. The development isolates and towers over adjacent homes some of which are Heritage listed. Stanhope Road currently has no unit blocks so the change will be dramatic. The overshadowing, loss of privacy and loss of amenity issues effect more than 50 residences directly to the north, south, east and west of the proposed development. While the Government’s aim was to develop low/medium-rise buildings around transport hubs this is a high-rise development which is completely incompatible with the locality and hence, is not in the public interest.
3. Not consistent with the Ku-ring-gai Council’s Preferred Scenario which recommends a maximum height of 12 meters in this area rather than the 35 meters proposed in this application.
4. Cause further overloading of services including local schools (enrolments in numerous schools in Ku-ring-gai already above their maximum designated maximum numbers) as well as medical and other health services.