The Zoo is, in my view already overdeveloped. This proposed development will benefit no-one in the local community. Parking and heavy traffic volumes are a major problem in surrounding streets at peak times. The Zoo is built on fragile harbour front reserve land in what is supposed to be a conservation reserve. The constant addition of new buildings to this land is a blight on the natural landscape of Sydney Harbour and its few remaining natural bushland areas. The proposed development is not eco-friendly, it is 4 storey high-density accommodation which is totally out of character with the local area. There are considerable restrictions on normal residential development in this area which the Zoo would be breaching with this development.

The Zoo is already overdeveloped. We complained for months throughout 2015 when the zoo was noisily chipping branches every morning on the land fronting Whiting Beach Road. We were told there were no alternative locations to chip the wood as it would disturb the animals. Eventually (after several months of complaining) the noise stopped, however we are concerned that new accommodation modules will mean the wood chipping will return to ruin our amenity in Whiting Beach Road, as the paying customers won't want to be woken up by wood chipping. We have also been inundated by water in big storms since the zoo carpark was built and the drainage is inadequate. The car park is an eyesore in a beautiful area. The Zoo is not subject to local council restrictions which are there to allow everyone to live together. Due to its special relationship with the State Government it can and does ride roughshod over neighbours' objections. It has become much more developed over the 20 years we have lived in Whiting Beach Road and the traffic and parking have become major problems in surrounding streets at peak times. The Zoo is built on fragile harbour front reserve land in what is supposed to be a conservation reserve. The constant addition of new buildings to this land is a blight on the natural landscape of Sydney Harbour and its few remaining natural bushland areas. The proposed development is not eco-friendly, it is 4 storey high-density accommodation which is totally out of character with the local area. There are considerable restrictions on normal residential development in this area which the Zoo would be breaching with this development.

The zoo is already overdeveloped.
Trees are being cut down daily ( - daily!!) on zoo land . To chip up. Completely unsustainable.

Little Ashton Park, next door, has been destroyed by zoo development. Take a good hard look. You will weep.

There is significant flooding in Whiting Beach Rd every time it rains, since the zoo built the car park.

Why destroy even more natural bushland on the harbour when this is really the zoo's only precious asset??

At what point does the zoo stop developing/building? Ever?

The children and the animals need trees not hotels.

It will become just another hotel development with a water view.
But without any natural bushland left.
Think carefully and kindly about the environment , please.

I object to the DA for the Australia Habitat and Taronga Wildlife Retreat on the basis of increased traffic and parking problems for the neighbours of Taronga Zoo. The use of the Zoo as a concert venue and now as an eco-tourist facility to provide 58 rooms and 4 suites will exacerbate the existing traffic issues for Mosman. As the Zoo is located on a peninsula, and hence there is only one way in and out by road, the development will lead to increased traffic on Bradleys Head Road. The proposal will also lead to further parking issues in residential streets surrounding the Zoo.

I am concerned about the planned 2-4 storey accomodation pods at the zoo. This is disturbing as the area is low rise buildings and bushland , therefore this is not in keeping with residential area or the environmentally compatible structures that are in place now, I am not anti development BUT the structures are too tall and not in keeping with the zoo's philosophy or Mosman's philosophy of harmony with nature and camouflage within the landscape. I find the need to build such huge structures is hypocritical within the environment of the zoo....a natural reserve and disrespectful to the surrounding neighbours who support the zoo,the additional polluting nature of the neighbouring sponsors has been disregarded. This is very dissappointing and I am hoping rational debate sees this proposal dismissed.

I have concerns about the increase in traffic this new development will bring to the existing area. At this present time Military Road and Mosman Junction can barely cope with the zoo traffic.

In particular I am concerned that an increase in overnight visitors staying in the proposed Eco-Tourist Facility will impact parking in the local area. As a zoo neighbour I struggle especially during the school holidays and weekends to find parking during the day, but this is usually alleviated when the zoo closes. Visitors to the zoo, park in the surrounding area to avoid parking costs and also if the zoo carpark is full. Although I am reluctant to suggest it I believe that 2 or 3P parking with permits for residents may have to be introduced to the surrounding streets if this proposal goes ahead.

I have caught the Zoo ferry to my work in the city for more than 15 years and I am fortunate in that it is practical for me to access the ferry by walking along the bush path owned by the Zoo from Sirius Cove. I am a supporter of the proposed development, however, as a goodwill gesture to the Zoo's neighbours for putting up with the disruption to traffic etc. during the construction phase, I would like to suggest that the Zoo could upgrade the quality of the path to Sirius Cove so that it can easily be used during and after heavy rain (currently it becomes so muddy in these conditions as to be impractical). The upgrade could be by way of continuing the existing boardwalk all the way to the stairs that connect with the end of Rickard Avenue (possibly using the man made and presumably less expensive materials used in parts of the Bradley's Head foreshore track) or preferably by laying a concrete path similar to the excellent one installed at Cremorne Point a year or so ago. An attractive, all weather path (possibly with clever Zoo marketing e.g. animal impressions in a concrete path - a new version of the iconic concrete faux wood balustrades etc. used by the Zoo 50+ years ago...) would almost certainly encourage more ferry commuters to walk to the ferry as opposed to catching a bus or driving to the wharf. This would have obvious health and environmental benefits and could be used in the Zoo's marketing.

To Whom it May Concern,

I have been a resident of Whiting Beach Rd for the past 40+ years. Over this time we have lost the use of a beautiful park at the end of our road and had it replaced with an ugly multi-storey car park.

During the weekends, public holidays and school holidays it is not uncommon for us to be 'parked in' by Zoo visitors and sometimes staff. Most days, I have to pick up rubbish left on my nature strip by Zoo visitors, including used nappies, food and drink containers and bags of rubbish.

It has become difficult to ask visitors to my home because of the parking issues.

The amount of traffic in our street has risen exponentially and there is no effort by the zoo or the council to do anything about the growing problem.

Despite what the EIS says about there being adequate parking, the traffic will become worse and the reluctance of zoo visitors to pay for parking, will mean that the parking problems Whiting Beach Rd and the surrounding streets experience will continue to worsen.

My concern is -
1. The increased TRAFFIC and PARKING congestion in Bradley Head and Whiting Beach Roads.
2. Construction NOISE during the building of this excessive increase in accommodation pods.
3. REMOVAL of the COOL, SHADY, TREE lined environment around the paths and animal viewing.
4. Undesirable CONCRETE BUILDINGS providing for an elite few people.
5. Undesirable TRUCK NOISE early in the mornings.

I object to this development proposal. I also objected to the recent proposal (SSD7311) for other major works at Taronga Zoo.
My grounds for objection are the same in both cases.
Simply put, the Zoo seems only to be interested in what happens inside its walls when it serves up proposals to further develop this site.
It pays no heed whatsoever to the effects of its continuous development programme on the surrounding residents who must put up with ever increasing levels of traffic congestion and parking issues in the surrounding streets.
Each development proposal that the Zoo comes up with is designed to increase the throughput of the most important animal species in its world i.e. Homo Sapiens (Paying Customer).
Each development is designed to simply make more money for the Zoo and it seems totally unconcerned as to the cost to anyone else.
As I noted in my earlier submission to SSD7311, if the Zoo management has a business model that relies on ever increasing levels of development into the future, then the time has come for the management to seriously start looking for a more suitable site on which to base this future development.
Building and operating a 52 room hotel on prime harbourside real estate should not be part of any Zoological Park's raison d'etre and this development application should be dismissed out of hand.