To Whom it may concern
NSW DPHI
I wish to express my strong objection toward SSD-81890707, residential flat buildings at 10, 14 and 14a Stanhope Road, Killara.
Delibrate act to use state TOD as instrument to land bad design
The first reason for my objection is that the proposal is inconsistent with Local council’s alternative TOD plan (Preffered Scenario). At the time of lodgement of the SSD the council’s alternative plan has been publicly exhibited, to the majority that this is the understanding that the alternative plan represent greater public interest. However the EIS prepared for SSD-81890707 is silent about this fact. Which would render this plan a delibrate act to avoid compliance with the preffered scenarios which would consitute a much lower FSR ratio. This will result in a much lower financial return for the project. It can be argued that the proposal is using the state’s TOD plan as a vehicle to land bad design that completely disregard existing urban fabric with the pure intention to generate profit. The argument is further evident in the proposal’s attempt to provide Minimum required number of affordable housing while maximising sellable floor area by adding extra floor height. I consider the proposal inappropriate to be approved through SSD due to its lack of attempt to consider council’s alternative TOD scenarios which inturn reflect the developer’s delibrate attempts to act against public interest and comply with KLEP 2015.
Questionable legitamacy of heritage assessment
Furthermore, The heritage impact statement (HIS) prepared for the SSD application made no attempt to conduct comprehensive analysis of the adverse impact the project will have on number 12 Stanhope, a property and an heritage item isolated by the development site. Nor did the HIS analyse the impact the development will have on the broader Heritage conservation area. The HIS is a mere description of the Heritage items to which I consider must not be accepted as sufficent analysis for determination of the application to be based on. It can be argued that this is a another delibrate act to down play the significant role of the heritage and cultural value of the built environment, that local residents and sydneysiders cherished for over a century.
Numerical satisfaction does not constitute approval
While the EIS claims the proposal meets many planning principles numerically, this does not justify approval without consideration of qualitative impacts. The residents of 12 Stanhope Road, for example, currently enjoy privacy, unobstructed views toward the rear, and substantial solar access — all of which will be severely compromised by the proposed development. The submitted shadow diagrams explicitly show a significant reduction in solar access with the exceeded height, yet the applicant has made no attempt to mitigate this impact or propose suitable alternatives. The drastic reduction in amenity and the lack of responsiveness to this concern is unacceptable. Planning and design should also consider quality of space and liveability, not just regulatory compliance.
Questionable community engagement strategies
The development proposal has also demonstrated a significant lack of meaningful community engagement. Many local residents were unaware of the project until its public exhibition on the NSW Major Projects Portal. The applicant’s engagement report claims that approximately 500 flyers were distributed; however, the effectiveness of this exercise is highly questionable. Only five residents reportedly attended the information session hosted by the applicant, raising serious doubts about the reach and clarity of the communication efforts.
Whether by design or through neglect, the 1 percent response rate is appauling. At the very least, it reflects a minimal approach to community consultation, which is especially concerning given the scale and long term impact of the proposal. A development of this significance should be grounded in transparency and genuine community conversation.

I would like to formally object to the proposed residential development with in-fill affordable housing at 10-14A Stanhope Road Killara (SSD-81890707). As a resident of Stanhope Road Killara, I am deeply concerned about the potential negative impacts this development may have on our beloved neighbourhood.
1. Traffic Congestion and safety hazards
Stanhope Road is a residential street that is already under strain and I would say already exceeds capacity during school and commuting hours. The proposed development will funnel a substantial volume of additional traffic onto a narrow, two-way road not designed to handle such intensity. This raises serious safety risks for residents, pedestrians and cyclists. The development will also likely increase vehicle queuing and congestion at the Pacific Highway intersection, further compounding transport pressure across Killara.
2. Heritage and Community Character
The proposed development is completely out of character with the surrounding built environment and would erode the heritage fabric of Stanhope Road. It falls within a Heritage Conservation Zone valued for its low density and cohesive architectural identity. It not only isolates and undermines 12 Stanhope Road Killara which is a heritage property but also contradicts the Kuring-Gai Councils preferred alternative scenario to the TOD.
Approving this SSD would be of great disappointment and would damage public trust. For the above mentioned reasons, I strongly urge the Department to refuse this SSD (SSD 81890707).

I would like to object to the proposed residential development with in-fill affordable housing at 10-14A Stanhope Road Killara (SSD-81890707). As a resident of Stanhope Road Killara, I am deeply concerned about the potential negative impacts this development may have on our community and environment.
1. Traffic Congestion: The proposed development is likely to significantly increase traffic congestion on Stanhope Road which is already a huge concern for residents and poses safety risks for pedestrians and cyclists. With over 190 car spaces in the development, will cause severe congestions.
2. Community Character: The scale and design of the proposed development are not in keeping with existing character of Stanhope Road and would significantly impact the heritage of our neighbourhood.
3. Isolation of 12 Stanhope Road Killara, heritage-listed house right in front and adjacent to the proposed development. 12 Stanhope Road Killara is a valued part of our suburb’s architectural and historical legacy. Heritage significant does not exist in isolation – it is dependent on the setting, scale and spatial relationships of its surrounding. The proposed development, from design, to scale and density are wholly out of character within the surround low-density heritage conservation zone of Stanhope and Killara in general.
4. Minimal engagement attempts made by Developer to the community: Neither did myself or my neighbour receive the community flyers from the developer (which explains the poor turn up rate at their community drop-in session). I was informed by the development just a few days ago by a concerned neighbour on Stanhope Road.
I strongly urge that this SSD application (SSD-81890707) for 10-14A Stanhope Road must be put on hold until an agreement is reached between Kuring-gai Council and NSW State Government. This is because the Councils preferred alternative TOD (which was publicly exhibited) suggests that the whole Stanhope Road Heritage Conservation Area would be preserved. Thus, this SSD would be completely out-of-line.

Please find attached Council's submission to SSD 81890707. Council objects to the proposed development.
regards,
Brodee Gregory
Executive Assessment Officer

The owners of 12 Stanhope Road object to the Proposed Development for the reasons provided in the attached letter of objection.

Please see my attached document endorsing considered, integrated and strategic urban planning over the proposed opportunistic developer-led project.

Please find my objection to this proposal attached.

Kind regards,
Nicholas Rogers