Novus on Victoria - Build-to-Rent

18401

Redacted

10/02/2026

Support

Website

I am writing to show my support for this development - ideal location for more housing and retail

18841

Northern Sydney Property Management

09/02/2026

Support

Email

To whom it might concern: I am making this submission in support of the ‘Novus on Victoria’ proposal. I am a business owner (two businesses) in Chatswood since 2015. I also have a business in Singapore and want to make some comparisons between Sydney and Singapore and my own experience operating in Chatswood. I joined the public hearing that you held last Friday and heard the views there. Firstly I have seen some proposals before for redevelopment of this site on corner Victoria Avenue and Victor St. It seems that Council rejected those because it required more commercial space to be provided. This made no sense to me especially after COVID where we since then have an over-supply of commercial space. The current proposal is sensible in giving more people the opportunity to live close to a major railway station and bus terminal. When I see some applications for development of Chatswood (and some other Sydney suburbs) I see many rate payers and councils rejecting applications to build residential close to CBDs and transport hubs. With my experience in Singapore this is totally counter-intuitive. I quote from one website: “Singapore has perfected the "Integrated Transport Hub" (ITH) and "Mixed-Use over Rail" model. This approach maximizes land use by vertically stacking transit, commerce, and housing”. So of course I support this concept and it seems that the Build-To-Rent model extends the convenience of easy access to transport and retail and commercial services to more people, including those who cannot afford to buy a place in such convenient locations. At the Friday forum I heard people complaining about vehicle access on Victor St and especially during the construction phase. With many new developments there is inconvenience to some people and I agree that those issues must be heard and considered. I also wondered about why no parking for residents in the building but the Novus representative answered this well, they said they have another BTR property in Chatswood that has residents parking. So those with cars can consider that one. Those without cars can consider this Victor St location. I think the suggested clutter of resident’s cars in nearby streets is very unlikely. So for businesses like mine, I am very positive about these additional residents have access to this location. It will be good for everybody long term. The whole of Sydney needs to move in this same direction of improved accessibility for as many people as possible. Regards, York Wu Northern Sydney Property Management

17801

New South Wales 2024

09/02/2026

Support

Website

I work nearby and recently saw this development online. It represents a positive upgrade to the CBD, and the additional housing it provides is exactly what the city needs

17956

Redacted

09/02/2026

Support

Website

I support this development I think it looks great!

16511

Redacted

06/02/2026

Support

Website

I think further housing and shops in this area is good for this area as the infrastructure is already there . Close to transport etc

16566

Redacted

06/02/2026

Support

Website

As someone who commutes along Victoria Avenue daily, I see real value in this proposal. The development would significantly improve the existing mall, which is in need of renewal, and contribute much-needed housing in Chatswood. I strongly support the project.

16581

New South Wales 2029

06/02/2026

Support

Website

I support this development as it will deliver much-needed housing, a describing a high-quality design, and contribute to the growth of the build-to-rent sector.

16651

Redacted

06/02/2026

Support

Website

In support

16656

Queensland 4014

06/02/2026

Support

Website

This would be a great step in the right direction for housing supply and rejuvenate the Chatswood area. Built to rent seems like a practical step forward to solve housing issues. Additionally, this would add a great space to the area

16661

Chatswood Hotel

New South Wales 2092

06/02/2026

Support

Website

As a proud member of Chatswood’s hospitality community, we welcome and support the proposed development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue. The addition of new residents and workers in the precinct will bring a valuable boost to activation and the local activity, increasing customer activity and helping businesses like ours continue to grow and serve the community. This kind of investment strengthens Chatswood’s position as a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly destination for dining, entertainment, and commerce. We look forward to seeing this project moving ahead and contributing to a thriving future for Chatswood.

15886

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

We need more affordable housing in high density urban areas like chatswood

15906

New South Wales 2068

05/02/2026

Support

Website

As a Willoughby local who frequent Chatswood weekly, I write in strong support of the Novus on Victoria build to rent proposal. Australia is experiencing a well documented housing supply and affordability crisis, and projects that deliver purpose built rental housing at scale should be actively encouraged rather than delayed. Build to rent developments such as Novus on Victoria play a critical role in expanding the availability of secure, long term rental accommodation across a broad and diverse range of household types, including singles, couples, families and key workers. The proposal demonstrates a high quality architectural response and has appropriately addressed environmental, sustainability, traffic, servicing and amenity impacts through detailed technical assessment. The development represents an efficient use of well located urban land and aligns with both state and local strategic planning objectives to increase housing supply in accessible locations close to transport, services and employment. Importantly, build to rent provides professionally managed housing with longer lease options, improved tenant security and consistent building maintenance, outcomes that are increasingly important in the current rental market. Supporting developments of this nature will help stabilise rental supply, improve housing choice and deliver long term community benefit. For these reasons, the Novus on Victoria proposal warrants full support from the State Government and local authorities and should be approved without delay in the broader public interest.

16061

New South Wales 2065

05/02/2026

Support

Website

5 February 2026 Submission in Support of Novus on Victoria, Chatswood We are residents of Naremburn, within Willoughby City Council LGA, and we support the proposed build-to-rent development, Novus on Victoria in Chatswood. Chatswood is a logical and well-suited location for this type of housing. It is close to public transport, shops, jobs, and services, and additional rental housing in this area is clearly needed. With rising rents and limited availability, developments like this help address ongoing housing pressures. We also see the build-to-rent model as a positive approach, offering more stability for renters and supporting long-term residents. Focusing new housing in established centres like Chatswood supports local businesses and makes better use of existing infrastructure. Based on the information on exhibition, the proposal appears well designed and appropriate for its location. Overall, we believe Novus on Victoria will be a positive addition to the area and I support its approval. Regards (Name redacted)

16076

New South Wales 2144

05/02/2026

Support

Website

i approve of the development

16106

New South Wales 2064

05/02/2026

Support

Website

Given the significant need for additional beds in Sydney and considering how accessible and efficient this type of offering is, the benefits clearly outweigh any potential issues. What are we waiting for?

16116

New South Wales 2088

05/02/2026

Support

Website

Great for housing supply and will rejuvenate chatswood

16121

New South Wales 2144

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

16131

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

16136

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I would like to support this Build-to-Rent development. The area needs it, it will be fantastic for the local community and wider community!

16141

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the document

16151

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

16251

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I agree for the development.

16261

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development.

16266

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

Very supportive of this development, think it will bring a lot of value to the community.

16276

New South Wales 2220

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I am good with that

16321

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of this development

16386

New South Wales 2099

05/02/2026

Support

Website

I support business that aims to bring community together.

16391

Redacted

05/02/2026

Support

Website

Support the development

16406

New South Wales 2064

05/02/2026

Support

Website

To supports the conditional approval of this proposed development

15051

Victoria 3006

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I live in Novus on Sturt, a build to rent building in Melbourne. I have lived here with my family for the past 6 months. I have found this style of living to be beyond expectations. Some of the reasons include: Lease flexibility without long‑term commitment 🡪 we are renovating our family home and have been able to extend our lease as faced with construction delays on our home Professional On-Site Management & Friendly Team 🡪 resulting in timely & reliable maintenance, clear communication and consistent standard of service, providing a level of service and reliability uncommon in private rentals Strong sense of Community 🡪 there is a great feeling of community through events, shared spaces & approachable on-site team, making it easier to know your neighbours and feel part of a community. Especially as I have children and a pet - this has made it a much easier transition to apartment living for my family. Highly accessible location 🡪 walkable neighbourhood with public transport connection and proximity to CBD enhancing convenience and day-to-day liveability Amenities at my doorstep 🡪 purpose design amenities such as wellness facilities and coworking (supporting my husband's WFH arrangements), social areas and pet friendly facilities – professionally managed and actively used (not just add-ons) Purpose‑built for long‑term living 🡪 Apartments designed specifically for renting, with practical layouts, durable finishes, and high standards of acoustic performance, natural light, and energy efficiency Overall, I think build to rent is a valuable housing solution and should be expanded to more locations. It offers community, safety, wellbeing and accessibility above and beyond traditional apartment rental arrangements.

15081

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I fully support this development. Great addition to the community and a great solution to provide further housing supply.

15086

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I am supportive of this proposed development.

15091

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support build-to-rent housing as it increases the supply of high-quality rental homes, helping to ease Sydney’s ongoing housing shortage.

15216

New South Wales 2068

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support this proposal as I think the location is perfect for this type of development being so close to all that transport and amenity. Are we not in a housing crisis? this is type of development we should be approving and building ASAP to fix the problem.

15241

New South Wales 2068

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I am in full support of this development proposal as it will provide the necessary housing needs in a location that suits best.

15266

New South Wales 2066

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of said development

15276

New South Wales 2086

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approved!

15281

New South Wales 2089

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I think this is great for housing supply in a Sydney suburb that needs rejuvenation and a stronger nighttime economy.

15286

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support the development

15291

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

Affordable housing please

15296

New South Wales 2151

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15306

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15311

New South Wales 2021

04/02/2026

Support

Website

Rejuvenate Chatswood and encourage nighttime economy

15321

New South Wales 2096

04/02/2026

Support

Website

It’s a fabulous development

15331

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15471

New South Wales 2122

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of development

15521

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I regularly visit the Chatswood CBD and strongly support the proposed development. Rent to build has numerous benefits including addressing the current housing crisis. Boosting supply and providing long term stability for renters is can only be seen as being advantageous for the commmunity.

15551

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I’m in support of this application and believe it will be a positive for the area

15561

New South Wales 2066

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve the development. I think it will be good for Chatswood and the local Community

15571

New South Wales 2062

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support this development

15581

New South Wales 2062

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support this development - great stuff keep it going

15601

New South Wales 2100

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support this

15606

New South Wales 2065

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development.

15611

New South Wales 2086

04/02/2026

Support

Website

This is a fantastic opportunity to provide more renting units in an over populated area. Keep downward pressure on rents going up and also provide some more skyscrapers for global city! The designs look fantastic,

15616

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development.

15626

New South Wales 2071

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of this development

15641

New South Wales 2093

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15646

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve the development

15651

New South Wales 2067

04/02/2026

Support

Website

Be great for the community and will rejuvenate Chatswood.

15656

New South Wales 2151

04/02/2026

Support

Website

i approve of the development

15691

New South Wales 2076

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15711

New South Wales 2223

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I support for the development.

15731

New South Wales 2205

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I agree for the development

15741

New South Wales 2067

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15746

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15751

New South Wales 2217

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15761

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development.

15766

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

approving development

15771

Redacted

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development.

15791

New South Wales 2194

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15796

New South Wales 2205

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I Approve of the development

15801

New South Wales 2142

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

15811

New South Wales 2144

04/02/2026

Support

Website

We want support

15831

New South Wales 2142

04/02/2026

Support

Website

I approve of the development

13341

Redacted

29/01/2026

Support

Website

As a long-time resident of the Willoughby area, I’d like to voice my support for the proposed development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue in Chatswood. This part of Chatswood is already well-serviced by public transport, retail, and community infrastructure, so it makes sense to build more housing here. We need more homes in areas where people can easily walk, commute, and access service, especially as housing affordability continues to be a challenge for many. I hope the proposal moves forward and contributes to a more inclusive, accessible, and lively Chatswood. Warm regards, (Redacted)

13346

Redacted

29/01/2026

Support

Website

I live in the Willoughby area and fully support the proposed development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. We need more housing options, especially in places like Chatswood where transport and services are already well-established. This project makes practical sense—it adds supply where it’s needed most and helps ease the pressure on affordability. (Redacted)

13396

Redacted

29/01/2026

Support

Website

As a local business owner operating a restaurant in Chatswood, I would like to express my strong support for the proposed development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue. Chatswood has long been recognised as the commercial and cultural hub of Sydney’s northern suburbs. Thoughtful, well-located development is essential to maintaining this role and ensuring the area continues to thrive. Increasing residential density near major transport links and key infrastructure will help address housing demand while also bringing greater activity and foot traffic into the precinct. For small businesses like mine, increased pedestrian movement and a stronger local population are critical. More people living, working, and passing through Chatswood directly supports local restaurants, cafés, retailers, and service providers, helping to create a more resilient and sustainable local economy. This kind of growth also contributes to a safer and more vibrant environment throughout the day and evening. I also welcome the proposed improvements to public spaces and pedestrian walkways, particularly around the Chatswood Interchange. Enhancing walkability and connectivity will encourage people to spend more time in the area, strengthening Chatswood’s role as a destination rather than simply a transport corridor. Overall, I believe this development will make Chatswood more lively, accessible, and economically strong, delivering long-term benefits for residents, businesses, and the wider Willoughby community. I look forward to seeing this project move ahead. Kind regards, (Redacted) Chatswood

10966

Redacted

19/01/2026

Support

Website

The proposed development will benefit the community. Firstly, housing supply. The project will deliver 260 BTR apartments helping alleviate the pressures of cost of living. Secondly, it will drive local economic growth, producing jobs, and supporting local businesses. Thirdly, it will promote sustainable transport, being a hub for public transport such as trains, metro and buses.

10426

Novus Management Pty Ltd

14/01/2026

Support

Email

Proposed Condition Amendments letter redacted.pdf (PDF, 150.43 KB)

Attachment 1 - Proposed Consent Condition Amendments.pdf (PDF, 189.52 KB)

9876

New South Wales 2063

09/01/2026

Support

Website

The current Housing affordablity and supply issues in Sydney are well known. The focus of increased higher density development around key transport hubs is logical and a necessary part of the housing supply equation. The Committee for Sydney report in April 2022, Rethinking Station Precincts highlights the benefits that can be obtained with high quality urban planning around key transport hubs. Given the challenges being faced by younger first home owners, new Built to Rent developments that have an assortment of Unit sizes and cost play an important role in providing suitable accomodation to those unable to afford home ownership. The location of this proposed development in Chatswood so close to the new Chatswood Metro, Chatswood Transport Hub and within the Chatswood shopping precinct ticks many boxes. I support the assessment made by the DPHI that this development is both acceptable and see it necessary if we are to bridge the gap in affordable housing supply on the lower North Shore.

9531

New South Wales 2066

23/12/2025

Support

Website

I fully support this development proposal. I believe is it vital for the increased housing supply demand and would greatly benefit the community!

9486

Redacted

17/12/2025

Support

Website

Supportive of the proposal for the benefit of the community and need for housing

9446

Redacted

16/12/2025

Support

Website

As a Willougby Council resident with a keen interest in urban design, I’m pleased to support the above development. From what I’ve seen, the architectural design of the building will be a strong addition to the Chatswood CBD. It complements the skyline while adding a modern, thoughtful touch to the streetscape. It’s refreshing to see a project that considers both function and form. Beyond aesthetics, the development brings practical benefits—more housing in a well-connected area and next to significant transport infrastructure, and increased activity that supports local businesses. It’s a smart use of space in a growing urban centre.

9246

Redacted

12/12/2025

Support

Website

This development represents a very positive step forward to good quality housing options as well as beneficial development and land use in the local community. i strong support the development. I trust that suitable parking will be allowed within the development given its central location.

8951

Orchard Hotel Chatswood

New South Wales 2067

09/12/2025

Support

Website

I believe this building will be great economically for the local businesses.

8981

New South Wales 2060

09/12/2025

Support

Website

I support the proposed development.

9131

New South Wales 2223

09/12/2025

Support

Website

I support the proposed development

18896

10/02/2026

Object

Email

Dear Department Leader: I am a tenant from 410-416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. Currently We have five employees, and everyone relies on their wages to support their families. If you develop this building, these five families will face significant hardship, and our business loans will likely be suspended. We request that the development be halted. Kind regard Jon

18156

Redacted

10/02/2026

Object

Website

For the reasons mentioned below, I object to the proposed Novus development at Victoria Avenue in Chatswood (Novus on Victoria). As a resident of the Sebel Residence, Chatswood (the Sebel), the proposed development is detrimental to the character of Chatswood and affects residents in neighbouring buildings in a negative way. 1. Traffic congestion Traffic congestion around Victor Street is already a serious concern, and the problem will only get worse if the Novus development is introduced at the proposed site. There are already so many cars going through the part of Victor St between Mandarin Centre and Post Office Lane. This is a very small road, and it is difficult for residents of neighbouring properties (such as the Sebel on 37 Victor St and the building on 39 Victor St) to get out, because traffic congestion on Victor St is very common. There is a lot of people walking across Victor St during peak hours and weekends. It is foreseeable that this increases the risks of collisions for pedestrians as they walk across Victor St to get to Mandarin Centre or Westfield Chatswood Shopping Centre. The part of Victor St between Mandarin Centre and Post Office Lane will be extremely crowded with cars and pedestrians if a new large-scale development is introduced at the proposed site. This will cause a lot of inconvenience and frustration for both residents nearby and those who drive to Mandarin Centre. 2. Loss of privacy Loss of privacy is a serious concern for residents on the north-facing side of the Sebel and at neighbouring properties (such as the Metro Residences). Hundreds of new occupants on the south-facing apartments in a new building at the proposed location will have an unobstructed view of the north-facing apartments of the Sebel at a close distance. It is foreseeable that someone from the new building will be able to see inside the Sebel apartments. This is a serious intrusion of privacy for residents of the Sebel. This is unprecedented as other residential buildings have been much further away from the Sebel. Residents from other properties nearby will also face a similar intrusion to their privacy. This development is unacceptable as it is detrimental to the quality of life of existing residents living in the surrounding buildings. 3. Loss of view and sunlight The proposed development will also block out the view and sunlight that existing residents in neighbouring buildings enjoy. For example, those on the north-facing apartments of the Sebel will get to see an extremely large and tall building directly in front of them every day. Furthermore, residents in neighbouring buildings will have to endure extensive periods of overshadowing, especially during winter, and loss of sunlight. Loss of view and sunlight is detrimental to the amenity for residents nearby. 4. Negative impact on the character of Chatswood The proposed development overwhelms surrounding areas and reduces the aesthetic quality of Chatswood as a beautiful place that is family-friendly and enjoyable to live in. It is out of scale with the local streetscape and makes the area adjacent to Mandarin Centre and Westfield very crowded and extremely dense. Overcrowding around this area reduces the quality of life for residents nearby and weakens the appeal of Chatswood both as a place to live in and a place to visit. Having a large-scale development such as Novus at the proposed site is visually unappealing and diminishes the family-friendly quality of Chatswood. 5. Impacts from construction at the proposed site It is foreseeable that constructing a 46-storey building like Novus on the proposed site will adversely impact nearby residents for several years. The constant noise from the construction site will create significant disruption and inconvenience for nearby residents. Dust and air pollution will also be an extremely serious problem for them. Besides residents at the Sebel, many residents from nearby buildings (such as those from the Metro Residences, namely Metro View (69 Albert St), Metro Spire (1 Post Office Lane), and Metro Grand (438 Victoria Avenue)) have expressed concerns similar to those mentioned above. These concerns are serious concerns. I request that the Independent Planning Commission consider these concerns when deciding on the proposed Novus development. In my view, the proposed Novus development is overall a negative development for Chatswood. Therefore, it should be rejected.

18336

Owners of SP 88678, Metro Spire, 1 Post Office Lane, Chatswood

New South Wales 2000

10/02/2026

Object

Website

please see attached letters dated 10 February 2026 (ref: 252145.4L (Spire)). Also attached is our original submission on behalf of Metro Residences, dated 28 May 2025 (Ref: 252145.2L).

Attachment 1_Redacted.pdf (PDF, 761.38 KB)

Attachment 2_Redacted.pdf (PDF, 804.14 KB)

18856

09/02/2026

Object

Email

Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to lodge a formal submission objecting to the proposed development Novus on Victoria – Build-to-Rent (SSD-63324208). After reviewing the available documentation, I have significant concerns regarding the appropriateness of this proposal and its potential impacts on the local area. My objections are outlined below. 1. Excessive Scale and Height The proposed development is excessive in scale, bulk, and height relative to the surrounding built form. It is inconsistent with the established character of the locality and risks setting an undesirable precedent for overdevelopment in the area. 2. Cumulative Overdevelopment and Premature Assessment A significant number of residential apartment developments in the surrounding area have already been approved in recent years. Many of these approved developments have not yet commenced construction, despite having been granted consent for a considerable period of time. Approving further large-scale developments before the completion of these existing approvals is premature. The true cumulative impacts of these approved developments—particularly in relation to traffic congestion, infrastructure capacity, public transport demand, and residential amenity—have not yet been realised or properly assessed. It would be more appropriate for the relevant authorities to allow these approved developments to be constructed and occupied, and then reassess the actual impacts on the area before considering additional major development proposals. 3. Traffic, Access and Parking Impacts The proposal is likely to generate a substantial increase in traffic movements, placing additional pressure on already congested local roads. When considered together with other approved but unbuilt developments, the cumulative traffic and parking impacts are likely to be significantly underestimated. 4. Amenity Impacts on Surrounding Properties The development is likely to result in unacceptable amenity impacts, including loss of privacy, overshadowing, reduced access to sunlight, increased noise, and a general decline in residential amenity for nearby occupants. 5. Infrastructure and Services Capacity There is concern that existing local infrastructure and services—such as transport networks, community facilities, utilities, schools, and open space—do not have sufficient demonstrated capacity to accommodate both this proposal and the numerous already approved developments in the area. 6. Inconsistency with Strategic Planning Objectives While increasing housing supply is an important objective, it should not come at the expense of orderly planning, infrastructure provision, and local liveability. In my view, the proposal does not adequately demonstrate consistency with relevant planning controls or strategic objectives when viewed in the context of existing approved but uncompleted developments. Conclusion For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Independent Planning Commission give serious consideration to these concerns and refuse the application, or at minimum defer determination until the impacts of existing approved developments have been properly realised and assessed. Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission. Kind Regards Michael Zhong Licensed Real Estate Agent

18871

09/02/2026

Object

Email

Dear Department Leader: I am a tenant from 410-416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. Currently We have seven employees, and everyone relies on their wages to support their families. If you develop this building, these seven families will face significant hardship, and our business loans will likely be suspended. We request that the development be halted. BR Jeff

17711

New South Wales 2067

09/02/2026

Object

Website

Dear Commissioners, I am writing to object to the current design of the Novus on Victoria development. I live nearby and have serious concerns about the impact this building will have on our area: 1. Loss of Sunlight • The building will block sunlight to many apartments in Metro View and Metro Spire. • The solar access drops from 84% to 45%, which is well below the required standard in winter. • This will reduce comfort, health, and property value for residents. 2. Building is Too Bulky • The tower looks too large for the site. • It lacks proper setbacks and looks like one giant block. • It will block views and feel too overpowering next to existing homes. 3. Traffic and Parking Problems • Victor Street is a narrow dead-end street already crowded with Westfield, Council parking, and residential traffic. • Adding 260 apartments with no parking will only make it worse. • It’s not realistic to assume new residents won’t own cars. 4. Construction Access is Not Safe • The site is hard to access. • There is no clear plan for how construction trucks will safely enter and exit. • This could create daily safety risks for pedestrians and drivers. 5. Lack of Proper Community Consultation • Many affected residents, including our building, were not properly consulted. • The engagement feels one-sided, with no real conversation with those most impacted. Request: I ask that the Commission does not approve this application unless major changes are made, including: • A slimmer, better-designed tower • Proper solar access for neighbors • Real traffic and parking solutions • Clear construction impact controls • Genuine community engagement Thank you for considering my concerns.

17716

New South Wales 2067

09/02/2026

Object

Website

Dear Commissioners, I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed development at Novus on Victoria in Chatswood. While I understand the need for new housing, especially close to public transport, I believe this project in its current form is too large, poorly planned, and will seriously affect the local community. The building is simply too bulky for the site. It doesn’t fit well with the surrounding area and will block sunlight and views for many residents, particularly those in Metro View and Metro Spire. Reducing winter solar access from 84% of apartments to just 45% is a major loss of amenity and should not be allowed. Victor Street, where the site is located, is already a narrow and congested dead-end with no proper turning circle. The idea that construction trucks and service vehicles can safely access and exit for the next two and a half years is hard to believe. There’s no clear or workable solution being offered, and the safety of pedestrians, especially with so much foot traffic in Post Office Lane, will be at risk. The proposal to build 260 apartments with almost no parking is also unrealistic. People will still own cars, and without space, they’ll spill into already crowded streets. Nearby residents and businesses will end up paying the price for a planning decision that ignores reality. What makes it more confusing is that Novus’ other project nearby does include car parking—why is this one being treated differently? From a design point of view, the building appears as one large, solid block with little articulation or visual relief. Council raised this concern clearly, yet Novus points only to the design competition process instead of addressing the outcome’s impact on the streetscape. That’s not good enough. It’s also disappointing that Novus hasn’t made a genuine effort to speak with affected residents. Buildings like Seaboule and Metro Spire weren’t properly consulted. It feels like decisions were made before we had a chance to speak. Novus says they’ve “allowed” for possible basement links to future developments, but nothing is confirmed. That doesn’t solve any current access issues—it just kicks the problem down the road. And finally, with a high-turnover rental building like this, there will be constant movement of tenants, deliveries, and removalist trucks. Saying that on-site managers will coordinate it all sounds good in theory, but it’s completely unworkable in such a tight and already strained location. I respectfully ask the Commission not to approve this development unless it is significantly redesigned to reduce its bulk, protect sunlight and views, improve access and traffic conditions, and genuinely respond to the needs of existing residents. Thank you for considering my submission.

17881

New South Wales 2067

09/02/2026

Object

Website

I object to the proposed development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. While I acknowledge the State’s housing objectives and the Department’s assessment process, I do not consider that the scale, height and cumulative impacts of this proposal have been adequately resolved. In my view, the Assessment Report places excessive reliance on technical compliance and existing conditions to justify outcomes that would result in a further and unreasonable erosion of residential amenity. My key concerns are outlined below. 1. Overshadowing and loss of solar access The Assessment Report acknowledges that the proposal would result in a number of existing apartments losing compliance with the minimum solar access standards in the Apartment Design Guide (Section 5.3.2, paragraphs 97–98). In particular, apartments at 69 Albert Avenue and 84–86 Albert Avenue would experience significant reductions in winter solstice solar access, with some dwellings reduced to approximately 1.6–1.8 hours of sunlight. Despite this, the impacts are considered acceptable largely because surrounding areas are already affected by existing development. In my view, existing or historical overshadowing should not be used as a justification for further loss of amenity. The assessment relies on narrow time windows at the winter solstice and does not adequately reflect the lived experience of residents who currently enjoy reasonable solar access that would be materially diminished by the proposal. 2. Bulk, scale and proximity to existing residential buildings The proposal involves a 46-storey tower with very close separation distances to surrounding residential buildings. Table 7 of the Assessment Report identifies that for buildings such as 1 Post Office Lane (Metro Spire), the proposal would appear as a prominent new feature in the foreground of views, at separation distances of only a few tens of metres. While these impacts are characterised as “moderate”, the proximity and scale of the development raise serious concerns regarding visual dominance, loss of outlook and the cumulative effect of building bulk in an already dense environment. The assessment places greater emphasis on the retention of partial views than on the qualitative change to outlook and sense of openness experienced by existing residents. 3. Reliance on existing impacts to justify further impacts A recurring theme throughout the Assessment Report is that many surrounding properties are already affected by overshadowing or bulk from existing development, and that this reduces the significance of the additional impacts caused by the proposal. I respectfully disagree with this approach. Planning assessment should not be based on a progressive lowering of amenity standards simply because an area has already undergone significant change. Existing impacts should not be relied upon to justify further erosion of residential amenity. 4. Design excellence and setbacks Council raised substantive concerns regarding building bulk, scale and setbacks, including the proposed nil setback to the western boundary (Section 5.2.3). While these concerns are acknowledged, they are ultimately set aside on the basis of design excellence outcomes and development feasibility. In particular, paragraph 67 indicates that providing a setback to the western boundary would prejudice development capacity on the neighbouring site and result in an unviable floorplate. In my view, development feasibility and maximising yield should not outweigh reasonable expectations of separation, amenity and urban design outcomes, particularly in close proximity to existing residential buildings. Although Council’s concerns are noted, it is difficult to see how they have been substantively addressed, given that the final built-form outcomes remain largely unchanged. 5. Density and community impacts The Assessment Report concludes that, in the absence of a floor space ratio control, density is acceptable based on built form and amenity considerations (Section 5.2.2), despite a very high number of public objections. In my view, the extent of community objection, combined with the acknowledged amenity impacts, warranted a more cautious approach. The proposal includes a high proportion of studio apartments, which may alter the demographic profile of the area and place additional pressure on local infrastructure, safety and community services. These broader community impacts are not meaningfully resolved in the assessment. 6. Construction impacts The proposed construction period of approximately four years (2026–2029) represents a prolonged disruption in an area already experiencing significant development activity. While construction impacts are noted, the cumulative effect of extended construction on residents’ amenity and wellbeing has not been adequately addressed. 7. Lack of assessment of cumulative impacts The Assessment Report generally considers individual impacts in isolation, concluding that each is acceptable when assessed separately. However, there is limited consideration of the cumulative effect of building height, bulk, proximity, overshadowing, view loss and prolonged construction on existing residents. In my view, the combined effect of these impacts results in a materially different and more severe outcome than any single impact considered on its own. This cumulative effect has not been adequately addressed in determining whether the proposal represents a reasonable outcome. 8. Public interest and weighting of State objectives While the delivery of housing is an important State objective, the public interest test requires a balanced consideration of both strategic benefits and local impacts. In this case, the Assessment Report places significant weight on meeting State housing targets, while unresolved local amenity impacts are treated as secondary. In my view, meeting a numerical housing target should not, of itself, justify outcomes that materially diminish existing residential amenity, particularly where those impacts have been acknowledged but not substantively resolved. 9. Limits of conditions in addressing core impacts The Assessment Report frequently notes that residual impacts can be managed through conditions of consent. However, many of the key impacts identified — including building height, bulk and proximity to existing residential buildings — are inherent to the proposal and cannot be meaningfully mitigated through conditions. This limits the effectiveness of the recommended conditions in addressing the core amenity concerns raised by residents and Council. Conclusion and alternative consideration For the reasons outlined above, I do not consider that the Assessment Report adequately resolves the key concerns raised by residents and Council. While the proposal may meet certain technical controls, this does not, in itself, demonstrate that the development represents a reasonable or acceptable outcome for existing residents. If the Commission is minded to approve the proposal, I respectfully submit that a reduction in building height and bulk, together with increased setbacks, should be considered in order to better balance the delivery of housing with the protection of existing residential amenity.

18151

Redacted

09/02/2026

Object

Website

I oppose the proposed Novus development at Victoria Avenue, Chatswood (Novus on Victoria). As the owner of the north-facing side of an apartment at the Sebel Residence, Chatswood (the Sebel), I am very concerned about the negative impacts that this development will bring. 1. View obstruction The proposed height of 46 storeys for Novus on Victoria will significantly obstruct the view enjoyed by residents on the north-facing apartment units of the Sebel. The view is an integral part of the visual amenity of these apartment units. The proposed site is just too close. Residents at the Sebel will pretty much get to see an extremely tall building directly in front of them every single day, and this is very depressing. This severely affects property values and the quality of life that residents of the Sebel enjoy. 2. Intrusion of privacy The proximity of the proposed Novus development poses a serious intrusion to the privacy of the residents on the north-facing side of the Sebel. This is because the south-facing side of the Novus apartments will be directly overlooking the north-facing side of the Sebel. Hundreds of new residents on the south-facing side of Novus will be able to clearly see from a close distance the private living areas of apartments on the Sebel, including living rooms, bedrooms, and the kitchen. It is uncomfortable to feel like being constantly watched by someone this close in my day-to-day life. Privacy is extremely important to the residential amenity of the Sebel, as residents expect to open their curtains and windows and enjoy indoor and outdoor spaces without feeling intruded upon. It is therefore unreasonable for Novus to be built on the proposed site, given its proximity to the Sebel, as it is detrimental to my quality of life, and the quality of life of other residents of the Sebel and neighbouring buildings, who are likely to experience a similar loss of privacy due to the proposed development. 3. Loss of natural sunlight Residents on the north-facing side of the Sebel will also face the loss of natural sunlight due to overshadowing by the height and size of the proposed development. Periods of overshadowing will be extensive, especially during winter. It is important for residents of the Sebel and neighbouring buildings to be able to enjoy sunlight coming into their apartments via the balcony and windows, as sunlight helps improve mental well-being. Loss of natural sunlight worsens the residential amenity for existing residents and is another reason the proposed development must be rejected. 4. Traffic congestion on Victor Street The proposed Novus development will exacerbate existing traffic congestion on the part of the Victor Street from just outside of Mandarin Centre to close to Post Office Lane. This is a very short road and there is a lot of cars frequently entering and exiting the following areas via Victor St, especially during peak hours and weekends: - the Mandarin Centre carpark (located near the intersection of Albert Ave and Victor St); - the Sebel Residence (located on 37 Victor St, adjacent to the Mandarin Centre); - the residential building at 39 Victor St; and - Post Office Lane (near 45 Victor St). It is already difficult for residents of the Sebel Residence to drive their cars out onto Victor St during weekends when cars fill up the road and pedestrians frequently cross the road. Even the cul-de-sac near 45 Victor St and Post Office Lane becomes very packed with cars. There are many times when a car does a three-point-turn at the cul-de-sac and there is a long queue of cars waiting from behind, blocking cars coming out of Post Office Lane. Some drivers just stop at the cul-de-sac and in the middle of Victor St just to pick up other passengers, even when there are ‘No Stopping’ signs. These instances reflect how Victor St is already congested. Introducing a high-density development at the proposed site will likely exacerbate the problem of traffic congestion at Victor St, which is already overburdened with cars. This creates a lot of frustration for nearby residents (including those from the Sebel) and those who park their cars in Mandarin Centre and Post Office Lane. 5. Out of scale with the local streetscape and disruptions to community character The proposed development impacts on the current character of the local area in an unprecedented and negative way. It destroys the aesthetic value of Chatswood because it overwhelms the surrounding area. For a very long time, there is considerable distance between residential buildings, allowing not only residents in these buildings to enjoy privacy but also maintaining the overall visual appeal of Chatswood as a family-friendly community. Having a large-scale development like Novus at the proposed site is out of scale with the local streetscape and diminishes the character of Chatswood as a family-friendly community. It makes the area around Victor St, Mandarin Centre, and Westfield extremely dense and overcrowded, and less appealing overall as a place to live. As a resident, I feel extremely uncomfortable to see Chatswood being transformed in such a manner. Based on the above reasons, the proposed Novus development must be rejected.

17531

New South Wales 2067

08/02/2026

Object

Website

Dear Independent Planning Commission, I write as a resident directly affected by the Novus on Victoria Build-to-Rent proposal to formally object to this development in its current form, for the following reasons: 1. Traffic Congestion, Safety and Local Infrastructure Strain Chatswood’s road network — particularly Victoria Avenue, Victor Street and Post Office Lane — already experiences significant congestion and safety issues. Increased vehicle movements from 260 additional apartments, service vehicles, delivery traffic, ride-share pick-ups and waste trucks will further worsen congestion and escalate risks for pedestrians and cyclists in this busy CBD location. Many submissions to the IPC highlight that traffic assessments understate peak-hour pressures, Victoria Avenue market conditions, and weekend congestion, and that the narrow local lanes cannot safely absorb these additional movements. Given the limited parking provision and heavy reliance on shared vehicles, spill-over traffic into local streets is likely — further reducing road safety and residential amenity. 2. Excessive Height, Cumulative Overdevelopment and Impact on Character The scale and height of the proposed building are significantly out of proportion with the prevailing built form and will: • Dominate the skyline and overwhelm the surrounding streetscape; • Cause permanent overshadowing, reduced access to natural light and obstructed sky views for nearby residents; and • Significantly diminish residential amenity, privacy and liveability for neighbouring buildings. The Chatswood CBD is already experiencing sustained intensification, with multiple high-rise developments underway or approved. This proposal — at its current height and bulk — adds to a cumulative overdevelopment that will erase visual breathing space and result in a tightly packed urban environment that feels crowded rather than a vibrant, diverse and enjoyable centre. To minimise these adverse impacts, I respectfully submit that any approval should limit the building height to no greater than existing surrounding buildings. This would help protect residents’ amenity, retain sky views, reduce overshadowing and preserve the human-scaled character of the centre. 3. Adverse Effects on Chatswood Mall Market and Public Domain Chatswood Mall and its associated markets are important community and economic assets that contribute to the area’s vibrancy and appeal. The additional population, congestion and prolonged construction activity associated with this proposal will create a more congested pedestrian precinct, reducing the quality of the public domain and undermining the family-friendly, mixed-use character of Chatswood’s core. Instead of enhancing liveability, the project is likely to make the centre feel overcrowded, detracting from its role as an enjoyable destination for residents, visitors and market-goers alike. 4. Misrepresentation and Inadequacy of Community Engagement The proponent claims it has engaged with the community, but the submitted consultation materials and signature list do not adequately represent residents living immediately adjacent to the proposed site — those most affected by its impacts. Many nearby neighbours have not been genuinely engaged, informed or consulted about the profound changes this development would bring to their daily lives. This raises significant concerns about the quality and authenticity of community engagement, and suggests consultation may have been conducted merely to satisfy procedural requirements rather than to genuinely inform design outcomes. 5. Understated Impact on Surrounding Buildings The proponent’s assessment repeatedly claims impacts such as sunlight loss, overshadowing, privacy and view restrictions are acceptable. However, submissions to the IPC and the Department’s own evaluation acknowledge significant and permanent solar access losses, including in nearby buildings, which fall well below recommended sunlight access standards. These impacts are not trivial technicalities — they represent meaningful reductions in daily amenity and quality of life that cannot be compensated once the development is constructed. For the reasons above — including traffic and safety pressures, excessive height and bulk, cumulative overdevelopment, inadequate community engagement, and understated amenity impacts — I respectfully request that the Commission: 1. Refuse approval of Novus on Victoria in its current form; or 2. Require a substantial reduction in height and scale so that any approved building does not exceed the height of existing neighbouring buildings and better respects the liveability, visual amenity and community character of Chatswood. Thank you for considering my submission.

17536

Redacted

08/02/2026

Object

Website

I write to add one comment on the Novus on Victoria Build-to-Rent proposal, particularly because of serious shortcomings in the proponent’s community engagement process. In its submission from Novus (as comments), Novus states that additional community consultation produced 49 submissions of support. However, this list does not meaningfully represent the views of residents who live immediately adjacent to the proposed site — those who will experience the most direct impacts. Many neighbours know little or nothing about this project, its implications, or the progress of the application, despite its size and potential effects on our homes and daily lives. Meaningful community engagement should involve direct, two-way consultation with the most affected people, supported by clear information about the key impacts (e.g., traffic, overshadowing, privacy and amenity). Novus’s use of generic support letters and signature lists does not demonstrate that local residents were genuinely informed or given a fair opportunity to participate. For these reasons — especially that many impacted residents were not properly consulted and that Novus’s claimed engagement does not reflect local sentiment — I do not support approval of this project in its current form, and I hope the Commission to give appropriate weight to the views and concerns of nearby residents. Thank you for considering this.

17371

New South Wales 2067

07/02/2026

Object

Website

This is my second submission. After reviewing quite a number of big tall projects built so close to each other (40m in this case), my concerns grew. Largely because of the most recent fire in Hongkong where 7 blocks of tall close residences caught fire & spread so quickly. The devastation & death fatality were astounding & tragic. We have to learn from history to avoid these problems. My second issue is that the authorities & IPC do not appear to be local residents & hence may not understand the severity. The human & car traffic issues here are not a joke. Most of the residences in the Grand Residences are elderly retirees & their movements are restricted. Post Office Lane & Victor St had just recently been upgraded to accommodate more than thousands of people a day & the elderly are able to enjoy the short walk to Westfield. I cannot imagine what can happen to those old people who may not be able to use these 2 streets for almost 3 years while the "no special need" building is being built. Already a few elderly had already expressed concerns about fire trucks & ambulance access limitations should Novus Victoria go ahead. And, from a design point of view, its an ugly straight tall building. Isn't consideration given to Spire & View buildings 40m away, where in future, residents can look straight into each other at the balconies/windows because this is how close the building will be. Privacy is totally lost! If the design is more friendly, like a staggered building, while allowing more sunlight access to others, will be more appealing to other residents in nearly buildings. Please do not think that the voices of concerns about Novus Victoria are low. This is only because the local residents are mainly from non English background & hence unable to verbally or write down their concerns. So the local council & IPC should assist as much as they can to give the residents a fair decision. Lastly, we pray & hope that our lifelong savings which went to our apartments in Metro Spire & View, will not be reduced substantially because of these undesirable projects, which do not, in my opinion, offer any commercial & community benefits to Chatswood.

16496

New South Wales 2067

06/02/2026

Object

Website

To the Independent Planning Commission NSW, I object to the proposed Novus on Victoria Build-to-Rent development on the basis that the fundamental challenges identified in the assessment are not incidental design shortcomings, but clear indicators that this site is not suitable for the scale, height, and intensity of development being proposed. 1. The Site Is Inherently Unsuitable for the Proposed Development The repeated constraints identified by the applicant — including reduced apartment sizes, limited lift provision, constrained servicing and vehicle movements — arise because the site is being pushed beyond what it can reasonably accommodate. This narrow site is bounded by Victor Street and Post Office Lane and sits directly adjacent to a pedestrian-heavy walking street within the Chatswood CBD. It is not a location capable of comfortably supporting a high-density, high-rise Build-to-Rent tower of this scale. The proposal represents an attempt to force an oversized development into a space that was never intended for such intensity — effectively trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. These issues cannot be meaningfully resolved through conditions of consent because they are intrinsic to the site itself. 2. Pedestrian Safety and Public Realm Impacts Post Office Lane and surrounding pedestrian routes already experience high foot traffic due to proximity to retail, transport, and residential buildings. Introducing a development of this scale will: • Increase service vehicle movements, deliveries, waste collection, and ride-share activity • Intensify conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles in already constrained spaces • Diminish the safety, comfort, and usability of a pedestrian-focused environment • This outcome directly undermines the function of the public realm and contradicts the intent of creating safe, walkable CBD streets. There are numerous alternative sites outside the core CBD that could accommodate Build-to-Rent developments of this scale without compromising pedestrian safety or overburdening constrained inner-CBD laneways. 3. Significant and Unresolved Privacy Impacts The proposal raises serious and unresolved privacy concerns for residents of neighbouring buildings, including Metro Spire where I own a property and other nearby apartments. The proximity, height, and bulk of the proposed tower will result in: • Direct overlooking into neighbouring living rooms and bedrooms • A permanent loss of visual privacy for existing residents • An unreasonable expectation that affected residents must keep blinds closed for most of the day to maintain privacy This is not an acceptable planning outcome. Residents should not be forced to choose between daylight and privacy as a consequence of overdevelopment on an unsuitable site. To date, no credible solution has been presented that meaningfully addresses these impacts without substantially reducing height or mass. 4. Loss of Views and Amenity The Assessment Report acknowledges that loss of view constitutes a loss of amenity, and that the visual impact of a large building obstructing previously open views can be confronting. For many residents, distant water views and open skyline outlooks form a significant part of their amenity and enjoyment of their homes. The permanent loss of these views is not minor or abstract — it represents a real and tangible reduction in quality of life. What the applicant describes as “acceptable and reasonable” does not align with the lived experience of residents. From a resident’s perspective, replacing open views with a dominant built wall is a profound and irreversible loss of amenity. Put simply: if placed in the same position, few would consider this outcome acceptable. Personal Impact As a nearby resident, this proposal would directly and permanently affect my daily living conditions. The loss of outlook, increased sense of being overlooked, and the dominance of a building of this scale so close to existing homes would materially reduce my enjoyment of my property. It is deeply unsettling to contemplate a future where privacy can only be maintained by keeping blinds closed and where open views are replaced by a sheer wall of built form. This is not an abstract planning concern — it is a real and ongoing impact that residents like myself would have to live with every day. Conclusion The Novus on Victoria proposal demonstrates that the site is being over-developed beyond its physical and contextual capacity. The cumulative impacts on pedestrian safety, privacy, views, and residential amenity confirm that this location is not appropriate for a tower of this scale and form. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Independent Planning Commission refuse the application or require a substantial redesign that meaningfully reduces height, scale, and intensity to reflect the constraints of the site and surrounding pedestrian environment.

16501

New South Wales 2067

06/02/2026

Object

Website

1. A huge 46 storey, 260 BTR apartment block at the dead end of a very narrow, two lane Victor Street, and the even narrower Post Office Lane will have negative traffic impact. You can’t expect so many people will solely rely on public transport. Taxis, Ubers, removalists, deliveries to shops, drop offs and pick ups, visitors and shoppers at Westfield and the street market on Thursday Friday and Saturday in Victoria Street Mall will increase traffic tremendously in the area. 2. Traffic jam is already very common in Albert Avenue and Victor Street especially on weekends when locals and north shore residents come to Chatswood to shop, it'll be even worse if Novus is allowed to go ahead, 3. It will block view very substantially of the (address redacted) where I live, and Metro View at 69, Albert Avenue, Chatswood 4. It will also block sunlight to these two buildings and other buildings in Victor Street 5. BTR developments should be at the fringes of the Chatswood CBD, not right in the middle of it, exacerbating all the existing problems such as traffic jams, noise and chaos, changing the character of Chatswood significantly 6. If it must be built, the height, size of the block and numbers of apartments should be reduced quite substantially so as not to impact the Chatswood CBD negatively

16616

Redacted

06/02/2026

Object

Website

Please see attachment

Chatswood Novus Proposal.pdf (PDF, 296.8 KB)

15991

New South Wales 2067

05/02/2026

Object

Website

The traffic in Chatswood is already over-congested, and this project will make it significantly worse. The Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure report claims that most residents of the Novus on Victoria will not own a car and instead use public transport. In particular, they claim that the lack of available parking will discourage residents from owning a car. As a resident of Chatswood, I do not believe this claim is realistic. In Sydney, a lot of areas are simply not accessible by public transport. Also, riding a bike is dangerous in most areas of Sydney. For these reasons, most residents in Sydney own cars. This is backed up by statistics. For example, in the 2021 Australian Bureau of Statistics Census, it was estimated that 91% of households in Australia own a motor vehicle and 55% own at least two. In our time living in Chatswood, everyone we know owns a car. We know people who rent in Chatswood and do not have access to parking associated with their apartment, yet they manage to find nearby street parking. When we first moved to Chatswood, we attempted to live without a car for a few months, but found it too difficult and relented. Hence, from our lived experience, we expect that the majority of new residents at the Novus on Victoria will own a car and contribute to making an already bad traffic situation in Chatswood worse.

16301

The Orchard Hotel

New South Wales 2077

05/02/2026

Object

Website

I agree the development proposed plan

14731

Willoughby City Council

New South Wales 2067

03/02/2026

Object

Website

Refer to attached files.

Willoughby Council - Submission (IPC) Redacted.pdf (PDF, 562.27 KB)

Attachment 1 - Recommended Conditions.pdf (PDF, 517.21 KB)

14291

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Submission Type: Objection 1. Introduction This submission is made in response to the State Significant Development Assessment Report for the Novus on Victoria, Chatswood – Build-to-Rent development (SSD-63324208), prepared by the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure and published in November 2025. While the importance of increasing housing supply in well-located areas is acknowledged, this submission contends that the Assessment Report does not adequately demonstrate that the proposal achieves an acceptable planning outcome when assessed against section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The Assessment Report places disproportionate weight on strategic housing delivery objectives while insufficiently addressing site-specific impacts, cumulative infrastructure pressures, housing quality, parking provision, and community amenity. For these reasons, the proposal should not be approved in its current form. 2. Insufficient and Unrepresentative Site Inspection and Traffic Assessment The Assessment Report relies on site inspections undertaken on 26 May 2025 and 27 August 2025 to inform conclusions regarding traffic, access, and pedestrian safety. However, the report does not demonstrate that these inspections occurred during periods that reflect the most constrained and congested operating conditions at the site. There is no evidence that inspections were undertaken during peak commuter periods associated with the Chatswood Interchange, Thursday to Saturday Victoria Avenue market operations, or peak retail trading hours or weekend pedestrian surges. Victoria Avenue functions as a highly pedestrianised corridor with competing demands from markets, retail activity, servicing vehicles, waste collection, and construction-related movements. Traffic modelling and inspections that do not reflect these peak conditions materially understate congestion, safety risks, and operational conflicts. As a result, the conclusion that traffic and access impacts are acceptable is not supported by robust or representative evidence. 3. Failure to Properly Consider Cumulative Infrastructure Impacts The Assessment Report largely considers the proposal in isolation, despite acknowledging that the site is located within a rapidly intensifying CBD environment. The assessment does not adequately address cumulative impacts arising from other approved, under-construction, or imminent developments in Chatswood, combined pressure on pedestrian networks, public transport capacity, utilities, emergency services, and public domain areas, or overlapping construction periods and their compounded disruption to residents, businesses, and visitors. For a State Significant Development, failure to assess cumulative impacts risks incremental overdevelopment and infrastructure saturation, contrary to orderly and strategic planning principles. 4. Overshadowing Impacts Are Acknowledged but Unacceptably Downplayed The Department acknowledges significant solar access impacts to surrounding residential buildings, including 69 Albert Avenue, where apartments meeting minimum solar access are reduced from 84% to 45%, and 84–86 Albert Avenue, where apartments meeting minimum solar access are reduced from 23% to 9%. These impacts are substantial, permanent, and affect a large number of existing dwellings. Despite this, the Assessment Report concludes that the impacts are “reasonable” largely due to the CBD context and existing overshadowing. This reasoning is flawed. Existing amenity impacts should not be relied upon to justify further degradation. The Assessment Report proposes no meaningful mitigation and instead normalises significant loss of residential amenity, establishing a concerning precedent for cumulative overshadowing impacts within Chatswood. 5. Overreliance on Design Excellence to Justify Non-Compliance The Assessment Report places heavy reliance on the competitive design excellence process to justify reduced tower setbacks, a nil western setback, and podium height exceedances. While design excellence is a relevant consideration, it is not a substitute for compliance with quantitative planning controls or for achieving appropriate urban outcomes. Using design excellence to override setbacks, bulk, and separation controls risks undermining the integrity of the planning framework. Council’s concerns that the design excellence process has been used to legitimise an overly intensive built form are well founded. Even where Development Control Plans do not strictly apply to SSD applications, they remain relevant benchmarks for assessing appropriate scale, separation, landscaping, and public domain outcomes. 6. Poor Housing Mix and Limited Social Benefit Despite claims of public benefit, the development delivers a housing mix heavily skewed toward smaller dwelling types, with 44.2% studio apartments, 30.4% one-bedroom apartments, only 1.2% three-bedroom dwellings, no dedicated affordable housing provision, and only 1% adaptable apartments. This outcome does not meaningfully address housing diversity, accessibility, or long-term community needs. The absence of family-sized dwellings, limited adaptable housing, and lack of affordable housing provision significantly undermines the social benefit claims relied upon in the Assessment Report. The quantity of housing delivered should not outweigh the quality, suitability, and inclusiveness of the housing provided. A development of this scale and intensity should be expected to deliver a more balanced and socially responsive housing outcome. 7. Inadequate Parking Provision and Impacts on the Local Community The Assessment Report accepts the proposal’s minimal parking provision on the basis of proximity to public transport and the Build-to-Rent typology. The development provides only one car share space and no resident parking for 260 dwellings. While access to public transport is a relevant consideration, it does not remove the need to realistically assess car ownership, visitor demand, servicing requirements, and secondary parking impacts. The lack of on-site parking will inevitably result in displacement of parking demand into surrounding residential streets, increased competition for limited on-street parking, conflict between residents, visitors, service vehicles, and local businesses, and reduced parking availability for existing residents and Victoria Avenue market traders. The absence of accessible parking is particularly concerning given the provision of only 1% adaptable apartments, undermining principles of inclusive and equitable planning. The parking strategy effectively transfers impacts to the surrounding community rather than mitigating them on-site. This represents a material deficiency in the assessment and weighs against a finding that the proposal is in the public interest. 8. Community and Public Domain Impacts The Assessment Report acknowledges community concern but does not adequately address prolonged construction impacts over an estimated three-year period, disruption to Victoria Avenue markets and surrounding traders, pedestrian safety and accessibility during construction, or degradation of public domain quality and community amenity. The public interest assessment places excessive emphasis on housing yield and employment outcomes, rather than a balanced consideration of liveability, safety, and long-term community wellbeing. 9. Inconsistency in Public Objection Numbers and Procedural Fairness The Assessment Report states that 97 submissions were received, including 92 objections. However, the NSW Planning Portal listed a total of 142 objections during the public exhibition period. This discrepancy is material and raises concerns regarding transparency, procedural fairness, and whether all objections were properly recorded and considered in accordance with section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. 10. Conclusion and Request to the Commission With 142 objections recorded on the NSW Planning Portal, the level of community opposition to this proposal is substantial and cannot be dismissed as incidental. The proposal results in significant and unmitigated amenity impacts, fails to adequately assess cumulative congestion, infrastructure, and parking pressures, relies excessively on design excellence to justify departures from established planning controls, delivers a poor housing mix with limited social benefit, transfers parking and traffic impacts onto the surrounding community, and does not sufficiently protect community and public domain outcomes. Accordingly, this submission respectfully requests that the Independent Planning Commission refuse the application in its current form.

Objection letter.pdf (PDF, 8.83 KB)

14301

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Application Number: SSD-63324208 Project: Novus on Victoria, Chatswood – Build-to-Rent Development Submission Type: Objection 1. Overview I object to the proposed Novus on Victoria Build-to-Rent development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. While the strategic objective of increasing housing supply is acknowledged, the Assessment Report fails to demonstrate that the proposal achieves an acceptable planning outcome when assessed against section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The proposal prioritises housing yield over site-specific impacts, cumulative infrastructure capacity, and residential amenity, resulting in an outcome that is not in the public interest. 2. Inadequate Assessment of Peak Traffic and Pedestrian Conditions The site inspections referenced in the Assessment Report do not appear to have been conducted during peak congestion periods associated with the Chatswood Interchange, Victoria Avenue market days, or weekend retail activity. As a result, traffic, pedestrian, servicing, and safety impacts are materially understated. Victoria Avenue already experiences significant congestion and competing uses. Failure to assess worst-case conditions undermines the reliability of the traffic conclusions. 3. Failure to Address Cumulative Development Impacts The development is assessed largely in isolation, despite Chatswood undergoing rapid and sustained intensification. The Assessment Report does not meaningfully consider cumulative impacts on pedestrian networks, public transport, emergency services, utilities, or overlapping construction periods. For a State Significant Development, this omission represents a fundamental weakness and risks incremental overdevelopment. 4. Unacceptable Overshadowing Impacts The Department acknowledges severe reductions in solar access to neighbouring residential buildings, including 69 Albert Avenue and 84–86 Albert Avenue. These impacts are permanent and affect a large number of existing dwellings. Relying on the CBD context to justify further loss of amenity is inappropriate and sets a dangerous precedent. 5. Conclusion The proposal delivers significant unmitigated impacts while offering limited social benefit. For these reasons, the application should be refused in its current form.

14306

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Application Number: SSD-63324208 Submission Type: Objection 1. Introduction I strongly object to the proposed Build-to-Rent development at Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. As a local resident, I am concerned that the Assessment Report places excessive weight on housing numbers while failing to protect existing community amenity, safety, and liveability. 2. Loss of Sunlight and Residential Amenity The proposal will result in severe and permanent overshadowing of surrounding apartment buildings. The reduction of compliant apartments at 69 Albert Avenue from 84% to 45% is not a minor impact—it represents a substantial loss of daily amenity for existing residents. Existing poor conditions should not be used to justify making outcomes worse. 3. Parking and Local Street Impacts The proposal provides no resident parking for 260 dwellings and only one car share space. This will inevitably push parking demand into surrounding streets that are already under pressure from residents, visitors, and Victoria Avenue market traders. The impacts are not avoided—they are simply transferred to the community. 4. Construction and Community Disruption The Assessment Report does not adequately address the impacts of a prolonged construction period of approximately three years, including disruption to local businesses, pedestrian safety risks, and loss of public domain quality. 5. Conclusion This proposal places unreasonable burdens on existing residents and the surrounding community. It should not be approved in its current form.

14311

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Application Number: SSD-63324208 Submission Type: Objection 1. Overview I object to the Novus on Victoria proposal on the basis that the built form outcomes are excessive and are inappropriately justified through overreliance on the design excellence process. 2. Misuse of Design Excellence The Assessment Report relies heavily on design excellence to justify reduced setbacks, a nil western setback, and podium height exceedances. While design excellence is important, it should not be used to override fundamental planning controls related to scale, separation, and amenity. Council’s concerns regarding excessive bulk and intensity are well founded. 3. Housing Mix and Social Outcomes The proposal delivers a housing mix dominated by studio and one-bedroom apartments, with negligible provision for families, adaptable housing, or affordable housing. Only 1% of dwellings are adaptable, which is inconsistent with inclusive planning principles. Claims of public benefit are therefore overstated. 4. Conclusion The proposal represents an overly intensive outcome that prioritises yield over quality. The application should be refused or substantially redesigned.

14316

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Application No.: SSD-63324208 Project: Novus on Victoria, Chatswood – Build-to-Rent I object to the proposed development on the basis that the Assessment Report does not demonstrate that the proposal achieves an acceptable outcome under section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. While the importance of housing supply is acknowledged, the assessment places disproportionate weight on strategic housing targets and insufficient weight on site-specific and cumulative impacts. The proposal is assessed largely in isolation, despite Chatswood undergoing rapid and sustained intensification. Traffic and access conclusions rely on site inspections that do not appear to reflect peak commuter periods, Victoria Avenue market days, or weekend retail conditions. As a result, congestion, pedestrian safety risks, and servicing conflicts are likely understated. The Department acknowledges significant and permanent overshadowing impacts to nearby residential buildings, including major reductions in compliant solar access at 69 Albert Avenue and 84–86 Albert Avenue. These impacts are substantial and affect a large number of existing dwellings, yet are downplayed due to the CBD context. Existing amenity constraints should not justify further degradation. The proposal also relies heavily on the design excellence process to justify departures from setbacks and podium height controls. Design excellence should not be used to override fundamental built form and amenity principles. For these reasons, the proposal should be refused in its current form.

14326

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Submission to the Independent Planning Commission Community, Liveability and Social Impact Objection SSD-63324208 – Novus on Victoria, Chatswood 1. Introduction This submission objects to the proposed Novus on Victoria Build-to-Rent development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood on the grounds that it will result in unacceptable impacts on residential amenity, liveability, community wellbeing, and the functioning of the Chatswood CBD as a place to live, work, and move through. While the need to increase housing supply is acknowledged, particularly in well-located areas, housing delivery should not be pursued at the expense of existing communities, basic amenity standards, or equitable distribution of impacts. This submission contends that the Assessment Report places disproportionate emphasis on housing numbers and strategic outcomes while insufficiently addressing how the proposal will affect people’s daily lives—both during construction and over the long term. 2. Chatswood CBD as a Lived Environment, Not Just a Strategic Location Chatswood is frequently described in strategic documents as a “strategic centre” or “CBD.” While accurate in a planning sense, this framing risks obscuring the reality that Chatswood is also: a residential neighbourhood for thousands of people; a major pedestrian environment; a transport interchange under daily pressure; and a location of long-established markets and local businesses. The Assessment Report repeatedly relies on the CBD context to justify impacts that would otherwise be considered unacceptable. However, a CBD is not an abstract planning concept—it is a lived environment. Development that diminishes sunlight, increases congestion, displaces parking, and disrupts public spaces directly affects the health, comfort, and wellbeing of existing residents and users of the area. 3. Overshadowing and the Human Impact of Lost Sunlight 3.1 Beyond Technical Compliance The Assessment Report acknowledges significant overshadowing impacts to nearby residential buildings, including dramatic reductions in the proportion of apartments meeting minimum solar access requirements. While these impacts are presented as numerical outcomes, their real-world implications are not adequately considered. Loss of sunlight affects: thermal comfort and heating costs; mental health and wellbeing; indoor air quality and natural ventilation; and the ability to use private and communal living spaces. 3.2 Normalising Harm in a High-Density Context The Assessment Report suggests that further loss of solar access is acceptable because surrounding buildings already experience some overshadowing. This approach effectively normalises cumulative harm. Rather than setting a baseline to protect remaining amenity, it treats existing constraints as justification for further degradation. For residents who have already experienced progressive loss of amenity due to surrounding development, this reasoning is neither fair nor reasonable. 4. Housing Mix, Liveability and Long-Term Community Outcomes 4.1 An Unbalanced Housing Outcome The proposal delivers a housing mix dominated by studio and one-bedroom apartments, with negligible provision for family-sized dwellings and only 1% adaptable apartments. This outcome does not support a diverse or stable community. Instead, it encourages transient occupancy and limits opportunities for residents to age in place, raise families, or remain in the area long term. 4.2 Limited Social Benefit Despite claims of public benefit, the proposal provides: no dedicated affordable housing; minimal adaptable housing; and very limited housing diversity. As a result, the social benefits relied upon in the Assessment Report are overstated. Housing quantity alone does not equate to meaningful social value. 5. Parking, Access and the Reality of Daily Movement 5.1 No Resident Parking Is Not Impact-Free The proposal provides no resident parking for 260 dwellings and only one car share space. While proximity to public transport is frequently cited, this does not eliminate car ownership, visitor parking demand, or the need for servicing, trades, and deliveries. The Assessment Report does not adequately engage with how these needs will be met in practice. 5.2 Displacement of Impacts to Surrounding Streets In reality, parking demand will be displaced into surrounding residential streets and commercial areas, increasing competition for already limited spaces. This will particularly affect: existing residents without off-street parking; visitors to local businesses; Victoria Avenue market traders; and people with mobility limitations. The impacts are not avoided—they are shifted onto the community. 6. Pedestrian Congestion and Safety in a Crowded CBD Victoria Avenue already experiences intense pedestrian activity associated with: Chatswood Interchange; retail trading; market operations; and events and weekend activity. The addition of a large residential development without adequate on-site mitigation measures will exacerbate congestion and increase conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, service vehicles, and rideshare activity. The Assessment Report does not convincingly demonstrate that pedestrian safety and comfort will be maintained under peak conditions. 7. Construction Impacts and Community Fatigue 7.1 Duration and Intensity of Disruption The construction period is estimated to extend over approximately three years. During this time, residents and businesses can expect: increased noise and vibration; dust and reduced air quality; restricted pedestrian access; and disruption to market operations and local trade. These impacts are not temporary inconveniences—they represent a prolonged degradation of daily living conditions. 7.2 Cumulative Construction Effects The Assessment Report does not adequately consider overlapping construction from other nearby developments, which will compound disruption and contribute to community fatigue. For many residents, the issue is not a single project, but a continuous cycle of construction with little respite. 8. Public Domain and Community Space Impacts The public domain surrounding Victoria Avenue is already heavily utilised. Footpaths, plazas, and market spaces are essential community assets. The proposal increases pressure on these spaces without providing commensurate improvements or mitigation. As a result, the quality, safety, and accessibility of the public domain are likely to decline over time. Public domain impacts should be treated as central planning considerations, not secondary issues. 9. Community Opposition and Trust in the Planning Process The level of community opposition to this proposal is substantial. The discrepancy between the number of objections recorded on the NSW Planning Portal and those referenced in the Assessment Report raises concerns regarding transparency and procedural fairness. When communities feel that their concerns are acknowledged but ultimately discounted, trust in the planning system is eroded. Meaningful consideration of community submissions is essential to maintaining confidence in the development assessment process. 10. Balancing Growth with Liveability Chatswood will continue to grow and evolve. However, growth should be managed in a way that: protects basic amenity standards; distributes impacts fairly; supports long-term community stability; and maintains Chatswood as a place people want to live, not just pass through. This proposal does not strike that balance. 11. Conclusion and Request The proposed development prioritises housing yield over liveability, community wellbeing, and equitable planning outcomes. It delivers significant and permanent impacts on sunlight, congestion, parking availability, and public domain quality, while offering limited social benefit in return. For these reasons, this submission respectfully requests that the Independent Planning Commission refuse the application in its current form or require substantial redesign to address the concerns outlined above.

14521

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

The proposed Build-to-Rent tower at 410-416 Vitoria Avenue has 46 storeys which is much taller than my Spire tower at which I live at the middle level. This development is large, close to us and will change the local neighbourhood which is incongruent to the community. My objections points are as follows: 1. Amenity & privacy: it will overshadowing, block my views, incongruence, overlooking, loss of privacy 2. Traffic & parking: the new building will have 260 apartments which will be resulting in high demand on streets and garages 3. Noise & construction impacts: if the construction work last for a few years, the deliveries and possible night works will definitely producing much noise, pollution in air and lights 4. Public services and local character: there will be higher population which will have impact and challenges on local retail and open spaces Suggested points: 1. Limits on the maximum storeys to less than 30 storeys; 2. limit the construction hours from 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday only; 3. Limit parking arrangement to owners only 4. Limit the landscaping so as NOT to block the sunlight and view of Spire Tower 5. Safety and traffic concerns：　ｖｅｈｉｃｌｅ　ｍｏｖｅｍｅｎｔ　＆　ｉｎｔｅｒｓｅｃｔｉｏｎ　ｓａｆｅｔｙ　 ６ｃｏｍｍｕｎｉｔｙ　ｂｅｎｅｆｉｔｓ：　ｔｈｅ　ｃｌｕｂ　ｈｏｕｓｅ　ｆａｃｉｌｉｔｉｅｓ　ｃｏｕｌｂ　ｂｅ　ｓｈａｒｅｄ　ｂｙ　ｕｓ　　

14536

New South Wales 2067

02/02/2026

Object

Website

Statement Submission – Objection to Proposed Development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood I am a resident living in close proximity to the proposed 46-storey build-to-rent development at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. I object to the proposal due to its excessive scale and the long-term, irreversible impacts it would have on residential amenity and the cumulative development intensity of the area. While I acknowledge the need to increase housing supply and recognise the strategic intent of higher-density development near transport, I do not believe the height and bulk of this proposal represent an appropriate or balanced outcome for the local context. At 46 storeys, the development significantly exceeds the prevailing scale of surrounding buildings and would permanently alter the character of the precinct. Importantly, this proposal does not occur in isolation. There are already at least four other tall apartment developments approved or proposed within close proximity. When considered collectively, these projects represent a substantial and concentrated increase in height and density, raising serious concerns about cumulative overdevelopment and the long-term liveability of the area. Due to the close proximity of neighbouring residential buildings (approximately 40 metres), the proposal would result in ongoing loss of privacy, outlook, and access to sunlight for existing residents. These impacts are permanent and cannot be adequately mitigated through design measures at this scale. The building’s height and massing are also likely to cause long-term microclimate impacts, including increased wind effects and reduced daylight at street level, diminishing the quality and usability of surrounding streets and public spaces. Chatswood is already a highly congested centre. The addition of 260 apartments, combined with the impacts of multiple nearby high-rise developments, will place further pressure on local roads, parking, public transport, and community infrastructure. While individual projects may appear manageable in isolation, the cumulative impact over time is likely to be significant. For these reasons, I request that the Independent Planning Commission refuse the application or require a substantial reduction in height and scale to ensure that long-term residential amenity and local character are appropriately protected.

14576

Redacted

02/02/2026

Object

Website

To whom it may concern, I am writing to strongly object to this development. Chatswood CBD is already overcrowded and congested, and the area is struggling to cope with the amount of high-density living that has already been approved. Adding another large apartment building here will only make the situation worse. I understand that the reason for building more apartments is to help with the housing shortage. But why does it have to be built on this site? Yes, it’s a prime location, but Chatswood CBD is already extremely congested and overcrowded. Approving yet another major development in this exact location will further reduce the liveability of the area for current residents. This development should be built somewhere else, not in the most congested part of Chatswood CBD. If the goal is to increase housing supply, then development should be spread out instead of concentrating even more people into one already overloaded location. Building further out from the station would still be convenient — people can walk — and it would help ease pressure on the CBD rather than making it worse. For example, more housing could be built on the other side of the Pacific Highway, rather than continuing to pack more and more high-density buildings into the CBD core. That would help distribute population growth more fairly and reduce congestion in the busiest parts of Chatswood. Also, according to Tim James (Member for Willoughby), in his most recent community newsletter, Chatswood has already been doing its fair share. He stated that Chatswood has exceeded its housing targets, with major densification already completed, and that there are currently 28 sites of further residential development. This clearly shows Chatswood is already carrying a heavy development load, and continuing to push even more high-density buildings into the CBD is unreasonable and unfair to residents. I also believe many people in the community and neighbourhood oppose this plan, but they choose not to speak up because they feel the decision has already been made. It feels like community consultation is just “ticking a box,” where residents are asked for feedback but nothing changes. Many people feel they can’t fight a giant — that no matter what residents say, the development will go ahead anyway. I don’t see any real benefit for existing residents. The area will become even more crowded, and local residents will be the ones dealing with the negative impacts. My main concerns are: Traffic and congestion: Chatswood is already congested. This will increase traffic, delays, and parking issues. Noise: There will be years of construction noise, and even after construction there will be more ongoing noise from increased residents, deliveries, and activity. Building too close to others: This building is being built far too close to other buildings, which will affect privacy, sunlight, airflow and overall liveability. Loss of view and impact on nearby buildings: Many residents will lose their view and natural light, and the whole area will feel more cramped. Future impact on the land and area: Once this is approved, it sets a precedent and more developments will follow. The land will become even more overdeveloped, crowded, and less liveable for residents in the future. Chatswood does not have enough infrastructure to support more high-density housing in the CBD. Yes, we have a Metro and a train station, but that is not enough. This housing must be accompanied by the schools, parks, roads, and more community facilities that make homes and neighbourhoods liveable. For example, Chatswood Public School is already at maximum capacity, and parks and playgrounds around Chatswood are limited and outdated. Adding more residents without upgrading infrastructure will only reduce the quality of life for everyone already living here. For all of these reasons, I strongly object to this development and ask that it not be approved.

14051

New South Wales 2067

31/01/2026

Object

Website

too close to Metro, blocking our view and sunshine, too many people making the road more difficult to drive.

14066

New South Wales 2067

31/01/2026

Object

Website

Please refer to the letter and attachment uploaded. Thank you.

Ltr IPCN - 31Jan2026.pdf (PDF, 99.55 KB)

Attachment to ltr IPCN - 31Jan2026.pdf (PDF, 105.07 KB)

Photo A. 2 Two highrises 35metres (50 footsteps) apart.jpg (JPG, 137.16 KB)

12756

Redacted

29/01/2026

Object

Website

I am an owner and resident of a neighbouring residential building located approximately 40 metres from the proposed development site at 410–416 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood. I reside in a mid-level apartment within a nearby building. I am making this submission to object to the proposed development, as I consider its height, bulk and close proximity to be inappropriate for the site and to result in unreasonable and unacceptable impacts on the visual amenity of surrounding residential properties, including my own. My concerns are outlined below. ⸻ 1. Excessive height, bulk and proximity The proposal comprises a 46-storey tower which, with a separation distance of only approximately 40 metres from a neighbouring residential building, fails to provide an adequate level of outlook, openness and visual separation between existing high-rise residential buildings, resulting in a visually dominant built form for neighbouring dwellings. Chatswood is a highly active and well-established suburb and an important strategic centre on Sydney’s North Shore. Due to environmental and planning constraints that limit high-rise development in Chatswood, high-density buildings have already become highly concentrated on a relatively small number of developable sites, particularly in areas close to the Chatswood station. While the subject proposal site is within the areas, it is surrounded by established residential buildings and forms part of a predominantly residential environment. In this context, the introduction of an additional 46-storey build-to-rent residential tower represents an excessive level of residential intensity, further compounding an already dense built form. It is questionable whether the addition of further high-rise residential towers of this scale would contribute to Chatswood functioning as a more liveable and balanced suburb. ⸻ 2. Unacceptable loss of water views and open skyline My apartment currently enjoys open skyline and water views, which form an important part of the amenity and liveability of the dwelling. The proposed development would result in the near-complete and permanent loss of these views, replacing an open outlook with a visually imposing building mass at close range. This represents a severe and irreversible impact on residential amenity, particularly for mid-level apartments, which reasonably rely on horizontal outlook rather than elevation for amenity. This impact goes well beyond a minor or acceptable planning outcome and would fundamentally alter the day-to-day living environment of affected residents. ⸻ 3. Impacts cannot be mitigated by conditions Importantly, the loss of visual amenity and outlook cannot be reasonably mitigated through conditions of consent. These impacts arise directly from the scale, height and siting of the building itself, rather than from construction management or operational issues. As such, measures such as landscaping, screening or minor design adjustments would not adequately address the fundamental planning concerns associated with this proposal. ⸻ 4. Failure to achieve an appropriate planning balance As residents of an existing lawful residential building, there is a reasonable expectation that basic standards of amenity—including outlook, separation and visual openness—will be protected through the planning process. In my view, the proposal fails to strike an appropriate balance between the objective of increased density and the need to protect the amenity of surrounding residential development, particularly given the scale of the impacts and the extremely close proximity involved. ⸻ Conclusion For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully submit that the Commission should not approve the proposal in its current form. I also wish to emphasise the human impact of this proposal. My home represents the result of a lifetime of savings and commitment, purchased with the expectation of enjoying a stable, liveable environment with access to open skyline and water views. These qualities are not incidental or speculative benefits; they form a fundamental part of the amenity and value of the dwelling. The proposed development would permanently eliminate these qualities, effectively removing what has taken a lifetime to achieve. This loss would be irreversible and, in my view, disproportionate and unreasonable, particularly given the extreme height and close proximity of the proposed tower. Planning decisions must balance growth with fairness. In this case, the burden placed on existing residents is excessive, and the outcome would fundamentally undermine the reasonable expectations of those who have lawfully invested in and made their homes in this area. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Commission refuse the proposal, or at the very least require substantial redesign, including a significant reduction in height and increased setbacks from neighbouring residential buildings.

12101

New South Wales 2067

28/01/2026

Object

Website

Submission to the NSW Independent Planning Commission Objection to Proposed Development – Built Form, Traffic & Parking, Waste Management and Sight Lines 1. Introduction I am writing to lodge an objection to the proposed development currently under consideration by the NSW Independent Planning Commission (IPC). While I acknowledge that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) has assessed the proposal as approvable subject to conditions, I remain concerned that the development, in its current form, will have unacceptable and lasting impacts on nearby residents and the wider neighbourhood. The proposal is a large-scale development located approximately 40 metres from our property, and its scale, intensity and design represent a significant departure from the existing built character of the area. Given its proximity and duration of construction (anticipated 2026–2029), the proposal raises serious concerns regarding amenity, functionality, safety, and neighbourhood character that have not been adequately resolved through conditions alone. This submission focuses specifically on: Built form and design Traffic and parking impacts Waste management and sight lines 2. Built Form and Design 2.1 Scale, Bulk and Massing The proposed development exhibits a bulk and scale that is disproportionate to its immediate surroundings. Its height, building footprint and overall massing will result in a visually dominant structure that overwhelms neighbouring properties, particularly those in close proximity. The transition between the proposed development and existing lower-scale buildings has not been sufficiently moderated through setbacks, articulation, or stepped height transitions. As a result, the development risks appearing imposing rather than integrated into the established neighbourhood context. 2.2 Amenity and Privacy Impacts Due to the close distance (approximately 40 metres), the development is likely to result in: Loss of privacy through overlooking from balconies and windows Reduced residential amenity, particularly for living rooms and private open spaces Potential overshadowing, especially during winter months While mitigation measures may be proposed, the proximity and scale of the development mean that privacy impacts are inherent to the design rather than incidental. 2.3 Neighbourhood Character The proposal represents a significant change in local character, introducing an intensity and built form that does not reflect the prevailing scale or rhythm of the area. This risks setting an undesirable precedent for future developments, progressively eroding the character and liveability of the neighbourhood. 3. Traffic and Parking 3.1 Increased Traffic Generation The proposed development will substantially increase the number of residents, visitors, deliveries and service vehicles in the area. This will place additional pressure on local roads that are not designed to accommodate such increases in traffic volume. Concerns include: Increased congestion during peak hours Reduced safety for pedestrians and cyclists Conflicts between residential traffic and service or delivery vehicles 3.2 Parking Demand and Spillover While on-site parking may be provided, experience shows that developments of this nature often generate parking overspill into surrounding streets, particularly for visitors, trades, delivery drivers, and ride-share vehicles. This will: Reduce parking availability for existing residents Increase competition for limited on-street parking Create access issues for emergency and service vehicles The reliance on future parking management conditions does not adequately address the day-to-day impact on residents who already experience constrained parking conditions. 3.3 Construction Traffic Impacts The construction period (expected 2026–2029) presents additional concerns, including: Frequent heavy vehicle movements Delivery and removal of materials Potential for out-of-hours or night works These impacts will affect safety, noise levels, and access for residents over a prolonged period. While construction management plans may be required later, the scale and duration of disruption should be given greater weight at this approval stage. 4. Waste Management and Sight Lines 4.1 Waste Collection and Servicing The increased population associated with the development will significantly increase waste generation. Concerns remain regarding: Adequacy of on-site waste storage Frequency and timing of waste collection Interaction between waste vehicles and local traffic Poorly managed waste servicing can lead to: Noise impacts during early-morning collections Obstruction of driveways and sight lines Increased heavy vehicle movements in residential streets 4.2 Waste Vehicle Movements and Sight Lines Waste collection vehicles are typically large and require clear access and turning areas. In constrained sites, this often results in: Vehicles reversing into or out of sites Reduced visibility for pedestrians and cyclists Obstructed sight lines at driveways and intersections Any compromise to sight lines presents a clear safety risk, particularly for children, elderly residents, and people with mobility impairments. 4.3 Visual Impact of Waste Infrastructure Waste storage areas, if not carefully designed and screened, can detract from streetscape quality and visual amenity. Given the scale of the development, the cumulative visual impact of loading zones, waste rooms, and service areas should be carefully reconsidered. 5. Conclusion While the need for additional housing is acknowledged, this proposal raises legitimate and unresolved concerns regarding built form, traffic and parking pressures, waste management, and safety impacts arising from compromised sight lines. Given the development’s proximity to existing homes and its long-term implications for amenity and neighbourhood character, I submit that: The proposal, as currently designed, places disproportionate impacts on nearby residents Many of these impacts cannot be fully mitigated through conditions alone Greater weight should be given to community concerns at this determination stage I respectfully request that the NSW Independent Planning Commission: Reconsider the appropriateness of the built form and scale Require stronger and more enforceable measures to address traffic, parking and waste impacts Ensure that sight lines and safety considerations are prioritised over development yield Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission. If you want next: A shorter version (1–2 pages) A more forceful legal-style objection A version tailored to speaking at the IPC public meeting Or alignment to a specific LEP / DCP clause Just tell me how you’ll be using it. great, now also add local character as chatswood is affulent high income suburb also rewrite the objection less chatGPT style more like a concerned owner style Absolutely — below is a rewritten objection that: Adds local character, specifically Chatswood as an affluent, high-income suburb Sounds human, grounded, and concerned, not generic or “AI-ish” Reads like it’s written by a nearby property owner / resident Keeps a measured but firm tone (credible to the IPC) Still well under 10,000 words and suitable for written submission or speaking notes. Submission to the NSW Independent Planning Commission Objection to Proposed Development – Built Form & Design, Traffic & Parking, Waste Management, Sight Lines and Local Character 1. Introduction I am a nearby property owner writing to express my objection to the proposed development currently before the NSW Independent Planning Commission. This development is located approximately 40 metres from my property and is of a size and intensity that will fundamentally change the immediate neighbourhood. While I understand that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure has assessed the proposal as approvable subject to conditions, I am concerned that the impacts on surrounding residents and the character of the area have not been adequately addressed. Given the proposal’s proximity, scale and expected construction period (2026–2029), the development will have long-term consequences for amenity, safety, and the overall quality of the local environment. These impacts are not abstract — they will be experienced daily by residents living nearby. This submission focuses on concerns relating to: Built form and design Traffic and parking Waste management and sight lines Local character and amenity in Chatswood 2. Built Form and Design 2.1 Scale and Visual Impact The proposed development is large, bulky and visually dominant when viewed from surrounding properties. Its height and massing appear excessive given the proximity to existing residential buildings and do not provide an appropriate transition in scale. From a nearby resident’s perspective, the building will be constantly present — not just as a distant skyline feature, but as a looming structure that changes outlook, sense of space, and visual comfort. The limited separation distance amplifies this impact. 2.2 Privacy and Amenity Due to the closeness of the development: Overlooking from windows and balconies will reduce privacy Living areas and private spaces will feel exposed The sense of separation that residents reasonably expect will be lost These impacts cannot be meaningfully mitigated once the building is constructed. They are inherent in the current design and layout rather than minor issues that can be resolved through conditions. 2.3 Overshadowing and Loss of Outlook The size and positioning of the building raise concerns about overshadowing, particularly during winter months, as well as the loss of established outlooks. For residents who have invested in their homes and chosen this area for its liveability, these changes represent a significant and permanent loss. 3. Traffic and Parking 3.1 Local Traffic Conditions Chatswood already experiences heavy traffic pressure, particularly during peak hours. The proposed development will add residents, visitors, service vehicles and deliveries to an already constrained road network. This raises concerns about: Increased congestion on local streets Reduced safety for pedestrians and cyclists Greater difficulty entering and exiting properties These impacts will be felt not only during peak times, but throughout the day as service and delivery traffic increases. 3.2 Parking Spillover While on-site parking is proposed, experience in the area suggests that: Visitor parking demand often exceeds provision Trades, delivery drivers and ride-share vehicles rely on street parking Overflow parking impacts nearby residential streets This will reduce parking availability for existing residents and increase daily inconvenience. In an established suburb like Chatswood, where many households already manage limited street parking, this is a genuine concern. 3.3 Construction Impacts The expected construction period from 2026 to 2029 represents years of disruption, including: Heavy vehicle movements Material deliveries Potential night or early-morning works Living through prolonged construction at this scale has serious implications for noise, safety, access and general wellbeing. While construction management plans may be required later, the duration and intensity of these impacts should be given more weight at this approval stage. 4. Waste Management and Sight Lines 4.1 Increased Waste Generation A development of this scale will generate a substantial amount of waste. Concerns remain about whether on-site waste storage and collection arrangements are genuinely adequate and practical. Poorly functioning waste systems often lead to: Noise during early-morning collections Odours and visual clutter Increased servicing vehicle movements These issues directly affect nearby residents’ day-to-day amenity. 4.2 Safety and Sight Lines Waste collection and service vehicles are large and require clear access. In constrained urban sites, this often leads to: Vehicles reversing in or out of driveways Reduced visibility at access points Compromised sight lines for pedestrians and cyclists Any reduction in sight lines presents a real safety concern, particularly in an area with families, older residents and regular foot traffic. 5. Local Character and Chatswood Context Chatswood is a well-established, high-income suburb valued for its liveability, access to services, and overall quality of the built environment. Residents choose to live here not only for convenience, but for a certain standard of design, amenity and neighbourhood character. While Chatswood is a centre for growth, that growth should: Respect existing residential areas Maintain a high standard of urban design Avoid overdevelopment that prioritises yield over liveability The proposed development, in its current form, risks eroding the qualities that make Chatswood an attractive and desirable place to live. Large, bulky buildings placed close to existing homes undermine the sense of space, privacy and comfort that residents reasonably expect in this suburb. There is concern that approving developments of this nature sets a precedent that gradually diminishes the character and amenity of surrounding neighbourhoods. 6. Conclusion I recognise the need for additional housing and development in appropriate locations. However, this proposal places disproportionate impacts on nearby residents due to its scale, proximity and intensity. Many of the concerns outlined above — particularly those relating to built form, privacy, traffic pressure and safety — cannot be adequately resolved through conditions imposed after approval. I respectfully ask the NSW Independent Planning Commission to: Give greater weight to the lived experience of nearby residents Reconsider whether the scale and design are appropriate for this location Ensure that Chatswood’s established character and amenity are protected, not progressively eroded Thank you for considering this submission. If you want next: A shorter, sharper version (1 page) A more emotional owner-voice (still professional) A version aligned to IPC speaking time limits Or tailoring to a specific Chatswood precinct Just tell me how you plan to use it. also add victor street is 2lane dead end street where endeless car do uturn to drop off kids, supplier drop off to restaurants on post office lane and pedestrian walk across to go westfiled entrance is so dangerous without traffic lights, post office lane is worst a single lane combined with pedestrain walkway from metro station, this building with basement parking will add extreme choke points which will collapsed the community wellbeing and introduce risks Understood. I’ve integrated your Victor Street / Post Office Lane concerns and rewritten the objection so it reads like a genuine nearby owner who lives with these conditions daily — clear, grounded, and serious, without sounding exaggerated or “planner-speak”. You can submit this as-is to the IPC or adapt sections for speaking. Submission to the NSW Independent Planning Commission Objection to Proposed Development – Built Form, Traffic & Parking, Waste Management, Sight Lines and Local Character 1. Introduction I am a nearby property owner writing to object to the proposed development currently before the NSW Independent Planning Commission. The site is located approximately 40 metres from my property, and the scale and intensity of the proposal will significantly change the immediate neighbourhood. While I note that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure has indicated the proposal is approvable subject to conditions, I am concerned that the real, on-the-ground impacts for residents, pedestrians and local businesses have not been fully appreciated. This area already operates under high daily pressure from traffic, pedestrian movement, school drop-offs, deliveries and access to major retail and transport infrastructure. Introducing a large development with basement parking and additional servicing into this environment risks creating severe choke points that will affect safety, amenity and community wellbeing. This submission focuses on: Built form and design Traffic and parking impacts Waste management and sight lines Local character and liveability in Chatswood 2. Built Form and Design 2.1 Scale and Proximity The proposed development is large and visually dominant, particularly given its close proximity to existing residential properties. At approximately 40 metres away, the building will not sit comfortably in the background but will instead dominate outlooks and sense of space for nearby residents. The bulk and massing of the building do not provide an appropriate transition to surrounding development. Once constructed, the impact will be permanent and cannot be meaningfully mitigated through conditions. 2.2 Privacy and Amenity Given the closeness of the development: Overlooking from windows and balconies will reduce privacy Residents will experience a loss of separation and personal space Living areas and private spaces will feel exposed These are not minor or theoretical concerns — they directly affect daily life and the enjoyment of homes that residents have invested in over many years. 3. Traffic and Parking Impacts (Local Reality) 3.1 Victor Street – Existing Conditions Victor Street is a two-lane, dead-end street that already operates under intense pressure, particularly during school drop-off and pick-up times. It is common for: Cars to enter, realise there is no through access, and perform U-turns Parents stopping briefly to drop off children Vehicles idling, reversing, and manoeuvring in confined space This occurs daily and already creates congestion, confusion and safety risks. Adding a large residential development that relies on basement parking access in this environment will significantly worsen these conditions. Increased resident traffic, visitors, ride-share vehicles and deliveries will compound an already fragile traffic situation. 3.2 Post Office Lane – Severe Constraints Post Office Lane is, in practice, one of the most problematic access points in the area. It is: A single-lane road Combined with a pedestrian walkway A key pedestrian route from the Metro station Used by suppliers servicing restaurants, particularly for deliveries and waste removal This lane already functions beyond its comfortable capacity. Pedestrians regularly share space with delivery vehicles, creating frequent conflict points and safety concerns. 3.3 Pedestrian Safety and Westfield Access There is significant pedestrian movement across the area, particularly people walking from Victor Street and Post Office Lane towards the Westfield entrance. This movement occurs without traffic lights or adequate pedestrian priority, making crossings dangerous — especially during busy periods. Families, children, older residents and commuters are all forced to negotiate vehicle movements in areas where sight lines are limited and driver attention is divided. 3.4 Impact of Basement Parking and Servicing The proposed development’s basement parking and servicing arrangements will: Introduce additional vehicle entry and exit points Increase turning, reversing and queuing movements Intensify congestion at already constrained locations This will create extreme choke points in Victor Street and Post Office Lane. The cumulative effect is not just inconvenience — it introduces real safety risks and degrades the daily functioning of the neighbourhood. 4. Waste Management and Sight Lines 4.1 Waste Collection Impacts A development of this scale will generate significant waste volumes. Waste collection vehicles are large, frequent, and often operate early in the morning. In narrow streets and lanes such as Post Office Lane, this typically results in: Vehicles blocking access Pedestrians being forced into vehicle paths Noise impacts during early hours 4.2 Sight Line and Safety Concerns The combination of: Narrow lanes Pedestrian walkways Waste and delivery vehicles Increased basement access movements means that sight lines are already compromised. Any additional traffic will further reduce visibility for both drivers and pedestrians. This is particularly concerning in an area with high foot traffic from the Metro station and nearby retail destinations. 5. Local Character and Chatswood Context Chatswood is a well-established, affluent, high-income suburb that residents choose for its access to transport and services combined with a reasonable standard of liveability. While Chatswood is a growth area, development should: Be carefully designed to fit constrained sites Avoid overloading streets and lanes that are already operating at capacity Maintain safety and amenity for residents, workers and pedestrians Approving a development that intensifies traffic and servicing in Victor Street and Post Office Lane risks undermining community wellbeing and eroding the qualities that make this area functional and desirable. Growth that ignores local conditions does not improve the suburb — it strains it. 6. Conclusion This proposal, in its current form, places unacceptable pressure on an already constrained local environment. The combination of: Large built form close to existing homes Basement parking access in narrow streets Heavy pedestrian movement without adequate controls Ongoing delivery and waste servicing creates a situation where traffic congestion, safety risks and loss of amenity are inevitable. These impacts cannot be fully resolved through post-approval conditions. Once approved and built, the consequences will be permanent. I respectfully request that the NSW Independent Planning Commission: Give greater weight to existing traffic and pedestrian conditions Reconsider whether the scale and access arrangements are appropriate for this location Prioritise safety, liveability and community wellbeing over development yield Thank you for considering this submission.

12106

New South Wales 2067

28/01/2026

Object

Website

Dear Sir or Madam, My name is Lin Jing. I live very close to this proposed development, at Metro Spire Chatswood entrance from woolworths. My English is not very good but I want to write about my real worries from living here every day. This new building is very big and too close to where we live. Our area is already very busy and stressful. I am worried this project will make life harder and not safe. Victor Street is very narrow and not connect to other road. Every day many cars drive in and then have to turn back. Parents stop cars to drop off child. Cars U-turn and stop suddenly. People walk between cars. This already feels dangerous. If this building is built, there will be many more cars coming for parking, visitors and delivery. I don’t understand how this street can take more cars. Post Office Lane is even worse. It is very narrow and only one lane. People walk there from the metro station. At the same time, trucks come to deliver food to restaurants and take rubbish. Cars and people are too close together. Trucks often block the lane and people must walk around them. Many times I feel scared walking there. At night time, walking in Post Office Lane and Victor Street does not feel safe. Many young kids hang around. Some are rude and shout bad words. I have also seen people selling secret things. The lane is dark and narrow, and when people stand around, I feel afraid to walk past alone. If more people move in from this building, I worry this feeling will be worse. Many people walk from Victor Street and Post Office Lane to go to Westfield. There are no traffic lights. Cars turn suddenly. People cross the road while cars move. I see children, old people and families crossing every day. If more cars come from underground parking, this will be more dangerous. The underground parking will bring many cars in and out all day. Cars will wait, turn around and block the road. Delivery trucks and rubbish trucks will come more often. Victor Street and Post Office Lane are too small for this. Cars and people will mix together and it will not be safe. The building is also very big and very close to our home. We will lose privacy. People can look into our windows. The building will block our view and make us feel closed in. This is our home, not just a place on paper. We buy high price to have a view and will also lose money for lost of view Chatswood is a good area. Many people work hard to live here because it is convenient and safe. People care about living quality. Development should not make the area worse. Build to rent model will bring low income people here. But this suburb is not suitable as have long history of asian migrants who pay high price for community, such as big build to rent will affect the community here. Building is too big for this place and will bring many problems. Once it is built, we cannot change it. I ask the Commission to please think about people who already live here. Please look carefully at Victor Street and Post Office Lane. Please think about safety, day and night. Thank you for reading my letter. Yours sincerely, Lin Jing

12216

New South Wales 2067

28/01/2026

Object

Website

As an existing resident, I'm concerned about the noise and dust during the construction that could take years. It'd cause significant disruptions for many people due to the close proximity to existing buildings. Also I'm worried about the impacts on my privacy after this building project's complete. With the current proposed location, it'd very easy to see into my windows from the new apartment. I believe this proposed development will have a negative overall impact on the Chatswood community as well. There'll be more traffic during peak hours, increased demand for parking and more crowding on our already busy night market streets. As this is a build-to-rent project, this will not support people looking to buy a house either. Even for rent, this location is not affordable for people that are struggling due to the housing crisis

12336

New South Wales 2067

28/01/2026

Object

Website

As a resident of a nearby residential building, I would like to formally object to this development proposal due to the significant negative impacts it would have on my living conditions. 1. Loss of Sunlight and Natural Light The proposed development, at 46 storeys, is significantly out of scale with the surrounding residential environment. Due to its height and proximity, it would severely obstruct sunlight and natural daylight to my apartment, which is located approximately 40 metres from the site. Importantly, my apartment is single-aspect, with all windows facing east. This means that my home relies entirely on this single direction for natural light, ventilation, and outlook. If a building of this height is constructed directly in front of my apartment, it would almost completely block sunlight, views, and airflow, resulting in a substantial loss of residential amenity. Access to natural light is essential for health, wellbeing, and reasonable residential amenity. The overshadowing and visual impact created by a building of this height would result in a permanent and unacceptable loss of sunlight, outlook, and amenity to my home, particularly during key daylight hours. 2. Construction Impacts – Dust and Residential Amenity The construction of a project of this scale is expected to occur over an extended period (2026–2029). During this time, residents in nearby buildings would be exposed to excessive dust, noise, and air pollution. Construction dust would directly affect air quality, the ability to open windows, and the general comfort and health of residents. These impacts would be especially concerning given the close proximity of existing residential buildings to the site. 3. Impacts on the Chatswood Pedestrian Precinct and Public Domain The site is located adjacent to the Chatswood pedestrian street, which is a key local destination for shopping, dining, and community activity. It is heavily used by residents, families, and visitors as a place for walking, leisure, and social interaction. Major construction activities, including heavy vehicle movements, excavation works, and basement construction, would significantly disrupt this pedestrian-focused environment. Frequent truck access and construction traffic would raise serious concerns regarding pedestrian safety, noise, dust, and general accessibility. Prolonged construction adjacent to an important public and retail street would also negatively affect local businesses and diminish the amenity and attractiveness of this valued community space. Conclusion Given the excessive height of the proposed building, its close proximity to existing residences, and the severe impacts on sunlight access, outlook, residential amenity, and the Chatswood pedestrian precinct, I believe this development is inappropriate for this location and should not be approved in its current form. Thank you for considering my submission.

12416

New South Wales 2067

28/01/2026

Object

Website

I oppose this development, I have been a long standing resident in Chatswood and have lived here 25+ years, this development will impact negatively to the Chatswood community contribute to further congestion, coverage of sunlight and block our view completely. This should not be allowed at all. The location where it is proposed is our local shops it’s not meant to hve high rises buildings built.

12426

New South Wales 2067

28/01/2026

Object

Website