We are horrified to learn that a development of this scale is being contemplated for this site.

Our understanding is that it is an SSD which is bypassing Council planning and
approval. This is an absolutely ridiculous situation which we find totally inappropriate.

While we understand the necessity to address the housing crisis in Sydney we
do not believe that developments like these are a solution to the problem.
In fact long term they will be a disaster.

Firstly there is not the infrastructure in Lindfield to support a large
scale development eg, roads, schools, preschools,
doctors, transport, parking etc.

Secondly the nature of the development is completely at odds with the
surrounding area.

Lastly it is very unlikely that young Australians who are most impacted by
the housing crisis will be able to afford these units when considering the
cost of units that have recently sold in Lindfield.

Kind regards
Cathryn and Daniel Cronin

As a resident of the area for some 30 years, I wish to note my objection to this project.

If approved, this will be the largest development in all of Lindfield. It sets a precedent and as such requires appropriate scrutiny and consideration. It butts directly onto low density heritage listed & heritage conservation area houses, and it will have major impacts for all residents of the Lindfield Station East area into the future.

I am generally supportive of development of new housing in Ku-ring-gai and Ku-ring-gai Council’s alternative Preferred Scenario plan for TOD, but not what is proposed for this location.

Specifically,
- Significant height density and bulk: 220 units in nine stories and 33m, which is above maximum building height
- At the very outer edge of TOD border (and outside of development in Ku-ring-gai Council’s alternative TOD plan); no transition to lower density housing which surrounds it on all sides
- Significant impacts on heritage (including four adjacent heritage properties) and in a Heritage Conservation Area (HCA)
- Significant overshadowing / privacy / solar access issues
- Significant acoustic issues due to location of site and scale of development
- Significant reduction of tree canopy and mature trees
- Significant traffic and parking issues (represented by the 367 parking spaces in building)

In addition, it undermines the Court-mediated Agreement that Council and the NSW Government entered into; and it undermines the extensive community engagement process that we participated in.

The NSW Govt SEPP plan has been forced on local residents of affected areas. No effective consultation or discussion about effects on existing heritage designations , impact on surrounding infrastructure and amenities.
With regard to this particular submission, you propose a development of in excess of 200 residences in an area currently occupied by a few free standing houses included in a heritage designated area.
Surrounding houses will be impacted by the overwhelming density & height of the development - significantly exceeding current restrictions. There is no attempt to moderate the impact on surrounding homes by restricting height & density near boundaries.
Details of off street parking for residents of the development aren't specified. Unless mandated off street parking match the 237 apartments we conclude there will be a substantial increase in on - street parking in the area. Streets are already congested with cars parked for station access. Traffic congestion in Trafalgar Avenue will be increased substantially beyond previous levels as it appears this will provide access for all of the high density area.
Council has very effectively supported established mature trees in the Lindfield area. In one fell swoop this SEPP plan will result in a clear fell of all trees on the impacted area.
Has the impact of sewerage & water connections to this significantly larger number of dwellings been taken into account? What provisions have been made?
Homes in the area have been required to build retention tanks to protect against excessive water run off during storms. What provisions will be made at this development considering the substantially larger roof area?
In summary we believe this proposal is significantly out of character in the area & poses major problems for local residents.
Big brother gone mad.
We await your consideration of these issues & confirmation that the development will be significantly scaled back to better fit the environment.

I am supportive in-principle of increasing population density in Ku-ring-gai through targeted medium density housing (inc affordable housing), where (i) infrastructure (schools, hospitals, parks roads) fully supports the population uplift in full; (ii) existing heritage & conservation controls are observed; and (iii) existing environmental and sustainability controls are observed.

However, and in accordance with above, I strongly object to the proposed development at 59-63 Trafalgar Avenue 1A&1B Valley Road Lindfield, due to -
(i) lack of infrastructure - local roads, schools and green spaces simple cannot cope with densification on this scale, unless this densification is preceded by a significant increase in infrastructure to allow for rapid population growth
(ii) height - nine storeys on the outer edge of TOD border is excessive; surrounding houses will be significantly overlooked, losing their privacy
(iv) heritage - the size and scale of this development will impact on the neighbouring Heritage Conservation Area and heritage items, destroying the character of the community and reducing the value of local properties

The result of the above is that the local community will be significantly negatively impacted, and will have their property values and quality of living significantly reduced.

I strongly urge the NSW Government to halt this development, or significantly reduce the scale of this development to a reasonable and sustainable level.

Thank you

Thank you for considering my comments and objection.
If approved, this will be the largest development in all of Lindfield. It sets a precedent and as such requires appropriate scrutiny and consideration. It butts directly onto low density heritage listed & heritage conservation area houses, and it will have major impacts for all residents of the Lindfield Station East area into the future.
I am generally supportive of development of new housing in Ku-ring-gai and Ku-ring-gai Council’s alternative plan for TOD, but not what is proposed for this location.
Specifically,
- Significant height density and bulk: 220 units in nine stories and 33m, which is above maximum building height
- At the very outer edge of TOD border (and outside of development in Ku-ring-gai Council’s alternative TOD plan); no transition to lower density housing which surrounds it on all sides
- Significant impacts on heritage (including four adjacent heritage properties) and in a Heritage Conservation Area (HCA)
- Significant overshadowing / privacy / solar access issues
- Significant acoustic issues due to location of site and scale of development
- Significant reduction of tree canopy and mature trees
- Significant traffic and parking issues (represented by the 367 parking spaces in building)
In addition, it undermines the Court-mediated Agreement that Council and the NSW Government entered into; and it undermines the extensive community engagement process that we participated in.
Thank you.

I reject the above affordable housing project on the grounds that it will not fulfil its desired intentions, whilst at the same time destroying the character of the suburb and cause major problems for all local residents. Council have put forward a far more sensible proposal to help with the governments desired outcomes.

FYI Hyecorp are building a complex on the highway at Roseville above the old Memorial Club. The prices are advertised from $900,000 for a 1 bedroom to $4,500,000 for a 4 bedroom. They have a proposal to build a similar complex in Roseville under the guise of affordable housing. These are not affordable to the vast majority of Australians.

The government needs to state what price is affordable and who gets to buy the few "affordable" properties offered. Will they be friends of the developers who get to buy the affordable ones, and how long will they last under the "affordable" definition before someone makes a nice profit on them.

Under these present TODs, all that will happen, is the suburbs will be ruined for no added value. There are heritage houses in the middle of this proposed development which will lose all heritage significance.

The only way forward is through the government adopting council proposals and discussions with council (who have had discussions with locals). There has been no discussions with locals by the government or the developers, despite allegations to the contrary.

Regards
Ann Meagher

I strongly object to this proposal proceeding in any form based on:
- It needs to be assessed within Ku-ring-gai councils preferred planning scenario which has been developed after wide community consultation
- Its sheer size and bulk will be detrimental to the residents of the area that will need to contend with its negative impacts; privacy; overshadowing; acoustics; reduction in tree canopy
- It will result in significant traffic and parking issues
- It will irreparable impact the heritage of the area
I’m supportive of high-density residential development within Ku-ring-gai, but on the basis that it is part of an overarching policy developed in consultation with the community.

Please see letter of objection attached.