Please see my objection in attached file

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally lodge my objection to the proposed development project that seeks to construct a 10-storey residential flat building with 98 dwellings and 193 car parking spaces adjacent to my property. After thoroughly reviewing the preliminary architectural plans and public development notice, I have several serious concerns that I believe warrant a comprehensive re-evaluation of this proposal.

1. Excessive Height and Associated Impacts
The proposed 10-storey structure is significantly out of scale with the surrounding low-density residential neighbourhood. Its excessive height raises serious concerns regarding:
• Overlooking and loss of privacy: The placement of high-level windows and balconies directly facing neighbouring properties will result in intrusive overlooking into private yards and dwellings.
• Overshadowing: The building’s height will cast prolonged shadows over adjacent properties, drastically reducing natural sunlight during the day.
• Visual impact and landscape obstruction: The structure will obstruct the natural views currently enjoyed by the local residents and alter the overall landscape character of the neighbourhood in a negative manner.

2. Loss of Green Space and Tree Removal
The development will require the clearing of a substantial area of green space and the removal of numerous mature trees. This not only diminishes the ecological value of the site but also negatively affects the community’s access to green cover. The existing vegetation plays a vital role in:
• Carbon sequestration and urban cooling
• Providing habitat for local wildlife
• Enhancing the aesthetic and environmental quality of the area
Removing these green assets contradicts broader environmental sustainability goals and sets a concerning precedent for future development in the region.

3. Increased Density and Associated Pollution
The proposal includes 98 dwellings and 193 parking spaces, suggesting a substantial population influx and vehicle increase in a currently quiet neighbourhood. This scale of density will likely introduce:
• Noise pollution: From both increased vehicular movement and human activity, particularly during evenings and weekends
• Air quality concerns: Due to higher concentrations of vehicle emissions and reduced airflow resulting from the dense building footprint
• Traffic and congestion: With the increase in parked and moving vehicles, existing roads may become congested and unsafe, especially for pedestrians and cyclists.

4. Lack of Supporting Infrastructure
The proposed development makes no substantial effort to upgrade or accommodate the increased strain on existing infrastructure, which is already under pressure. Specific concerns include:
• Drainage and sewage: The current stormwater and wastewater systems may not be adequately equipped to handle the added load, increasing the risk of flooding or system failure.
• Traffic management: Local roads are narrow and not designed to handle such a high influx of daily vehicle movements.
• Utility pressure: The increase in demand for electricity, water, and internet (including NBN services) will stretch the already limited service provision in the area.

• Public facilities: There is a notable shortage of community amenities (parks, schools, healthcare services) in the immediate vicinity to support a population increase of this magnitude.

5. Construction-Related Disturbance
The proposed construction period will inevitably involve the deployment of heavy machinery, prolonged site work, and continuous delivery and transport operations. These activities are highly disruptive and will:
• Diminish the daily quality of life for residents
• Create safety risks for pedestrians and schoolchildren in the area
• Generate dust, vibration, and noise pollution over an extended period
Given the building scale, the construction phase could last several years, compounding these issues over time.

6. Accumulative Effects
There are numbers of development projects in this area. They would generate accumulated effect to worse the impacts.

Conclusion
While I understand the need for urban development and increased housing supply, such efforts must be balanced with community interests, environmental protection, and infrastructure planning. The current proposal demonstrates a lack of due consideration in these critical areas and represents a clear threat to the livability, safety, and character of the existing neighbourhood.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge the planning authority to reject the current proposal or require a substantial redesign that reflects the scale, infrastructure, and environmental realities of the area.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Vrf

The current fascination with pretending that Lindfield and central North Shore is "affordable" housing is a farce. The whole TOD concept is flawed given that Australia has huge land areas and we must jam as many people into Sydney as possible is completely crazy. I have lived in this area for over 30 years and it is a nice suburb, just the way that it was for families who have aspired to live in the area and saved their whole life for the privilege. If I wanted to live in the equivalent of Zetland I would have bought there instead of Lindfield. The bullying of council and ignoring of residents and overturning their rights and choices by the NSW and Federal Governments is an absolute disgrace and approaching that of a communist country. As a professional Civil Engineer with over 40 years of experience who has created many of NSW's key infrastructure projects, I have considerable insight into this area and the needs of a community.
However, moving on, the proposed development, and in fact the entire TOD proposal on the North Shore, has completely negated planning sensibility given the lack of infrastructure to cope with such an influx of new residents. Specifically, school boundaries are being changed, and current class capacity is exhausted at Killara High and a number of nearby schools even prior to any further new residents entering the area. The electricity and water supply / sewage system is also at capacity. As for the Pacific Hwy, travelling south after 7am or north after 5pm is a recipe for a slowly moving carpark. It is ridiculous to anticipate that anything other than a high percentage of new residents would not be utilising their cars to travel, hence further contributing to local gridlock. Importantly it must be noted that Balfour St and Bent St over their whole length are 100% full of cars EVERY day, prior to the vast influx of necessary tradesmen and workers necessary to undertake the scale of project proposed. There will be no parking for the workers and what is worse is that the residents will be inconvenienced by excessive noise, rubbish, inability to park in their own street during the construction period. The traffic generated by the close to 200 extra vehicles in Balfour Street even prior to the other intended nearby developments proceeding has not been assessed. The completion of the new Coles redevelopment has increased local traffic volumes by approximately double and this proposed development is going to make things even more crazy, noting that in the afternoon cars are already double parked in Balfour Street to collect children from the school near Coles, which results in dangerous actions of motorists, to overtake on the wrong side of the narrow road with young children interacting with this scenario. It is only a matter of time prior to a serious injury / accident with the current traffic volumes and congestion. The fact that the TOD mandate has been forced upon the area in which I have made my home will have effectively 10-20 Storey buildings causing gridlock over much of the local area. The traffic intersection at the junction of Pacific Hwy and Balfour Street is verry dangerous due to the blind crest and besides this already being a black spot, it will certainly only get worse. Simply put this area is not suited nor have the capacity to incorporate the scale of development proposed in this application and should be rejected, for the equivalent of 2-3 storey premises in line with the local area.
Many thanks for considering this submission
Mark Sinclair

My first comments relate to the whole area and the increased traffic that will come about from both the school and the new Bunnings at the intersection of Allambie & Rodborough roads. Should the proposed roundabout at Aquatic Dr & Allambie Rd, be considered in conjunction with the intersections at Allambie & Rodborough Rds, Allambie & Warringah Rds & finally Rodborogh & Warringah Rds to develop an integrated solution that can manage the increased traffic volumes? It seems that a piecemeal approach to the management of traffic flows will lead to poor outcomes. One such outcome will be the increased utilisation of the "rat run" through Mortain Av, Kurrabi Rd, Wyarama St & Government Rd - the first 3 of those have no footpaths which forces pedestrians to walk on the road. Increased traffic has the potential to increse the risk of pedestrian/vehicle accidents.

My second comment relates to safe pedestrian crossing locations for students at the new Forest High School. The update to the roundabout at Aquatic drive does not provide information on safe cross locations for students. Along Allambie Road in that area, there are only two locations where students will be able to cross Allambie road safely at lights; they are at the intersection of Allambie Rd & Mortain Ave, approximately 375m away from the school and at the intersection of Allambie & Warringah Rds, some 385m away from the school. There is also the small pedestrian island located at the intersection of Allambie Rd & Sunlea Place. Are these to be the only crossing options for children walking to school?

I am in support of this project and those of the school relocation and bunnings - but want to ensure that traffic / pedestrian management in the local area has been well considered to ensure safety and local community quality of life is protected.

My submission is attached.