6 storey is not suitable for the area that only has a maximum of 3 storey. The roads won’t cope either.

I believe the 192 resident parking spots and 7 visitors parking spots is totally insufficient for a complex of 149 units (plus staff). Street parking is extremely tight in local streets at any time, let alone during summer when beachgoers swell the traffic and require parking.
Indigo by Moran should have dedicated off street parking sufficient to accomodate their residents and provide additional visitor parking.

I support seniors housing on this site in principle. North Narrabeen needs high-quality downsizer options. However, the proposed 5–6 storey, ~149-unit scheme with three basement levels is far too tall and bulky for this coastal neighbourhood, and sets an unacceptable precedent for height and massing in a low-scale beachside suburb. The scheme fails the objectives of the planning framework regarding coastal character, amenity, flood and evacuation resilience, and cumulative impacts. Consent should be refused unless the height, FSR, setbacks and massing are substantially reduced to a maximum of three storeys with materially increased deep soil and landscape.
1. Introduction & Standing
I am a local resident of North Narrabeen with 15 years of expertise in strata and community management. I support seniors living as a land use and recognise the loss of aged care beds previously on the Wesley site; however, the current proposal’s scale is not compatible with its coastal context or surrounding two- to three-storey pattern. Public exhibition for SSD-76220734 commenced on 23 October 2025 and closes 5 November 2025.
2. Planning Framework & Objectives
Assessment must consider EP&A Act s4.15 matters, relevant SEPPs and local instruments, including:
• EP&A Act 1979 s4.15 (impacts, suitability of site, submissions, public interest).
• Resilience & Hazards SEPP (incorporating Coastal Management provisions) and the Coastal Management Act 2016 (coastal zone objectives, hazard resilience).
• Northern Beaches LEP/DCP (height/FSR objectives, built form/landscape, coastal character, view sharing, parking & access). Public material indicates R3 areas on the Beaches are typically 2–3 storeys, with higher limits only near nominated centres under State reforms. This site’s proposed 5–6 storeys would exceed the prevailing local scale.
3. Proposal Snapshot (Key Facts & Claims)
Based on exhibition material and public reporting:
• Use: Seniors housing/retirement village (independent living + limited care).
• Scale: 5–6 storeys, ~149 apartments, 3 basement levels.
• Site: 156–164 Ocean St, 81–81A Lagoon St & 8 Octavia St.
• Former use: ~55 aged care beds + 35 assisted living units (Wesley Mission).
• Status: State Significant Development, exhibition 23/10/25–05/11/25.
Position: Support the use, oppose the scale. Acceptable outcome: ≤ 3 storeys, reduced GFA/FSR, increased setbacks and deep soil, revised access and landscape.
4. Assessment & Grounds of Objection
4.1 Urban Design & Neighbourhood Character
The building height and bulk (5–6 storeys over large frontages) would read as a mid-rise precinct in a low-rise beachside suburb, eroding the established coastal character and view corridors to the ocean/lagoon. “Technical compliance” with any numeric control does not satisfy objectives to respect local character, landscape setting and view sharing. A three-storey envelope with stronger articulation and deeper setbacks is necessary to align with the area’s prevailing 2–3 storey rhythm.
4.2 Coastal & Flood Risk (Resilience)
Narrabeen is flood- and erosion-prone; evacuation and shelter-in-place performance for older residents must be conservative. Coastal/lagoon flooding, stormwater exceedance, and climate allowances should be tested against coastal management objectives and s4.15 (site suitability). The combination of deep basements and high resident density increases risk exposure during flood or utility outage events. A lower, lighter footprint (≤3 storeys), reduced car-park excavation and more deep soil would better support resilience and evacuation options.
4.3 Traffic, Access & Parking
Ocean St and the surrounding network experience peak congestion; seniors villages also generate frequent service trips and visitor parking demand. The likely on-street spillover and access safety issues at this location are understated when the proposal scales to 5–6 storeys and ~149 units. A reduced unit yield with a single consolidated driveway location, improved sightlines and higher onsite visitor parking is warranted to avoid unacceptable impacts.
4.4 Residential Amenity (Overshadowing, Privacy, Wind)
Mid-rise bulk adjacent to low-rise homes risks winter overshadowing of private open space, intrusive cross-views below acceptable privacy distances, and wind acceleration around ocean-front corners. The proposal’s height exacerbates these effects. A three-storey cap with increased upper-level setbacks and planted buffers would materially improve solar access, privacy, and wind comfort outcomes consistent with DCP objectives.
4.5 Environment, Landscaping & Urban Heat
Tree/canopy losses from basements and building footprint reduce local shade in a coastal microclimate that already experiences high glare and wind. Increased deep soil zones, canopy targets and permeable area are needed to mitigate heat and support biodiversity. These outcomes are difficult to achieve at 5–6 storeys on this site but feasible at ≤3 storeys with rebalanced site coverage.
4.6 Services, Infrastructure & Social Impact
While seniors housing is needed, the scheme emphasises premium independent living and results in a net reduction of genuine aged care beds compared with the former Wesley operation, contrary to community expectations about care availability on the Beaches. Height-driven yield does not automatically translate into social benefit if it undermines character, resilience and infrastructure capacity. A smaller scheme can still deliver meaningful downsizer supply.
4.7 Cumulative Impact & Precedent
Granting 5–6 storeys here would create a de facto benchmark for mid-rise forms beyond nominated centres under NSW’s housing reforms. Council has already warned that 4–6 storey envelopes are intended near specific town centres and transport nodes, not blanket coastal frontages. Allowing this height will invite “leap-frog” proposals and accelerate character change beyond strategic intent.
5. Response to Likely Proponent Arguments
• “Housing for seniors is needed” — Agreed; deliver it at appropriate scale. Need does not override failure to meet objectives for character, amenity and hazard resilience under s4.15.
• “Design excellence / within envelope” — Height alone is not the test; proposals must also achieve objectives (character, view sharing, coastal setting, landscape). A three-storey scheme is more likely to do so here.
• “Transport and parking are adequate” — Peak-period observations and the coastal cul-de-sac geometry indicate limited spare capacity; impacts scale with unit numbers. A smaller scheme mitigates risk.
6. Requested Outcomes
1. Refuse the application unless height, bulk and yield are reduced to a maximum of three storeys with increased setbacks, reduced site coverage, materially larger deep soil zones and a revised landscape plan.
2. Require updated flood/coastal and evacuation analysis reflecting conservative climate allowances and the specific vulnerabilities of seniors populations.
3. Require a revised traffic and parking assessment addressing visitor and service vehicle accumulation, safe access design and on-street spillover safeguards at the reduced scale.
4. Require a social impact addendum clarifying care provision relative to the former Wesley facility and demonstrating community benefit at the lower height.

Objection to SSD-76220734 – 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen
Submitted to: Secretary, Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Re: Indigo by Moran – 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen
Introduction and Personal Connection
I am a long-term resident of Narrabeen and have lived in this area for more than 20 years on and off. My family and I chose Narrabeen because of its unique coastal village character, community spirit, and environmental beauty. I am writing to strongly object to the proposed State Significant Development (SSD-76220734) known as Indigo by Moran, located at 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen.
This proposal, which seeks approval for a six-storey (21-metre-high) luxury seniors’ living complex comprising 149 apartments, is completely out of character with Narrabeen’s existing low-rise coastal environment. The development’s scale, density, and associated traffic and environmental impacts will have long-term negative consequences for both the immediate neighbourhood and the broader Northern Beaches Peninsula.
1. Incompatibility with the Existing Character and Planning Controls
Narrabeen is defined by its relaxed, coastal village identity, where the built form has historically respected the area’s natural environment — the ocean, the lagoon, and the dunes. The surrounding buildings in this pocket of Ocean Street are predominantly two to three storeys high, with a small-scale residential character.
A six-storey, 21-metre structure will dominate the streetscape and permanently alter the visual balance between built form and landscape. It will tower over neighbouring homes, casting long shadows over adjoining properties and significantly increasing the sense of enclosure on a street that was never designed for high-density living.
The proposal is inconsistent with both the Northern Beaches Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and the Narrabeen Lagoon Catchment Study, both of which aim to preserve the area’s low-rise character and protect visual corridors between the lagoon and the coast. By far exceeding the intended height and bulk controls, the development will create an unacceptable visual precedent that could open the door for similar high-density projects along the coast, effectively transforming Narrabeen into something it was never meant to be — a built-up, urbanised extension of the city.
The design’s materials and form are more aligned with inner-city or suburban retirement developments, not a fragile coastal environment. Its architectural massing and facade treatments fail to respond sensitively to the beach and lagoon context.
2. Unsuitability of the Site for Seniors Housing under the SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability)
While the proposal has been lodged as a Seniors Housing development, it does not satisfy the key intent of the SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability), which is to deliver accessible and affordable accommodation for older people close to essential services.
In this case, the starting price of over $3 million per unit clearly targets the luxury market, not seniors in need of accessible housing. The development provides only 10 beds (in one assisted-living wing) out of 149 apartments, which highlights that this is a commercial development masquerading as seniors housing to exploit the SEPP’s relaxed planning controls.
The site itself is unsuitable for senior residents due to its steep topography, limited pedestrian infrastructure, and distance from critical health and transport services. Ocean Street lacks continuous, safe pedestrian pathways and is already heavily trafficked. For seniors with mobility challenges, this would pose serious accessibility and safety concerns. The area is not within a walkable distance of major medical facilities or essential services, which contradicts the SEPP’s intent.
The proximity to the main coastal road also exposes future residents to high traffic noise, salt corrosion, and air pollution — hardly conducive to the calm, healthy environment that seniors housing should provide.
3. Traffic, Parking, and Accessibility Impacts
The proposed 149 apartments will generate significant additional vehicle movements on Ocean Street, Lagoon Street, and Octavia Street — narrow residential roads that are already under heavy strain.
The development provides 178 car spaces, meaning at least 120 or more vehicles will likely be forced to park on nearby streets once visitors, staff, and service vehicles are considered. These streets are already congested due to existing residents, beachgoers, and tourists. Overflow parking will exacerbate traffic conflicts, block driveways, and reduce pedestrian safety — particularly for children and families walking or cycling to the beach and lagoon.
The delivery and service access points proposed for the site are also inappropriate. Increased movement of garbage trucks, service vehicles, and taxis will create additional hazards on an already busy and narrow street network. Emergency vehicle access could also be compromised due to limited turning circles and congestion.
Narrabeen has long struggled with traffic bottlenecks along Ocean Street and Pittwater Road. Adding the traffic from a 149-unit complex will worsen these conditions and increase the risks at key intersections, particularly around Lagoon Street and Octavia Street. The cumulative impact has clearly not been adequately considered.
4. Environmental and Coastal Impacts
This site sits between two environmentally sensitive zones: Narrabeen Beach and Narrabeen Lagoon. Any intensive development on this site will place further pressure on both ecosystems through increased runoff, erosion, and pollution.
The proposed excavation and basement car park works could disrupt groundwater flow and increase flood risk in a catchment already prone to inundation. The loss of existing vegetation and mature trees will reduce the natural buffer between the lagoon and the residential zone, impacting biodiversity and stormwater quality.
Furthermore, the height and bulk of the structure will obstruct coastal breezes and ocean views from the public domain, degrading the natural coastal experience that both residents and visitors enjoy.
Given the intensifying effects of climate change, with increased storm events and sea-level rise, building a large-scale, high-density development so close to the water’s edge is short-sighted and environmentally irresponsible.
5. Social and Community Impacts
Narrabeen’s charm lies in its sense of community — neighbours knowing neighbours, families gathering by the lake, and the relaxed, unpretentious lifestyle that defines the Northern Beaches. The introduction of a gated, high-end luxury development will fragment this social fabric.
It creates exclusivity, not inclusivity. Rather than addressing genuine housing needs, it prioritises profit and prestige. Local small businesses rely on a stable, diverse community, not transient or restricted high-end complexes.
Moreover, this proposal will set a dangerous precedent. If approved, similar developers will seek to exploit the same planning loopholes, leading to the gradual overdevelopment of the peninsula. What begins as one 21-metre structure could become a cascade of high-rises along our coast, fundamentally changing Narrabeen forever.
6. Precedent and Cumulative Impact
This development is not an isolated project. The Department must consider the cumulative impact of approving a State Significant Development of this nature in a small coastal suburb like Narrabeen.
Once a precedent is established, other developers will argue for similar concessions, effectively dismantling the local planning framework that was designed to preserve the character of the Northern Beaches.
The community has seen this pattern before in other coastal areas — once large-scale developments are approved, local councils lose their ability to maintain control over appropriate scale and character. The result is irreversible urbanisation of once-natural landscapes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this proposal is inconsistent with the planning intent for Narrabeen and the Northern Beaches. It fails the tests of compatibility, suitability, and sustainability. It poses serious environmental, traffic, and social risks and offers no meaningful benefit to the broader community.
I urge the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to refuse SSD-76220734 – Indigo by Moran, 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen, on the grounds that it is fundamentally incompatible with the site, the local character, and the long-term vision for our coastline.
Narrabeen’s identity is rooted in its balance between nature and community. This development threatens to tip that balance permanently. Once our coastline is built up, there is no turning back.
Let us protect the place we call home — for our children, our environment, and the generations to come.

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed SSD development in Narrabeen, Indigo by Moran.

As a local resident (Loftus Street) in my 60s who is deeply invested in the future of our community, I fully support thoughtful growth, genuine social housing initiatives, and considered planning. However, this proposal is neither responsible nor aligned with the local planning framework or community character.

KEY CONCERNS:

1. Height and Zoning Breach

Narrabeen was re-zoned by the NSW Government only last year to a maximum of three storeys for housing. Yet this proposal seeks six storeys—double the permitted height.
This is inconsistent with the process that led to the zoning decision and sets a dangerous precedent for future development that ignores planning controls.

2. Misuse of “Social and Diverse Housing” Classification

From my understanding, this proposal is being processed under Social and Diverse Housing provisions and considerations. However, only 10 of 149 units are designated for assisted living. The remaining apartments are forecasted to be sold at around $3 million plus each.
It is difficult to see how luxury apartments qualify as “social or diverse housing,” and it looks like a planning loophole is being used to by-pass appropriate scrutiny.

3. Significant Light and Privacy Impacts

A six-storey structure of this scale will overshadow neighbouring properties, impact natural light, reduce privacy, and negatively affect the amenity of long-standing family homes.

4. Water Table & Structural Impact

Narrabeen’s water table sits at approximately 15 metres—where our bore currently draws from. A three-storey underground garage with major foundations is an evident environmental and geotechnical risk.
There has been inadequate assessment provided on how this will affect groundwater, especially in such a sensitive location.

5. Inadequate Parking Provision

Only seven visitor parking spaces for 149 units is unrealistic and irresponsible. Our streets already experience heavy parking pressure, and this will inevitably push overflow parking into an area that has very limited street capacity. A garbage truck can barely squeeze down our neighbouring side street, Loftus Street, at the best of times. We already feel the squeeze of inadequate parking.

6. Increased Traffic and Disruption and Flow

The development will significantly increase traffic on Lagoon Street and Ocean Street. Ocean Street carries consistent traffic for much of the day (with a natural increase at peak times). It is also an arterial road, assisting traffic that needs to move both north and south daily towards the peninsula and the city.

Both the construction phase and long-term occupation will create congestion and safety risks for residents, pedestrians and families.

7. Community Character and Precedent

This proposal does not reflect the established character of Narrabeen. Allowing a six-storey build here opens the door to further inappropriate height creep across the suburb—effectively undoing the careful zoning work completed just last year!

RELEVENT POLICY CONTEXT:
(Please let me know if incorrect as is taken from policy documents that may have been further updated since)

To support my objection, I highlight key relevant NSW planning policies:

The State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (“Housing SEPP”) is the principal state instrument governing residential development in NSW.
The Low and Mid‑Rise Housing Policy (LMR Policy) is embedded via Chapter 6 of the Housing SEPP (through the Amending Instrument from 28 February 2025).
Under this policy:
For designated “low and mid-rise housing inner areas” (within about 400 metres of a town centre or transport node), the consent authority must be satisfied that residential flat buildings are up to six storeys (and up to approx. 22 m height) in specified locations.
For “outer areas” (up to 800 m from centres) the cap drops to four storeys (approx. 17.5 m) for residential flat buildings.

Importantly, these state-wide controls are minimums and do not override local zoning controls which impose lower height limits and protect amenity, character and infrastructure capacity. Local Environmental Plans (LEPs) and Development Control Plans (DCPs) remain fundamentally relevant.

Local council planning documents within the Northern Beaches Council area show that deviations of more than ~90% above maximum permitted height have been treated as significant non-compliance.

In this case, not only is the proposal well above the local maximum of three storeys, but the contextual characteristics of the site (water table, street capacity, parking, traffic, amenity) aggregate to show that this development is inconsistent with both the policy intention and the local planning framework.

CONCLUSION:

I am not opposed to development, progress or genuine social housing. I want to see Narrabeen thrive. But development must respect planning controls, the environment, the community and the character of the area.

This development should be scaled appropriately to the legislated three-storey limit (or whatever local zoning direct states). Allowing six storeys here undermines that process.

I strongly request that this proposal be rejected in its current form. A revised plan—adhering to the three‐storey zoning consistent with community expectations and government guidance—would be far more acceptable.

Thank you for considering this objection. I trust that the planning process will uphold fairness, transparency and the principles intended by the recent rezoning and state policy.

Yours sincerely,

Susan Ansell

To Whom It May Concern,

Re: Objection to Proposed Development – Indigo Moran, 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen.
Submission (SUB-97542213)

My name is Stephanie Catteau, and I am a resident of 23 Lisle Street, Narrabeen 2101. I am writing as a concerned member of the local community to formally object to the proposed Indigo Moran development at 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen.

I am deeply concerned and outraged by the scale and physical impact of this proposed development on our neighbourhood. The density and height of the buildings are completely out of character with the surrounding area and will have severe consequences for the local community, including:

Traffic and congestion: The existing road network and parking capacity in Narrabeen cannot support the significant increase in vehicles that this development will bring. The area is already congested, particularly during peak times and weekends, and additional apartments and cars will worsen safety and accessibility for residents, pedestrians, and cyclists.

Excessive building height and bulk: The proposed heights far exceed the existing character of the suburb. Such large-scale structures will dominate the skyline, block views, and create an oppressive visual impact that does not fit within the established low-rise coastal village atmosphere of Narrabeen.

Loss of trees and green space: The removal of mature trees and vegetation is unacceptable. These trees are essential for maintaining local biodiversity, providing shade, and contributing to the natural beauty and environmental health of the area.

Overshadowing and loss of amenity: The proposed buildings will cause significant overshadowing of neighbouring streets and properties, reducing sunlight, privacy, and general liveability for existing residents.

Lack of genuine community consultation: Many local residents, including myself, were not informed or consulted during the planning process. This lack of engagement is deeply disappointing and suggests that community voices have not been adequately considered.

In summary, the scale, density, and design of this project are inappropriate for this location and would cause lasting negative impacts on the character, environment, and liveability of Narrabeen. I strongly urge the Planning Department to reject this proposal and to prioritise developments that align with sustainable growth, community values, and the preservation of our local environment.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Kind regards,
Stephanie Catteau
23 Lisle Street
Narrabeen NSW 2101

I am a resident of North Narrabeen and a frequent user of Ocean Street, Lagoon Street and the surrounding local area. I am deeply concerned about the proposed “Indigo by Moran” State Significant Development at 156 Ocean Street.

This submission outlines my objection to the proposal on planning, environmental and social grounds. My concerns relate primarily to incompatibility with local character, excessive height and scale, inadequate traffic and parking provision, and environmental unsuitability given the site’s sensitive coastal location.

1. Incompatibility with Local Character and Planning Controls

The proposal is fundamentally inconsistent with the Northern Beaches Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and Narrabeen’s established coastal village character.
• Excessive height and bulk: The proposed six-storey (approx. 21m) structure dramatically exceeds the prevailing building height in the surrounding residential area, which is predominantly two to three storeys. This will result in visual dominance and overshadowing of neighbouring properties, beaches, and public reserves.
• Precedent risk: Approving a development of this magnitude will set a dangerous precedent for similar large-scale “seniors housing” projects along the Northern Beaches, undermining the area’s low-rise coastal identity.
• Inconsistent urban form: The building’s bulk and modern form do not integrate with the existing urban fabric or the character of Ocean Street and Lagoon Street, which are defined by smaller-scale residential dwellings and coastal open space.

2. Unsuitability of the Site for State Significant Seniors Housing

While providing housing for seniors is important, this site is not suitable for the proposed scale or typology.
• Limited walkability and accessibility: The steep terrain, distance from shops and medical facilities, and lack of public transport connectivity make the location impractical for over-60s independent living.
• Environmental vulnerability: The site lies within the coastal hazard zone and is exposed to potential flooding, coastal erosion, and sea-level rise risks. Developing at this intensity is inconsistent with the Coastal Management Act 2016 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards).
• Tokenistic assisted-living component: Only 10 assisted-living beds are proposed out of 149 units, which fails to meet genuine seniors-housing needs and suggests the development is primarily a luxury apartment complex.

3. Traffic, Parking and Access Impacts

The proposal will exacerbate existing traffic congestion and parking stress along Ocean Street and connecting roads.
• Inadequate parking provision: With only 178 car spaces for 149 units and staff, the shortfall will force overflow parking onto surrounding residential streets such as Lagoon, Octavia, and Loftus Streets. This will worsen congestion, reduce resident amenity, and compromise pedestrian safety.
• Increased service and construction traffic: Heavy vehicle movements during and after construction will add significant safety risks, especially near pedestrian crossings and narrow coastal roads frequently used by children, cyclists, and beachgoers.
• Cumulative impact: Ocean Street already experiences congestion due to beach traffic, surf club activity, and weekend visitors. Adding this volume of permanent vehicle movements is unsustainable.

4. Environmental and Amenity Impacts
• Shadowing and loss of privacy: The proposed building height will result in significant overshadowing of nearby homes and public open space, reducing solar access and residential amenity.
• Stormwater and drainage concerns: Increased impervious surfaces will intensify runoff into Narrabeen Lagoon and surrounding drainage systems, increasing flood risks.
• Visual impact on the coastal landscape: The development will be highly visible from the beach, lagoon, and surrounding headlands, conflicting with the scenic coastal landscape values protected under the Coastal Design Guidelines 2023

5. Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I strongly object to SSD-76220734 – Indigo by Moran, 156 Ocean Street, Narrabeen.

The proposal:
• Conflicts with the existing character of Narrabeen;
• Fails to respect local height, density, and environmental controls;
• Introduces unacceptable traffic, parking, and safety impacts; and
• Is unsuitable for seniors housing in its current form.

I urge the Department of Planning to refuse the application or, at minimum, require substantial redesign to align with the surrounding low-rise context, local planning framework, and environmental constraints.

Regards,
Michael Young

I am writing as a resident of Ocean Street to formally object to the proposed 6-storey over 50 development.

Grounds for Objection

Inconsistent with Local Character
There are currently no 6-storey buildings within this suburb. The existing streetscape is characterised by low- to medium-rise residential dwellings, typically between one and three storeys. Introducing a 6-storey building would be visually intrusive and inconsistent with the established character of Ocean Street and the surrounding neighbourhood.

Conflict with Planning Intent and Density Expectations
To my knowledge, there has been no indication from the State Government or Council in recent strategic planning proposals that this area is intended for high-density or 6-storey development. The scale and intensity of this proposal appear to exceed what is envisaged under current planning frameworks and would set an undesirable precedent for future overdevelopment.

Unacceptable Visual and Amenity Impacts
The proposed height will overshadow neighbouring properties, reduce privacy, and create an overbearing bulk when viewed from the street and adjoining residences. This will have a significant negative impact on the amenity and enjoyment of existing residents.

Traffic and Parking Concerns
Ocean Street is already experiencing traffic congestion and limited on-street parking. A high-density building of this scale will further strain local infrastructure and reduce safety and accessibility for residents and visitors.

Environmental and Infrastructure Capacity
It is unclear whether local infrastructure—including stormwater, waste collection, and public transport—has the capacity to accommodate a development of this size without negatively impacting existing residents.

Conclusion

For these reasons, I respectfully request that Council refuse this Development Application in its current form. I urge Council to ensure that any future development on this site aligns with the existing character, height limits, and strategic vision for Ocean Street and the wider suburb.

Thank you for considering my submission. I would appreciate being kept informed of any further progress or amendments to this application.

My property borders , on the proposed multiple level apartment / retirement home, I am not a builder , my home is in great conditions , they are going to dig a carpark {3 levels} below ground level { 3 / 4 level above } apartments , I wish to request a licensed : eg - local council / gov't engineer, surveyor , or builder OR all of them do a report on the condition of my house before and after the construction of this dwelling - I am very concerned.

The proposed six-storey development on Ocean Street is inconsistent with the established low-rise coastal character of Narrabeen, introducing excessive bulk and scale that would dominate the streetscape and diminish the area’s visual harmony. Its height and massing would create significant overshadowing on neighbouring dwellings, reducing sunlight to private open spaces well beyond acceptable limits, while upper-level balconies and windows would directly overlook adjoining properties, eroding privacy and amenity. The resulting density and scale represent over-development for the site, compromising both the livability and coastal village identity that define this community.