I strongly object to the size of this development. 5-6 storeys is way too high for this street including the extra traffic it will cause on a road that is already busy . It does not fit in with the beachside residences . Three storeys in line with other buildings in the area would be a much better outcome .

I object to the current building height and the number of dwellings.
I do not object to a building height of 3 levels.
We do not have the infrastructure to house this many people.
The building height is ridiculously out of character for this area.
The whole peninsular is over built and therefore over populated.
This is a money grabbing exercise by the developers.
We have no decent roads in or out.
Our hospital was moved to the end of 1 laned flood prone and then gated 'shut' Wakehurst Parkway.
Mona vale road works were stopped by government making it also 1 lane each way in places
So absolutely not 6 stories on Ocean St
Over population, over sized, overshadowing neighbouring properties, not enough street parking as it is, no proper crossings for safety.

Our only mode of transport is by bus service that can't cope with the amount of people using it

Having 150 units being built is absolutely ridiculous, there is no parking as it is on the streets and having 150 units with probably two people living in each is only going to make our streets more busy. Narrabeen isn’t built to have units like that. Please don’t do this.

Six stories on Lagoon street with no parking? This will create traffic chaos and it not aligned with the rest of the suburb. This is a private enterprise and will add no value to the local community. Sure keep it as a retirement village, 3 stories maximum. Based on what I can see of the development it is a monstrosity and should not be allowed to proceed given the impact on the local community via Overlook and traffic congestion.

INTRODUCTION
My name is Deborah Inkster
Address: 4/150 Ocean St Narrabeen 2101 NSW
I would like to object to the current proposed project because I am a neighbour of Indigo and live next door towards the front of the proposed building on Ocean Street. I am retired, live with my husband and spend most of my time at home and in the surround area on the peninsula. We downsized and moved to the northern beach for our retirement.
In future years I may likely be looking to enter a Retirement Living Village.
I would be looking for one that provides high -quality design, considerate operations and long -term stewardship. That supports aging in place and supportive community activities. One that works well with the local area and neighbourhood and is sensitive to the environmental sustainability.
I would therefore assume that other prospective residents would want to feel the same about the community and the building they were buying into. If they fully understood the impact of Indigo by Moran project I'm concerned, they would not want to be a part of something so large, overpowering and disruptive to the neighbourhood.
So, I have my concerns.
The current design would impact my everyday life, my interaction with the neighbourhood and the general environment I live in.

My Everyday life Impact
1.Sunshine Loss/Overshadowing due to the Height and proximity of the Building
Our unit is on the southern side of the complex on the ground floor with 6 large windows facing north, adjacent to the proposed complex.
Due to the proximity and height of the building 21.1m (which is 71.5 % above the SEPP recommendation) we will have significant over shadowing through the day, which we don't have currently with the current 3 story building.
During the winter months, predominately we will have shade over our living area and kitchen as we have 6 north facing windows. We will most likely need to increase the use of our air conditioning due to these reasons.
Our outdoor communal clothes lines will be in full shade in the winter, for longer periods, that will need the use close dryers, increasing our energy consumption. We also have a garden area included in our ownership along this side, which will be impacted by overshadowing.
2. The building height blocks My Sky view (please see attachment no1)
The proposal Non -compliance with the Height asking 71.5% above SEPP regulations.
We will no longer see the blue sky from the 6 north facing windows, so limiting our view of sky to the front veranda exit.
The height and bulk of the building results in significant visual intrusion and view loss for my unit.
3. The inadequate Setbacks from our boundary invading My Privacy.
My privacy is affected by the height, as mentioned and by the closeness of the corner units on level 1-3 and their extended curved balconies. The current balcony planned set back is only 2.605m away from our fence line. This exacerbates the perception of bulk and mass impacting my privacy. There is a direct line of vision from these balconies on Level 1-3 into our 6 window areas.
My privacy day and night inside is affected which means shutters may have to be closed , further reducing the light in the room.
This privacy loss also impacts my use of the clothesline, our backyard and front courtyard for personal and social activities. Tree screening may be provided , however this may also impact the amount of light on our outside area.
4. My Interaction with the Neighbourhood
There will be overloading and an increase in difficulty for me to park my car in the street /streets that surround my house. This is due to the large number of Indigo residents ,staff, visitors, trade and maintenance vehicles, that will need to park on the same streets , because of the insufficient car parking provision, in the proposal, eg 4 abled bodied and 3 accessible spaces. 3 staff spaces. It is already difficult to find a park most evening, better in the day which will now change. Like ourselves we have two cars with only one car park, so I can assume a high percentage of the owners will have two cars. The proposal states two carparks per unit, however the plans only show enough room for 1 car space.
The increase traffic flow and acoustic noise increases will impact our low-density neighbourhood and safety of the many locals that walk on Ocean Street.
5. My Interaction with the Environment.
I’m concerned that the excessive bulk and size of the building so close to my residence will significantly result in reducing natural ventilation, sea breezes and general ventilation of surrounding buildings. The summer heat and cooling sea breezes is a pleasant part of life by the sea. This impact is likely to exacerbate urban heat around my area. And again, increasing my energy cooling expenses.
6. The Management of the Norfolk Pine trees.
They are planning to remove some of these trees, which all hold heritage and ecological value . According to the EIS (document 251002_EIS-156-164 Ocean St Narrabeen, page 1 ) The First Nation group who were consulted on the site advised they were increasingly important to Indigenous peoples as Local identifiers for the community.
The ones to be keep are having ground excavation work completed to close to their root system and will most likely slowly die and need to be removed. The Arborist on his report expressed concern the remaining trees would have a moderate to high rate of dying. This will impact me living so close to them and I have safety concerns of them falling over when dying off in times of huge windstorms.
These trees create impact in my view and visual privacy. If removed erodes the landscape character and natural setting of the area for the sake of the proposed building and garden design.
MY SOLUTION SUGGESTIONS: -
OVERSHADOWING /SUNLIGHT
New plans reducing the height of the building to SEPP requirements with adequate setbacks greater than 7.1m and tiered higher levels.
BULK AND SIZE
New plans reducing the height and bulky width of the building. This would come in with the accordance of the street scape of the Narrabeen Peninsula. This would increase the user-friendly look of the project that would appeal more to prospective clients to buy into Indigo.
INCREASE PRIVACY TO OUR UNIT
New plans to reduce the oversized south facing balconies on the Ocean Street frontage units and make setbacks compliant under SEPP.
New plans to reduce the height of the development to SEPP compliant building height. Downsize the courtyard space to provide a more sympathic design to SEPP setbacks.
TRAFFIC AND PARKING
New plans for the construction phase to increase parking for Tradies and large trucks. This could include use of the land along Octavia Street as a car parking area until the basement is completed.
New Plans redesigning the basement car parking levels to include full two car spaces and storage.
To provide new plans for an increase in Visitors and staff basement parking.
To retain the current bus stop location, to minimize loss of street parking and maintain convenience for residents.
LANDSCAPE AND NORFOLK PINES
We need new plans from the developers that are in alignment with the Arborist report, to look at saving these Norfolk pines and soil volume.
CONCLUSION
Overall, I am in favour of a Retirement Village development on this site next to my home. I do not support this DA for Indigo by Moran Seniors Living Development SSD-76220734. I request that the application be reviewed considering all the submissions recommendations. That it's reviewed in the light of compliance with EXISTING SEPP conditions and other government bodies to achieve a harmonious outcome for the Narrabeen Peninsula.

Thank you for reading this report.
Deborah Inkster

I object to the size, and in particular the height, of this proposed development. It is enormous in an area that has been kept to (mostly) a maximum of two storeys. Six storeys is extreme to say the least, particularly when the infrastructure in these areas remain the same.

I object to the proposed development on the grounds of excessive height and bulk, significant privacy impacts, removal of mature native vegetation, and non-compliance with SEPP, SEARs, and Seniors Housing Design Guide requirements.
A detailed objection outlining these issues, including visual impact out of character for the area, loss of amenity and planning compliance failures, is attached for consideration. Regards Michell Cudmore 0466939929

From: Kobe Edwards

Date: 3/11/2025

I am a resident of Narrabeen and wish to formally object to the proposed Indigo by Moran seniors housing development at 156–164 Ocean Street, Narrabeen. The scale and intensity of this proposal are entirely inappropriate for this sensitive coastal site and inconsistent with local planning controls. I personally pass the area of this development almost every day and have many close family members who live in very close proximity to this development and would affect me and my family personally. On top of this, as a lifelong resident of Narrabeen I worry what might happen in the future to the Northern Beaches if this development is allowed to proceed, as this proposal does not provide any relief for housing and in fact subtracts from the amount of assisted living for the elderly in the area.

I have included some of the concerns I have with this development below.
1. The proposal exceeds the intended scale of the R2 Low Density Residential Zone under the Northern Beaches LEP 2011. Its 21.5m height and bulk disregard Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings and the Housing SEPP 2021 design principles.

2. The site sits within mapped Coastal Environment and Coastal Vulnerability Areas under the Coastal SEPP 2018. Excavation over 11m deep poses flooding, groundwater, and structural risks.

3. The BASIX assessment barely meets minimum standards with little passive design or energy efficiency, contrary to Clause 3.6 of the Housing SEPP and Section B5 of the DCP.

4. No meaningful consultation was undertaken before lodgement, and the public exhibition period of only two weeks was unreasonably short.

5. The absence of an Independent Design Review Panel undermines confidence in the process. Approving this would set a dangerous precedent for large-scale overdevelopment along Narrabeen’s coastline.

6. Under section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, developments must demonstrate consistency with planning instruments and serve the public interest. This proposal offers no genuine community or environmental benefit and undermines the principles of sustainable coastal planning.

Request
I request that the Department refuse SSD-76220734, or alternatively require a full redesign that:
• Reduces height, bulk, and excavation depth;
• Improves sustainability and BASIX performance;
• Retains mature trees and expands deep-soil areas;
• Undergoes independent design review; and
• Is re-exhibited with proper community consultation and an extended timeframe.

I hope that you take these issues into consideration and will refuse this development, at least in its current state. This proposal is dangerous for Narrabeen, and will cause significant disruptions for local families, and even those who frequent the area in general.

Sincerely,
Kobe Edwards