Dear Sir/Madam,
I would like to object to the project as there are no buildings of 9 floors in height in that part of Lindfield. If it was 4 or 5 floors in height it would be acceptable. If all buildings in that area are to be built to that height the traffic will be horrendous as the roads are narrow so there is no room for expansion. Not everyone will go to work/school by train or bus. I have a car and live in an apartment one block away from the train station in Lindfield and now I do not drive out at peak hour times. I am lucky as I work for myself and can adjust the times I leave for work. I got a red light camera fine because there is so much traffic turning from Archibold Rd to Boundary Rd going west in Roseville as they reduced the light time there to 4 or 5 cars turning at a time - how are we going to get to Chatswood if we need to buy a bulky item?
My council and water rates are already very high. My charges will increase as you will have to upgrade council infrastructure, power, internet, water, storm water and sewer lines. A lot of these costs are passed on to existing residents as they are very costly kinds of things upgrade or install.
Such large buildings will increase urban heating as less vegetation will be there. Collectively we should not aspire to third world conditions.
Kind regards,
Helen Chee

I write to formally object to SSD-82899468, on the following planning, environmental, and community grounds:

The target number of new dwellings in Lindfield can be met within Ku-ring-gai Council’s Alternate TOD zone, which is expected to be approved before September 2025.
The proposed development is therefore unnecessary and inappropriate.
It fails the SSD cost to build threshold, sits outside the preferred TOD zone, and as a result of poor DPHI boundary planning, imposes excessive height and scale at the TOD boundary.
The proposal disregards heritage, local character, and transition requirements, relying on a planning loophole to extend TOD provisions beyond mapped boundaries.
Approval would be inconsistent with planning policy and undermine statutory controls.
At minimum, the Department must require: adherence to the mapped TOD boundary; comprehensive site-specific riparian and biodiversity assessment; and a heritage-sensitive design addressing bulk, scale, and transition.

What is your view on the project?
I object to the project.
My Comments
Please find attached my formal submission for your consideration in response to SSD-82899468, regarding the proposed development at 1–5 Nelson Road, Lindfield.
Keith Wright
13 August 2025
[email protected]

What is your view on the project?
I object to the project.
My Comments
Please find attached my formal submission for your consideration in response to SSD-82899468, regarding the proposed development at 1–5 Nelson Road, Lindfield.
Pam Wright
13 August 2025
[email protected]

Please find attached my submission for your consideration in response to SSD-82899468 at 1-5 Nelson Road Lindfield.