Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent, North Ryde

1526

New South Wales 2113

13/06/2025

Object

Website

The community area is currently saturated from high-density development. The new project, in its current version, will lead to a critical shortage of essential community spaces, social infrastructure, and green areas within walking distance. Residents at 1-3 Network Place are particularly concerned about the impacts of new high-rises. Key concerns include: - Overshadowing: The looming threat of overshadowing from new high-rises jeopardizes sunlight access for existing residents in 1-3 Network Place. - Privacy and View Sharing: Residents face concerns about privacy and view sharing, with some anticipating complete blockage of their views. - Inadequate Non-Refusal Standards: Insufficient car parking provisions in the area further exacerbate existing issues, indicating a lack of adequate non-refusal standards. - Exceeding Height Limits: The proposal outlines a building height exceeding the 37 meters specified as the maximum for this lot under Clause 6.9 of the Ryde LEP 2014. The proposal, therefore, does not comply with the LEP plan. - Misrepresentation of Public Amenities: The Triniti Lighthouse Build proposal appears to claim the New Link Road as an amenity offered by the proposal. This cannot be legitimately presented as a benefit attributable to the Triniti Lighthouse project. Regarding Clause 6.9 of the Ryde LEP 2014 ("Development in Macquarie Park Corridor"): While Clause 6.9 (3) allows for the consent authority to approve development with increased height and floor space ratio if satisfied about adequate provision for recreation areas and an access network. Our concern highlights that these provisions are already critically low. Therefore, even if the proposal attempts to leverage this clause, it must demonstrate how it will adequately provide for these elements, especially given the existing saturation and critical shortage. The current proposal appears to fall short in this regard, particularly with the misrepresentation of the New Link Road as a project benefit.

1436

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

There is currently not enough public amenities (such as parks, recreation, health facilities and schools) around the area to support the size of the development. The road leading to M2 is a very small road, which lead to severe congestion as many people drives to the city.

1476

New South Wales 2071

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The current Microsoft building area be kept for a gardening/park as there are lack of out door area for 3 large condominiums near the North Ryde metro. Pls consider the Park with underground council car park like Lindfield. This not only address the short of parking area near North Ryde metro (highly recommended the board members to drive to this area in weekday to understand why the residents already complaining difficult to park), it also enable future underground walk towards the metro opportunity.

1321

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I have a few problems with this proposal - the roads aren't wide enough to accommodate so many new people - severe lack of parking spaces and this will make it worse - winter time sunlight problem leading to cold, mould and mental health concerns -

1366

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The Stockland proposal next door is NOT entitled to the additional height and FSR (Floor Space Ratio) conditional on Clause 6.9. The arguments are that the development is NOT "commercial", the public recreation area is insufficient and the access network is convoluted and through the service access. 6.9 Development in Macquarie Park Corridor (1) The objective of this clause is to encourage additional commercial development in Macquarie Park Corridor co-ordinated with an adequate access network and recreation areas. (2) This clause applies to land in Macquarie Park Corridor, identified as “Precinct 01—Macquarie Park” on the Macquarie Park Corridor Precinct Map. (3) The consent authority may approve development with a height and floor space ratio that does not exceed the increased building height and floor space ratio identified on the Macquarie Park Corridor Precinct Incentive Height of Buildings Map and the Macquarie Park Corridor Precinct Incentive Floor Space Ratio Map, but only if the consent authority is satisfied that— (a) there will be adequate provision for recreation areas and an access network, and (b) the configuration and location of the recreation areas will be appropriate for the recreational purposes of the precinct, and (c) the configuration and location of the access network will allow a suitable level of connectivity within the precinct. From <https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/epi-2014-0608#sec.6.9>

1451

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The arguments are that the development is NOT "commercial", the public recreation area is insufficient and the access network is convoluted and through the service access. The clause is quoted below because when I follow the link, I see that it's repealed! If there are any legal experts out there who can explain the implications, it would be fantastic! 6.9 Development in Macquarie Park Corridor (1) The objective of this clause is to encourage additional commercial development in Macquarie Park Corridor co-ordinated with an adequate access network and recreation areas. (2) This clause applies to land in Macquarie Park Corridor, identified as “Precinct 01—Macquarie Park” on the Macquarie Park Corridor Precinct Map. (3) The consent authority may approve development with a height and floor space ratio that does not exceed the increased building height and floor space ratio identified on the Macquarie Park Corridor Precinct Incentive Height of Buildings Map and the Macquarie Park Corridor Precinct Incentive Floor Space Ratio Map, but only if the consent authority is satisfied that— (a) there will be adequate provision for recreation areas and an access network, and (b) the configuration and location of the recreation areas will be appropriate for the recreational purposes of the precinct, and (c) the configuration and location of the access network will allow a suitable level of connectivity within the precinct.

1491

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I object. The proposal is not entitled to the additional height and FSR in accordance with Clause 6.9, the public recreational area is inadequate and the access network is convoluted.

1246

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am the owner of a neighbouring property to the proposed development at Ryde Garden and I am writing to formally lodge my objection to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development adjacent to Ryde Garden, North Ryde. As a local resident, I am deeply concerned that this project, in its current form, will have a significant negative impact on the surrounding community and overall liveability of the area. I ask that the following issues be carefully considered before any approvals are granted: 1. Complete Loss of City Views and Overshadowing - The height, bulk, and positioning of the proposed development will directly block all existing city views from many Ryde Garden residences. This not only affects our property value but undermines the original design intent and visual amenity enjoyed by current residents. 2. Overlooking and Loss of Privacy - The proposed building faces existing apartments at an unacceptably close proximity, creating a severe privacy intrusion for Ryde Garden residents. With direct line-of-sight into living areas and balconies, this development compromises the right to residential amenity. 3. Traffic Congestion and Safety - North Ryde is already experiencing high traffic volumes, particularly during peak hours. An additional high-density residential complex of this scale will exacerbate congestion, increase pressure on local roads and intersections 4. Inadequate Parking Provision - With limited off-street parking and no clear plans to accommodate additional vehicles, this proposal will worsen the existing parking shortage. Residents and visitors will inevitably spill over into surrounding streets, creating tension and logistical issues in an already tight area. 5. Incompatible Built Form and Overdevelopment - The building’s height, bulk, and design are out of character with surrounding developments and not in harmony with the existing residential scale. It represents a form of overdevelopment inconsistent with the original planning vision of the area and the principles of sustainable urban design. 6. Detrimental Impact on Community Wellbeing - The Ryde Garden community values its open space, access to light, and a strong sense of privacy. This development threatens to undermine those qualities, affecting mental wellbeing, natural light access, and long-term residential satisfaction. I respectfully urge the planning authority to reject or significantly amend the Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent proposal. A more balanced approach that protects view corridors, respects neighbouring privacy, and addresses traffic and parking concerns is essential for maintaining the integrity and liveability of North Ryde. Thank you for considering this submission.

1341

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The development is NOT "commercial", the public recreation area is insufficient and the access network is convoluted and through the service access.

1381

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Blocking views, noise, overcrowding

1426

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing as a concerned resident that this development is being proposed outside of the original plans. I had purchase my residence recently in good faith, after doing my research that the proposed development was going to be no higher than 12 floors - which I was ok with, hence purchasing my residence in the existing neighboring property. The additional 8+ floors I believe will cause additional traffic in an already congested area of North Ryde causing major traffic delays and parking issues within the development area and will most likely spread outside the surrounding development area. I strongly object to the proposed development (up to 20+ levels). Please consider the original proposed development being no more than 12 levels.

1466

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I object to the additional height and land space proposed for the new Stockland development. The development does not need this addition as it is not considered commercial and already has enough space for its proposed recreational and residential purposes. There is also already extremely limited parking and high vehicle traffic during peak hours which the roads are unable to support even now.

1506

New South Wales 2112

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The purpose for this project aimed to provide rental premises for tenants. However, the density is too high and will devaluate the nearby properties. Moreover, there are additional projects already building in the nearby Laughlan’s Square and Macquarie Park. There will be oversupply of apartments in the coming years. Besides, traffic chaotic will be deepened furher.

1311

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

To whom it may concern, I am writing to express my strong objection to Stockland's proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development in North Ryde, specifically the closure of New Link Road. The implications of these proposed changes are profoundly concerning and would bring about severe hardships for our community. 1. View Loss and Visual Impact: The proposed development threatens to obliterate the iconic views that have been cherished by residents of Ryde Gardens. These views, spanning from the Harbour Bridge and Opera House to the CBD skyline, Darling Harbour, ANZAC Bridge, and beyond, are not mere scenic pleasures. They are our connection to the heart of the city, our daily inspiration, and the soul of our community. 2. Shadowing: The proposed development threatens to cast unwelcome shadows over our community. The resultant loss of natural light and the overshadowing of our homes will dramatically affect our quality of life, leading to increased energy costs and an overall diminished living environment. 3. Macquarie Park Innovation Precinct Place Strategy: The proposed development flagrantly disregards the Macquarie Park plan, which was established after an extensive review of precincts. The North Ryde Riverside area was meant to remain a commercial core, a promise that has been broken by this development.
It is imperative that you understand that these changes stand to affect hundreds of residents who purchased their homes under the assurance that the location would remain at 37 meters for commercial development. These are not just investors; they are families, individuals, and "Mum and Dad" homeowners who have deeply invested in this community. 4. New Link Road Closure: The closure of New Link Road is a grave mistake. It will block access via the slip road onto Rivett Rd, which is currently a lifeline for residents of Ryde Gardens and Centrale, as well as the diligent staff at Triniti. This route provides a crucial escape from the daily gridlock on Delhi Rd near the M2 entry and exit. Furthermore, shutting down the exit via the slip road onto Epping Road is nothing short of an assault on our way of life. Residents of Ryde Gardens and Centrale, along with Triniti staff, depend on this route for a direct exit onto Rivett Road and then eastbound on Epping Road. The absence of traffic lights between Ryde Gardens and the Harbour Bridge via this New Link Road exit is an invaluable escape route that we refuse to relinquish. Moreover, the proposed loss of parking spaces on this road will disrupt our community's ability to host visitors and provide much-needed parking during weekdays and weekends. 5. Rennie Street Access: The plans to route all access for an additional 508 apartments through Rennie Street is not only detrimental to the existing residents and staff but also represents a complete disregard for the safety and convenience of the community. 6. Child Care Facilities: The proposed closure threatens the safety of the young children attending the existing Childcare facility within the Triniti CSR building. The drop-off zone on New Link Road is a hive of activity during morning and evening hours, and this callous decision stands to jeopardise the safety of our little ones. 7. Will it provide affordable housing? In light of the current rental crisis in Sydney, it is important to acknowledge that the proposed Build-to-Rent (BTR) development falls short of its intended purpose, which is to provide affordable housing. The economic climate in Australia, characterised by weak economic conditions and high interest rates, has created a challenging environment for renters. As a result, rental prices have been on a relentless upward trajectory, leaving many residents struggling to afford housing. The higher tenant turnover and greater vacancy rates, driven by the overall affordability issues, further exacerbate the housing crisis. The proposed BTR development, with its average apartment floor plans of 80 square meters, would not substantially address this crisis. It is clear that the proposed BTR development is not aligned with the pressing need for truly affordable rental housing in the current Sydney market Considering the potential impacts on the well-being, safety, and lifestyle of the Ryde Gardens community, we vehemently reject this development proposal. We implore you to reconsider the closure of New Link Road and any changes that would disrupt our way of life, obliterate our iconic views, and rob us of our daily sources of inspiration. Our community's identity and the very essence of what makes Ryde Gardens special are at stake. We demand that you rectify these alarming proposals before proceeding with this development. Thank you for your time and consideration!

1441

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing as a concerned resident and homeowner to formally object to the proposed build-to-rent high-rise development planned for triniti lighthouse build in North Ryde. I urge the Commission to reconsider the approval of this project due to its substantial and irreversible impacts on existing residents and the surrounding community. 1. Severe Loss of Natural Light, Views, and Amenity The proposed high-rise will directly block the open outlook and skyline views from my apartment, which was a major factor in my decision to purchase my home. This development would significantly diminish natural light, increase overshadowing, and reduce ventilation, thereby decreasing my quality of life and that of many surrounding residents. Loss of views and sunlight can have detrimental psychological and emotional effects, particularly in high-density living areas where private outdoor space is already limited. The existing planning principles highlight the importance of protecting view corridors and solar access for existing residents—principles which this development appears to disregard. 2. Negative Impact on Property Value and Financial Stability The obstruction of views and increased density from a high-rise tower will likely reduce the market value of my property. As a long-term resident and ratepayer, this is deeply concerning, especially in a time of financial uncertainty. It is unjust for existing homeowners to bear the economic loss caused by developments that prioritise developer returns over community wellbeing. Thank you for your consideration.

1481

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

1) street parking is already tight and this new proposal is going to make it worse. I do not see adequate resolution proposed to address this . 2) the height is going to block the view and reduce the light of the building next door - which is where I reside, I do not agree the height proposed .

1236

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

1. Exceeding Local Planning Controls The proposal seeks to utilize Clause 6.9 to increase the building height to 20 floors, nearly double the 12-floor limit set by the Local Environmental Plan (LEP). This approach sets a concerning precedent that could lead to similar height increases in adjacent developments, such as the former Microsoft building at 1 Epping Road 2. Insufficient Parking Provision The development plans allocate only 102 parking spaces for 510 units, equating to a ratio of 0.2 spaces per dwelling. This is significantly below the standard requirement and may exacerbate existing street parking issues, as highlighted in the City of Ryde's objection to Stockland's proposal . 3. Loss of Visual Amenity for Existing Residents Residents of Ryde Gardens, particularly those in apartments below the 22nd floor, face potential loss of views due to the proposed development. The visual impact assessment provided by Stockland fails to adequately address these concerns, merely stating compliance with the Apartment Design Guide without offering solutions for view sharing . 4. Overdevelopment in an Already Dense Area The Ryde Local Government Area (LGA) is projected to exceed its housing targets, with Ryde Council's housing strategy aiming for an additional 20,000 to 22,000 dwellings by 2036. The proposed development contributes to a cumulative increase in density, raising concerns about the adequacy of existing infrastructure and amenities 5. Strain on Local Infrastructure and Services The addition of 510 new BTR units will place significant pressure on local infrastructure, including public transport, roads, schools, and healthcare services. These systems are already under stress from recent high-density developments in the area, and no clear plan has been provided to upgrade or expand essential services to accommodate further growth.

1326

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Whilst the original plan to erect a building of 20 stories was not ideal, I considered it acceptable. However, the revised plan to build a much taller structure will certainly adversely affect the quality of life for residence in the adjacent properties, including the one I own. I also feel that building such a tall structure will set a precedent for adjacent plot which I would also consider to adversely affect the quality of life for local residence, should they be built to a similar height.

1371

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The development is not commercial, the public recreation area nearby is insufficient There is also the issue of parking as it's already difficult to get any street parking for visitors

1456

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The surrounding area does not have the necessary infrastructure to support the development of the proposed size. With many more proposals like this that will come in the future as the entire area is rezoned, allowing a development of the proposed magnitude would set a dangerous precedent for the future. There are already issues with insufficient street parking as the surrounding streets are consistently at least 95% full. Additionally, the metro is extremely packed in the mornings around peak hour and the only chance to get on is if workers are disembarking for their day jobs at the North Ryde area. If the commercial buildings are all rezoned and replaced with very tall buildings, the bottleneck will get substantially worse. Housing density is a serious issue with enormous and far-reaching ramifications on a number of areas, and it should be planned carefully to allow for sustainable positive impact in an area. Otherwise, the negative impacts will make the entire area unattractive for all residents, workers and citizens. To conclude, it would be dangerous to set a precedent allowing a building of the proposed height and density, especially when a number of other similar buildings will be constructed in the area in the near future.

1496

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Development Application due to its anticipated negative impact on the neighbourhood. Firstly, there is a significant undersupply of parking spaces in the area, and this development will exacerbate the issue, creating difficulties for residents and visitors alike. Additionally, increased traffic congestion will overwhelm the local road network, which is not designed to accommodate such a high volume of vehicles. Furthermore, the proposed development raises serious concerns regarding excessive building height and insufficient setbacks. If the structure exceeds height limits or encroaches on required setbacks, it will reduce privacy, restrict access to natural sunlight, and diminish the character of the neighbourhood. This could negatively affect the quality of life for residents and alter the established streetscape in an undesirable way. For these reasons, I urge IPC to reject this application.

1251

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The high density build to rent buildings will affect the residents living this area very much. The traffic will be extra crowded, and there is no enough exercise and play grand nearby. Please consider the people's life who living there.

1346

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Absolutely. Here’s the revised objection letter with environmental concerns added from a neighbour’s perspective, such as urban heat, tree loss, wind tunnelling, and biodiversity impacts. These points are integrated naturally to reflect the voice of a local resident: --- Subject: Objection to 20-Storey Proposals – Clause 6.9 Height Increase (Stockland & 1 Epping Rd) To the Independent Planning Commission, I am writing to formally object to the proposed increases in building height under Clause 6.9 in the Stockland North Ryde proposal and the adjacent development at 1 Epping Road. Both developments are now proposed to rise up to 20 storeys, significantly exceeding the 12-storey (37m) height limit that local residents were originally led to expect. As a local resident, I have following concerns: 1. Disruption to Local Amenity and Livability These height increases will dominate the local skyline, overshadowing low- to mid-rise buildings and completely changing the character of the neighbourhood. Loss of privacy and natural light for residents, particularly in Buildings A and B, will make existing homes significantly less livable. Increased traffic congestion and pressure on local infrastructure, with no clear plan to expand roads, schools, or public transport. 2. Environmental Impacts on the Neighbourhood Large-scale towers and concrete-heavy designs will reduce permeable surfaces, worsening stormwater runoff and flood risk during heavy rains. Wind modelling has not been shared transparently; however, towers of this height can cause wind tunnelling effects, particularly uncomfortable or even dangerous at pedestrian level. This area supports a small but vital corridor of urban biodiversity, including bird species that rely on the existing canopy. Overdevelopment threatens to fragment this habitat. The scale of construction noise and dust during the build phase will significantly affect air quality and peace for surrounding homes, schools, and elderly residents. 3. Community Trust and Planning Integrity Residents made property decisions based on a reasonable 12-storey height expectation, which was considered a fair compromise for growth and livability. Changing Clause 6.9 to allow 20-storey buildings undermines public consultation, creating distrust in the planning process. I'm not opposed to thoughtful development—but it must be sustainable, balanced, and community-aligned. The proposed 20-storey towers represent an extreme and unnecessary overdevelopment that disregards both community wellbeing and environmental responsibility. I strongly urge the IPC to reject the proposed height increase and enforce the originally intended 12-storey limit.

1396

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I strongly object this proposal

1431

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at Ryde Gardens under Clause 6.9, which seeks to increase the allowable building height from 37 metres to 65 metres and the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) from 2:1 to 3:1 to accommodate a Build-to-Rent (BTR) scheme. 1. Breach of Expectations and Resident Trust Many current residents purchased their homes in Ryde Gardens based on the existing Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and direct advice from Council, which confirmed: Maximum allowable building height: 37m Maximum FSR: 2:1 The remaining commercial-zoned site would be developed under the same planning controls. This understanding materially influenced decisions to purchase apartments, particularly east-facing units above Level 12 in Buildings A and B, which were marketed and purchased with the assurance of uninterrupted views toward Chatswood, St Leonards, and the Sydney CBD, including Harbour Bridge views. The sudden use of Clause 6.9 by the developer (Stockland) to submit a revised concept plan in May 2023, increasing the proposed building height to 20 storeys (65m) and FSR to 3:1, was made without proper engagement or warning. Most residents were unaware of this clause or its implications. This lack of transparency has led to a significant erosion of trust between the community, the developer, and Council. The proposed changes directly contradict what residents were led to believe and undermines planning integrity. 2. Negative Impact on Amenity and Property Value The increased height and bulk of the proposed BTR tower will result in: Loss of long-promised, panoramic views from dozens of homes in the existing Ryde Gardens buildings. Significant overshadowing of open space and common areas. Increased noise, traffic, and strain on local infrastructure during and after construction. Residents who purchased properties at a premium due to the view and amenity now face the risk of devaluation and decreased liveability—with no recourse, despite earlier assurances. This is not a case of natural, incremental development—this is a major shift from what was clearly communicated and agreed upon when the community was first established. 3. Precedent and Misuse of Clause 6.9 Clause 6.9 is intended to encourage BTR housing but not at the cost of disregarding established planning controls and community expectations. Approving this proposal could: Set a dangerous precedent across the Ryde LGA and beyond, encouraging developers to bypass agreed controls under the guise of BTR. Undermine the credibility of local planning instruments, making it harder for communities to have faith in Council decisions or advice. Create long-term tension and dissatisfaction in communities where trust has been broken. Encouraging housing diversity is important, but it must be balanced, considered, and fair to existing residents. 4. Housing Contributions Already Made It is also worth noting that Ryde Gardens has already made a significant contribution to housing supply in the area. Many current residents: Downsized from large family homes, freeing up housing stock. Moved into Ryde Gardens because of its liveability, infrastructure, and long-term certainty offered by the existing LEP. Undermining the amenity and expectations of these residents could discourage similar housing movements, which are essential to broader housing affordability and supply goals.

1471

New South Wales 2119

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The agreement was building heights would only be 12 floors (37m). Anything beyond that is unacceptable so them proposing to have two buildings of 20 floors is completely unacceptable.

1316

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Oppose to the development, too crowded, especially the

1361

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I write to formally object to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development, which now exceeds the original heigh limit , on the following grounds. The area surrounding the proposed site is already experiencing significant traffic congestion, particularly during peak hours. This development will exacerbate the issue by introducing a substantial increase in vehicular movements associated with residents, visitors, and service vehicles. The local road network is not designed to support this level of intensified residential use. Additionally, there is limited street parking available in the vicinity. The proposal does not adequately address the parking shortfall, potentially forcing overflow parking into surrounding streets, further impacting existing residents and businesses. The proposed building height of more than 12 storeys is excessive and not in keeping with the existing planning controls or character of the surrounding area. The development seeks to take advantage of additional FSR and height allowances that are typically reserved for commercial developments. However, this is a Build-to-Rent residential development, not a commercial project, and should not qualify for these incentives. Granting this proposal the additional height and FSR would set a concerning precedent and undermine the intent of planning controls designed to ensure appropriate and sustainable development. The proposal fails to provide sufficient publicly accessible open space and recreational amenities. In developments of this scale, access to quality public open space is vital to support the wellbeing of both future residents and the existing community. The current plans do not adequately deliver this, and access to any proposed recreational areas appears restricted and poorly integrated with the broader public realm. In light of the concerns above, I strongly urge the Commission to reject the proposal in its current form. The height and scale are inconsistent with local planning intentions, and the traffic, parking, and amenity impacts have not been appropriately addressed.

1446

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I strongly oppose the current development plan due to significant traffic and parking concerns at Network Place. The area already experiences heavy vehicle and pedestrian traffic, making construction impractical without proper upgrades and planning to accommodate increased flow. Every morning, I find myself waiting 2–5 minutes at the traffic light just to exit Rennie Street, as congestion stretches all the way to my garage entrance. Parking is extremely limited, with only around 20 spots available on Rennie Street and Network Place. Additionally, construction will eliminate existing parking on Newlink Road, making it even harder for visitors to find a space. This issue will further impact the seven apartment blocks in the area, which house over 1,500 units. Before moving forward with this development, a comprehensive plan to address traffic flow and parking must be put in place.

1486

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am against the additional height and FSR of the proposed development. I understand that this additional height of the building was not something in the original proposal. The access to the area will become convoluted and there is inadequate public recreation space for what is being proposed for that area.

1241

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am objecting a 20 floor building development by Stockland on the 1 Epping Rd site.

1336

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The government's rental housing plan will block our buildings view and cause congestion, chaos and parking difficulties.

1376

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Dear Commissioners, I am writing to formally object to the proposed Triniti Stage 2 Build-to-Rent (BTR) development (SSD-10461) located in the Macquarie Park Corridor. As a nearby resident, I have serious concerns about the planning justification, the excessive scale of the proposal, and the unacceptable cumulative impacts it will impose on surrounding communities, particularly Centrale and Ryde Gardens. 1. Misuse of Clause 6.9 – Planning Integrity at Risk The proposal relies on Clause 6.9 of the Ryde Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to justify bonus height and floor space ratio (FSR). However: This clause appears to have been repealed, and no longer forms a valid legal basis for height/FAR uplift. Even if it were valid, it only applies to commercial developments. The Triniti Stage 2 proposal is clearly residential, and therefore ineligible. The clause also requires adequate recreation areas and effective access networks, which this proposal fails to provide. Relying on a repealed and inapplicable clause undermines the community's trust in the planning system and sets a dangerous precedent. 2. Excessive Height and Massing The proposed tower heights of up to 95 metres (31 storeys) are more than double the heights originally exhibited under the LEP. This results in: Significant visual bulk and domination of the skyline, Complete view loss for many residents in neighbouring buildings such as Centrale and Ryde Garden B, Overshadowing of both existing dwellings and the proposed recreation areas. 3. Strained Transport Infrastructure The proposal fails to consider the already overloaded public transport and road infrastructure: The Sydney Metro is already at capacity during morning peak hours. Adding 510 additional residential units without increased service frequency will make the system even more unsustainable. Both Epping Road and Delhi Road experience severe congestion, and increased population from this development will only exacerbate these conditions. No meaningful upgrades to public transport or road infrastructure have been proposed in conjunction with this development. Without integrated transport and land use planning, this development will significantly worsen commuting conditions for current and future residents. 4. Inadequate Open Space and Pedestrian Access Despite planning requirements, the proposal does not deliver sufficient high-quality public domain: The open space provision is minimal, poorly located, and subject to overshadowing. The proposed access network is convoluted, with key routes routed through service lanes and loading docks, making it unsafe and impractical for pedestrian use. 5. Cumulative Overdevelopment Without Town Planning Framework The Macquarie Park precinct has already approved multiple towers exceeding originally exhibited heights. The cumulative effect of: The two already-approved 95m towers to the east, and This proposed development of similar scale, …results in an unsustainable increase in residential density without appropriate supporting infrastructure, amenities, or a cohesive town planning strategy. Request for IPC Action Given these significant issues, I respectfully request that the Independent Planning Commission: Reject the development application in its current form, and Require the proponent to: Withdraw all planning bonus claims under Clause 6.9, Reduce tower heights to reflect the exhibited LEP scale, Deliver a compliant and functional public domain and pedestrian access network, Demonstrate how local infrastructure (particularly transport and road networks) can support the increased population. This is a clear case where development ambition has far exceeded what the site and surrounding community can reasonably support. I urge the Commission to prioritise good planning, resident amenity, and long-term infrastructure sustainability over developer convenience.

1461

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally object to the proposed 20-storey Build-To-Rent (BTR) development beside Building B in Ryde Garden. The concentration of high-rise buildings in such close proximity will severely impact both the views and natural light for existing residents. This overdevelopment of the area will drastically reduce livability and create a crowded, overbuilt environment. Furthermore, I am extremely concerned about the impact on traffic congestion and public transport. The nearby Metro is already operating at full capacity during peak hours. Adding more residential buildings without upgrading transport infrastructure will worsen daily commuting conditions. Macquarie Park already has a high density of apartments, and bringing similar intensity to the Ryde Garden area will negatively affect its character and liveability as a residential zone. The proposed 20-storey height is excessive and unsuitable for the area. I strongly urge the Commission to reconsider and restrict the building height to a more appropriate level, such as 12 storeys, which aligns with community expectations and the sustainable future of the precinct. Thank you for considering my submission.

Ryde_Garden_Objection_Letter.pdf (PDF, 2.48 KB)

1501

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Dear Commissioners, I’m writing as the owner of an apartment in Ryde Gardens to formally object to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development (SSD-55844212). 1. Breach of Clause 6.9 – Misuse of Planning Rules The development breaches Clause 6.9 of the Ryde LEP by using floor space ratio (FSR) rules from across the whole Triniti block, instead of just the Triniti 2 site. This goes against the intent of the planning controls and unfairly increases the development’s size. 2. Misuse of FSR – Overdevelopment of Triniti 2 The proposal wrongly combines FSR from multiple lots, leading to: • Buildings that are too large and out of character with the area • Negative impacts on nearby properties, especially Ryde Gardens • A worrying precedent for future overdevelopment through planning loopholes 3. Not Enough Green Space – Infrastructure Overload This project fails to offer enough open green space, especially given the high density proposed. It will also: • Add pressure to already limited parks and public areas • Strain schools, roads, transport, and utilities 4. Community Impacts – Safety and Stability at Risk The Build-to-Rent model may work in some areas, but here it could: • Increase tenant turnover and reduce community stability • Lead to less accountability and connection with the neighbourhood • Create safety concerns for families and long-term residents 5. Direct Impacts on Ryde Gardens As a resident, I’m concerned about: • Loss of privacy and natural light • More traffic and congestion • Noise, dust, and vibration during construction • A high-rise tower dominating an area designed for mid-rise buildings Conclusion This proposal does not suit the area and doesn’t respect planning rules or community needs. I ask the Commission to reject the application because it: • Breaches Clause 6.9 • Misuses FSR allocations • Damages local amenity and community safety • Lacks sufficient green space or long-term benefit Thank you

L.AddendumSubmission.39DehliRoad.NorthRyde.Final_.pdf (PDF, 1.2 MB)

1306

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Object

Website

Stockland proposal next door is NOT entitled to the additional height and FSR (Floor Space Ratio) conditional on Clause 6.9. The arguments are that the development is NOT "commercial" (it is residential), the public recreation area is insufficient and the access network is convoluted and through the service access.

1351

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

These proposals breach the community’s reasonable expectation of a 12-storey (37m) height limit. The scale of these towers will drastically reduce sunlight, privacy, and livability for neighbours like myself. From an environmental standpoint, the development will increase the urban heat island effect, and potentially worsen stormwater runoff. Clause 6.9 should not be used to justify such excessive height. I urge the IPC to uphold the original 12-storey limit and reject the proposed amendments.

1401

Redacted

12/06/2025

Object

Website

The proposed buildings are too high

1176

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

It will completely block my view from my unit

1231

Redacted

11/06/2025

Object

Website

As a resident of Ryde Gardens, I strongly oppose the proposed Build-to-Rent (BTR) development of 500 units adjacent to our community. This proposal raises serious concerns about long-term impacts on both the local community and the broader Macquarie Park Innovation District (MPID). Firstly, the development would cause a devastating loss of views for current residents and severely diminish the amenity of the area. Furthermore, the planning of public space is grossly inadequate to accommodate the large influx of new residents, putting significant pressure on existing infrastructure, open space, and local services. Importantly, the increase in BTR housing reduces the amount of commercially rated land and places more pressure on the City of Ryde to fund infrastructure and services from a shrinking commercial rate base. BTR properties often generate lower rateable income per square metre compared to commercial or industrial uses, and their rise threatens Council’s long-term financial sustainability. This shift increases reliance on residential ratepayers while undermining the city’s economic resilience. The continued loss of commercial and innovation space in MPID will have lasting impacts on the broader economy. MPID is a nationally significant employment and innovation hub. Diluting its core function by replacing high-value employment lands with residential development risks turning the area into a residential wasteland—one lacking in jobs, enterprise, and economic purpose. If this trend continues, residential creep will encroach on remaining commercial zones, displacing businesses and destroying the innovation ecosystem that supports thousands of jobs and billions in economic activity. This rezoning fails to strike the right balance between housing and economic development, and must be reconsidered. The proposed development is not in the best interest of Ryde Gardens residents, the City of Ryde, or the broader NSW economy.

1191

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

Formal Objection to SSD-55844212 – Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent Development As an owner and resident of an apartment in Ryde Gardens, I wish to formally object to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development (SSD-55844212). My concerns are outlined below: 1. Breach of Clause 6.9 – Site-Specific Development Standards The proposal contravenes Clause 6.9 of the Ryde Local Environmental Plan (RLEP), which restricts the use of site compatibility certificates to increase floor space ratio (FSR) beyond specified limits. The applicant has sought to bypass this restriction by applying the FSR across the entire Triniti block, rather than confining it to the Triniti 2 site — the actual location of the proposed development. This approach represents a misuse of planning provisions and undermines the intent of Clause 6.9. 2. Incorrect Application of FSR – Should Apply to Triniti 2 Only The development should be assessed solely on the basis of planning controls relevant to the Triniti 2 site. The proposed aggregation of FSR across multiple lots artificially inflates allowable density and height, resulting in: Excessive building bulk and scale that is inconsistent with the area’s character Major visual and environmental impacts on surrounding properties, including Ryde Gardens A concerning precedent for future overdevelopment through technical manipulation 3. Loss of Green Space and Increased Pressure on Local Infrastructure The proposed design fails to provide adequate open green space — a critical shortfall for a high-density Build-to-Rent scheme. Local residents already face limited access to open areas, and this development will only exacerbate the problem. Furthermore, the development will: Increase pressure on existing parks, footpaths, and shared community spaces Strain already overburdened public infrastructure, including schools, roads, utilities, and public transport 4. Negative Social Impacts and Reduced Community Safety While the Build-to-Rent model may suit some locations, it raises serious concerns in established, owner-occupied residential communities: High tenant turnover contributes to a transient population and weakens community bonds A revolving door of short-term residents reduces accountability and connection to the neighbourhood These dynamics may lead to a diminished sense of safety and security, especially for families and long-term residents 5. Direct Impacts on Ryde Gardens Residents As someone directly affected, I raise the following objections specific to Ryde Gardens and its residents: Loss of privacy and sunlight due to overshadowing Worsening traffic congestion in already busy streets Disruptive construction impacts including dust, noise, and vibrations The proposed tower will visually dominate a mid-rise neighbourhood, negatively altering the local skyline and character

1166

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

Dear Commissioners, I am writing to formally object to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development at North Ryde (SSD-55844212). I urge the IPC to reject this proposal based on the following grounds: 1. Violation of LEP Height Restrictions The Ryde Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 designates a maximum building height of 37 metres for this site. Stockland's proposal to construct buildings up to 65 metres (approximately 20 storeys) significantly exceeds this limit. The developer seeks to justify this increase through Clause 6.9, which was originally intended to promote commercial development, not high-density residential projects. Applying this clause to a residential build-to-rent (BTR) development is a misinterpretation and sets a concerning precedent for future developments in the area. 2. Misapplication of Clause 6.9 Clause 6.9 of the Ryde LEP allows for increased height and floor space ratio (FSR) in the Macquarie Park Corridor if certain conditions are met, such as providing enhanced open space and connectivity. However, the current proposal fails to deliver adequate public benefits to warrant such concessions. Moreover, the clause's intent was to encourage commercial development, not residential projects like the proposed BTR. Using this clause to justify a residential high-rise undermines the LEP’s objectives and could lead to overdevelopment in the area. 3. Negative Impact on Existing Residents The proposed development will have several adverse effects on current residents: Loss of Views: Residents of Ryde Gardens, particularly those in Buildings A and B, will experience significant view loss due to the proposed building’s height. These views were a key factor for many in choosing to live in the area. Overshadowing: The proximity of the new buildings (less than 30 metres in some areas) will result in substantial overshadowing, reducing natural light and affecting the quality of life for residents, including children attending the nearby childcare centre. Privacy Concerns: The close distance between the proposed development and existing residences will lead to privacy issues, as residents will be directly overlooked by the new buildings. 4. Strain on Infrastructure and Public Transport The addition of 508 new dwellings will place considerable pressure on local infrastructure: Parking: The development plans include only 155 car spaces for 508 units, leading to increased demand for already limited street parking. Traffic Congestion: The area's roads, particularly Delhi Road and New Link Road, are already congested during peak hours. An influx of new residents will exacerbate this issue. Public Transport: Local public transport options, such as the North Ryde Metro Station and nearby bus services, are currently operating at capacity during peak times. The additional population from the proposed development will further strain these services. 5. Inadequate Community Consultation Many residents were unaware of the implications of Clause 6.9 and its potential application to residential developments. There has been a lack of transparent communication regarding the changes and their impact on the community. This oversight has led to a sense of betrayal among residents who expected adherence to the established LEP guidelines. 6. Precedent for Future Developments Approving this development could set a precedent for other sites in the area, such as the old Microsoft building at 1 Epping Road, to seek similar concessions under Clause 6.9. This could lead to a cascade of high-rise developments, fundamentally altering the character of North Ryde and undermining the LEP’s intent. Conclusion In light of the above concerns, I respectfully request that the Independent Planning Commission reject the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development. The project contravenes the Ryde LEP, misapplies Clause 6.9, negatively impacts existing residents, strains local infrastructure, and sets a dangerous precedent for future developments. Thank you for considering my submission. Sincerely,

1216

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

I would like to oppose the development as presented in its current form. Key Objections to the Proposed Development 1. Out-of-Sequence Development • The proposal is inconsistent with the strategic staging outlined in the Macquarie Park Place Strategy and the Stage 2 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Rezoning. • It delivers a disproportionate share of new dwellings prematurely, without sufficient supporting infrastructure or open space. 2. Non-Compliance with Clause 6.9 of Ryde LEP 2014 • The development relies on incentive bonuses for building height and floor space ratio (FSR) under Clause 6.9, but: • Fails to provide meaningful commercial development to meet economic objectives. • Offers only 3.9% commercial space, insufficient for justifying bonus density. • Does not contribute adequately to access networks or recreational infrastructure as required by the clause. 3. Inadequate Communal and Public Spaces • The proposed open spaces and through-site links are inadequate or tokenistic. • The so-called ‘public domain’ includes roads and marginal areas not functional as recreation or amenity spaces. • Key pedestrian links and a public park identified in the precinct plan are either missing or poorly integrated. 4. View Loss and Visual Impact • Significant view loss for existing residents at Ryde Gardens (1–3 Network Place). • Views of Lane Cove National Park, Sydney skyline, and Harbour Bridge would be blocked. • The developer has not demonstrated alternative, less intrusive designs that could preserve view corridors. 5. Cumulative Impact Not Considered • The developer fails to consider the combined effect of multiple future high-density developments in the area. • This includes likely future changes in Neighbourhood 7 of the Macquarie Park TOD precinct. • Raises concerns about infrastructure strain, overshadowing, and urban congestion. 6. Poor Design and Amenity • Pedestrian paths are poorly located (e.g., near service lanes and substations), reducing their utility and public appeal. • “Communal” areas include lobbies, staff amenities, and bicycle storage, which do not qualify as genuine communal space under planning definitions. many thanks

1181

Redacted

11/06/2025

Object

Website

Non-compliance with Clause 6.9 development in the Macquarie Park Corridor Inadequacy of communal and pedestrian areas, car parking and traffic Overdevelopment of the site - insufficient recreation space and inconsistency with the Macquarie Park Place Strategy View loss and cumulative impacts

1196

Redacted

11/06/2025

Object

Website

If it is over 20 level building just 30 m in front of Ryde garden building then it causes to block the main view as well as natural lighting.

1171

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

To the Independent Planning Commission, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development in North Ryde. As a resident of Ryde Gardens, I have serious concerns about how this project contradicts local planning laws and threatens the amenity, infrastructure, and character of our community. 1. Misuse of Clause 6.9 for Residential Development Clause 6.9 of the Ryde Local Environmental Plan (LEP) was introduced to encourage commercial development in the Macquarie Park Corridor — not to support high-density residential proposals like this one. Stockland’s attempt to apply this clause to justify exceeding height and floor space limits stretches the original purpose of the legislation. This sets a dangerous precedent and weakens the LEP’s planning integrity. 2. Height Limit Breach The LEP clearly sets a maximum building height of 37 metres for this site. The current proposal, at approximately 65 metres, is almost double that limit. Allowing such a significant breach of the height control would erode community trust in the planning system and open the door to more oversized residential towers in an area not designed to accommodate them. 3. Direct Impacts on Residents This development would severely impact the day-to-day lives of existing residents. Privacy loss: The proposed towers will overlook existing homes, compromising the privacy of residents, especially in Ryde Gardens. View obstruction: Many people chose to live here for the open sky and distant views. These will be lost due to the excessive height of the new buildings. Overshadowing: The scale and location of the new structures will block sunlight from surrounding apartments and open spaces, including areas used by children at the nearby childcare centre. 4. Increased Pressure on Local Infrastructure North Ryde’s infrastructure is already struggling: Traffic: Roads like Delhi Road and the newly built Link Road are already congested at peak times. This project will bring hundreds of new cars into the area. Parking shortfall: With only 155 car spaces planned for over 500 units, the overflow will overwhelm nearby streets, creating parking stress for everyone. Public transport capacity: Metro and bus services are currently near full capacity during peak hours. Adding hundreds more commuters without adequate upgrades is unsustainable. 5. Lack of Transparent Consultation The community has not been properly informed about the implications of Clause 6.9 being applied to residential developments. Many residents assumed the LEP height limits were fixed, and have been blindsided by this proposal. There has been little transparency or outreach from the developer, leaving residents feeling excluded from decisions that directly affect their homes. 6. Risk of Setting a Harmful Precedent If this proposal is approved, it will pave the way for similar high-rise developments throughout North Ryde — including sites like the former Microsoft campus. This would permanently alter the character of the suburb and undo years of community planning and consultation. Conclusion I respectfully urge the Commission to reject this proposal. The project clearly exceeds the planning controls, misuses Clause 6.9, threatens the amenity of existing residents, and puts unacceptable strain on our already stretched infrastructure. Please protect the integrity of the Ryde LEP and the future of our community by upholding the existing planning rules. Thank you for considering my submission. Sincerely,

1226

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally oppose the current development proposal for 1 Epping Rd, North Ryde. While I acknowledge the urgent need for increased housing supply in Sydney, the scale and nature of this proposal raise significant concerns for the local community and the broader area. **Height and Density Concerns** The proposal seeks to exploit Clause 6.9 of the Ryde Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to build up to 20 storeys—almost double the height limit specified in the LEP for this location. This sets a dangerous precedent for future developments, undermining the integrity of local planning controls and community expectations regarding appropriate scale and density. Such a dramatic increase in building height and floor space ratio (FSR) will fundamentally alter the character of the area and contribute to an already growing sense of overdevelopment. **Traffic and Infrastructure Strain** The area surrounding 1 Epping Rd is already experiencing significant traffic congestion, particularly at key intersections such as Wicks Road and Epping Road. The addition of over 500 new apartments will exacerbate these issues, placing further strain on local roads, public transport, and parking availability. There is no clear commitment to infrastructure upgrades that would be necessary to accommodate the increased population, raising concerns about the long-term livability and safety of the precinct. **Amenity and Community Impact** The proposed development’s scale risks overshadowing existing residential areas and reducing access to sunlight, green space, and community facilities. While the inclusion of some communal amenities is noted, the overall impact on local amenity and the potential for increased pressure on public open spaces have not been adequately addressed. **Precedent and Planning Integrity** Allowing this development to proceed as proposed would undermine the intent of the Ryde LEP and the community’s trust in the planning process. Clause 6.9 should not be used to justify such a substantial departure from established controls, especially when the cumulative impacts on traffic, infrastructure, and local character have not been properly mitigated.

1186

New South Wales 2018

11/06/2025

Object

Website

With the height of 20 floor, the building will block the sunlight to the building it is adjacent which mostly are balconies and the their only way for the sunlight to come to the units. The 20 storey building will also create more traffic which I believe the road are already congested at peak hour.

1206

New South Wales 2113

11/06/2025

Object

Website

I would like to lodge my objection to the proposal to build up to 20 floors at this land block adjacent to my home block. There would be severe blockage of natural light, shadows and lack of privacy into my unit and also impact the view for which I had paid a premium for. In addition, additional units would create pressure on the already heavy residential traffic along this area, as Ryde Gardens is fairly dense in comparison with neighbouring areas. The original sites were meant to be commercial/lower density and this proposed increased build would also severely impact daily traffic flow and noise pollution with only limited roads servicing this area.

1116

Redacted

10/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally oppose the development of Triniti Lighthouse BTR. My key reasons for objection are: * Close Proximity & Loss of Privacy: The development's scale and design will place it unacceptably close to the existing apartment leading to a significant loss of privacy and an oppressive sense of enclosure. * Blocking Natural Light: The proposed height and massing will undeniably block the morning sun to neighbouring properties, negatively impacting liveability and quality of life. * Inadequate Road Infrastructure: Our current road network are insufficient to support the extent of increased density. Traffic is already really poor during peak hours due to the crossing of Epping, Delhi and the on/off highway ramps plus the incoming traffic for the surrounding offices. Parking around the area is also notoriously difficult. * Lack of Community Amenities: The major epping road, M2 highway, and Delhi road creates a natural segregation for this section of land that is bordered by the lane cove national park. Increasing the density of such a small section of land + offices will strain local amenities including schooling which isnt safely accessible for kids given the surrounding major roads. The Lane cove national park isnt accessible by walking and requires payment if driving. Going to the neighbouring graveyard doesn't make a great family picnic either. We really need more accessible green spaces; this will really help the surrounding offices and workers too. * Wind tunnelling: The existing buildings (mainly 1 and 3 network place) already causes a major wind tunnelling affect if there is wind blowing, predominantly from the west/north-west direction. Building another high rise in such close proximity will only exacerbate the wind tunnelling of the surrounding areas as the wind get channelled around 1 and 3 network plus the proposed triniti development. It will cause the surrounding areas to get incredibly gusty during windy days and possibly cause lots of whistling noises. The triniti proposal needs to be lower to avoid this channeling. I am not in support of such a large scale development of housing density in this particular location. However, if the density were to be reduced, with a lower height limit (say 10 levels) and with a shared community park/area then that would be acceptable. Given it is BTR, there is less need to go higher to attract buyers and it will help mitigate a lot of the concerns that myself and others have raised.

1031

Redacted

05/06/2025

Object

Website

Reasons for Objections: Breach of original agreement stated in LEP (from 45m to much higher — lack of trust). Overshadowing and loss of privacy for current residents. Increased traffic and parking issues in surrounding streets. The old Microsoft Building will likely to build to 20 floors if Stockland is permitted to do so. Strain on local infrastructure — roads, drainage, schools, transport. Environmental impact — tree removal, wildlife disruption, less green space. Loss of community character — a high-rise changes the feel of the area. Noise and dust pollution during extended construction phases. Suggested Alternatives to High-Rise Development: Community + Eco Park Hybrid Partially developed: One part residential (low-rise) and one part nature reserve or pocket park. Add a dog park, native plants, or even a bee hotel area. This will meet environmental concerns while generating some revenue from limited housing. Build a community hall, coworking space, or library paired with smaller residential units. Green roof or rooftop garden, which benefits nearby residents visually and environmentally

1041

New South Wales 2113

05/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of Trinity Lighthouse Built to Rent development, which includes the construction of two twenty-storey towers and one smaller tower. As the owner and resident of the neighbouring property at 3 Network Place North Ryde, I have serious concerns about the negative impact this development will have on my property, my family, and the surrounding community. 1. Residential Amenity Our current morning sunlight, which significantly contribute to the amenity and quality of our life here, will be substantially diminished. The proposed buildings, due to their excessive height and proximity, will severely overshadow our property, particularly during the morning hours. Morning sunlight is essential for the comfort, well-being, and energy efficiency of our home. As a retiree, I love my garden in our 'winter garden' balcony. The reduction in natural light will negatively affect our garden and our living spaces, creating a cold and dark environment. 2. Built Form and Design Our current views, which significantly contribute to the amenity and value of our property, will be substantially diminished. The height and bulk of the proposed towers are excessive and inconsistent with the existing built character of the area. This visual intrusion will have a lasting negative effect on our quality of life. With the addition of high-rise apartments directly overlooking our property, our privacy will be greatly compromised. The proposed height and orientation of the towers will result in direct lines of sight into our home and outdoor spaces, leading to a significant loss of amenity. 3. Traffic and Safety Concerns The increase in population density brought by this development will inevitably result in heavily increased traffic on Rennie Street and surrounding roads. This will not only increase congestion and noise but also pose significant safety risks, particularly for children and pedestrians. The current infrastructure is inadequate to handle this level of traffic, and no clear plans have been provided to mitigate these risks. Conclusion The proposed height and density of the development are not in keeping with the established residential and commercial character of the neighbourhood. Approving a development of this scale sets a worrying precedent and undermines the expectations of existing residents who have invested in this community. For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, refuse the proposed development or require substantial amendments to ensure it aligns with community expectations, maintains the residential character of the area, and protects the amenity of surrounding properties. I would appreciate the opportunity to be heard should this matter proceed to a public meeting or hearing. Thank you for considering my objection. Kindest Regards Marilyn Fiamengo

Pic1 Large over 6m Native gumtrees cut down.jpg (JPG, 180.62 KB)

Pic2 No morning sunlight Autumn Winter Spring.jpg (JPG, 83.47 KB)

Pic3 Large Buildings will overshadow ours.jpeg (JPEG, 107.09 KB)

991

Redacted

03/06/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to object to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development at 39 Delhi Road, North Ryde (SSD-55844212). My primary concern is as follows: Excessive Building Proximity and Its Impacts: The proposal’s unacceptably close spacing between buildings represents a reckless disregard for resident wellbeing and urban liveability. Packing large residential towers into such confined proximity creates an oppressive, prison-like environment that directly threatens physical and mental health. Residents will face severe privacy violations, with windows overlooking neighbouring units at absurdly short distances. Natural light will be drastically reduced, creating dark, claustrophobic interiors, while poor ventilation will trap pollutants and stifle airflow—conditions directly linked to respiratory issues and chronic stress. This is not theoretical. A 2024 NSW Government study on high-density housing found that developments with building separations under 18 meters saw a 42% increase in anxiety disorders and 35% higher rates of clinical depression compared to better-spaced projects. The proposed design blatantly ignores these findings, prioritising profit over human dignity. By forcing residents into such dehumanizing conditions, the project risks creating a public health crisis in our community. This is not merely poor urban design—it is a systemic failure to meet basic ethical standards for habitation. Approving this proposal would set a dangerous precedent, signaling that developers can sacrifice resident wellbeing for density targets. The Commission has a moral obligation to reject any project that so blatantly violates the Australian Urban Design Protocol’s principles of health, safety, and inclusivity.

971

New South Wales 2113

02/06/2025

Object

Website

To: Independent Planning Commission (IPC) Re: Objection to Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent Proposal (SSD-55844212) Dear Commissioners, I am writing as the owner of an apartment in Ryde Gardens to formally object to the proposed Triniti Lighthouse Build-to-Rent development (SSD-55844212). 1. Breach of Clause 6.9 – Site-Specific Development Standards The application breaches Clause 6.9 of the Ryde Local Environmental Plan (RLEP), which restricts the use of site compatibility certificates to increase the floor space ratio (FSR) for identified development sites. The developer has attempted to circumvent these controls by applying the FSR across the entire Triniti block, instead of the Triniti 2 site where the development is actually proposed. This is a clear manipulation of planning controls and undermines the intent of Clause 6.9. 2. Misapplication of FSR – Triniti 2 Site Only The development should be assessed based solely on the planning controls applicable to the Triniti 2 site. By aggregating FSR across multiple lots, the proposal inflates allowable density and height, resulting in: • Excessive bulk and scale that is out of character with the area • Significant visual and environmental impacts on neighbouring residences, including Ryde Gardens • A dangerous precedent for future overdevelopment based on technical loopholes 3. Loss of Green Space and Strain on Infrastructure The proposal provides inadequate green space, particularly for a high-density Build-to-Rent development. Residents in the area already lack access to sufficient open space, and this project would significantly worsen the situation without meaningful public benefit. It will also: • Put added pressure on local parks, footpaths, and communal facilities • Strain public transport, schools, roads, and utilities, which are already stretched 4. Erosion of Community and Reduced Safety The Build-to-Rent model, while viable in some contexts, poses specific challenges in established residential communities: • High turnover of tenants results in a transient population, eroding the sense of community stability and cohesion • A constant influx of short-term renters can lead to a lack of connection, accountability, and care for the neighbourhood • This contributes to reduced feelings of safety, particularly for families and long-term residents 5. Adverse Impacts on Ryde Gardens and Surroundings As a Ryde Gardens resident, I raise the following concerns: • Loss of privacy and overshadowing • Unacceptable traffic congestion • Construction impacts including dust, noise, and vibration • Visual overdominance of the proposed tower in a predominantly mid-rise context. This proposal is inconsistent with planning objectives and demonstrates poor consideration of the local community’s needs. I urge the Commission to reject the application on the basis that it: • Breaches Clause 6.9 of the RLEP • Misapplies FSR by spreading it across unrelated lots • Undermines local amenity, safety, and community character • Fails to provide sufficient green space or long-term social sustainability Thank you for considering my submission.

L.AddendumSubmission.39DehliRoad.NorthRyde.Final_.redacted.pdf (PDF, 3.08 MB)

906

New South Wales 2113

26/05/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally express my opposition to the proposed construction of the Trinity Lighthouse development. After careful consideration of the project’s implications, I strongly believe that this development is unnecessary, environmentally irresponsible, and driven by profit rather than community benefit. Below are my key concerns: ### **1. Under-utilised Existing Buildings in Proximity** There are multiple vacant or underused buildings in the immediate area that could be repurposed instead of constructing a new complex. For instance: - The office buildings directly in front of the proposed site are only **one-quarter occupied** during business hours. - On **Julius Avenue, an entire building stands completely empty**, yet no effort has been made to revitalise it. Rather than contributing to urban sprawl and further land consumption, the developers should explore **adaptive reuse** of these existing structures. This would not only preserve green spaces but also reduce construction waste and energy consumption. ### **2. Environmental Impact & Destruction of Green Space** The construction of Trinity Lighthouse will require **clearing natural land**, disrupting local ecosystems, and increasing the area’s carbon footprint. With climate change being a pressing global issue, we should prioritise **sustainable development** by utilising existing infrastructure instead of encroaching on untouched land. The destruction of green spaces for yet another commercial/residential complex is **short-sighted and irresponsible**. ### **3. Profit-Driven Development with No Regard for Community Needs** This project appears to be **motivated purely by greed**, with little consideration for the well-being of current residents. The proposed development will: - **Increase traffic congestion** in an already densely populated area. - **Overburden local amenities**—adding more residents and businesses to an area with only **two small restaurants** will lead to overcrowding and longer wait times. - **Compromise safety** due to increased pedestrian and vehicle interactions in a confined space. - **Lower quality of life** for neighboring apartment residents due to noise pollution, construction disturbances, and loss of privacy. ### **4. Lack of Proper Infrastructure to Support the Development** The current infrastructure (roads, public transport, sewage, and utilities) is **not equipped** to handle the additional strain this development will bring. Without significant upgrades, the area will face: - **Worsened traffic bottlenecks**, particularly during peak hours. - **Pressure on parking availability**, leading to spillover into residential zones. - **Potential strain on emergency services** due to increased population density. ### **5. Better Alternatives Exist** Instead of approving another high-density project, the council should: - **Incentivise the refurbishment of vacant buildings** to meet modern needs. - **Invest in green spaces and community facilities** rather than profit-driven developments. - **Conduct a proper needs assessment** to determine if this project is truly necessary or simply a speculative venture. ### **Conclusion** The Trinity Lighthouse project is an unnecessary, environmentally damaging development that prioritizes profit over people. With so many under-utilised buildings nearby, there is **no justification** for further construction at the expense of nature and existing residents. I urge the planning committee to **reject this proposal** and instead encourage sustainable, community-focused alternatives.

1356

New South Wales 2113

12/06/2025

Support

Website

Currently the land next to my building is empty. It does not look good, and is a complete waste. I believe there was mining from a third party company that may have concluded and looks barren and desolate. It would be great to continue to build up our community at network place with other apartments that help support the housing crisis in australia. I support this, however I (as an owner/occupier) do have concerns with congestion. Parking is already impossible, so even with the new apartment -it does not make a difference. It is more-so the congestion daily to leave onto delhi road.

1106

New South Wales 2113

10/06/2025

Support

Website

I highly support the development

1071

Redacted

06/06/2025

Support

Website

The proposal presents an excellent proposal that will provide more housing, build to rent is another form of housing, during a housing crisis. The housing will be in an excellent location as it is extremely close to the North Ryde metro station. It is also walking distance - using the pedestrian bridge - to Coles & other shops at Lachlan's Square. A new public school is also in development at a similar location ("Lachlan's Line Macquarie Park Education Campus"). Refinements to the proposal have been made by the applicant and therefore I strongly suggest that the proposal should be approved and represents an excellent use for the land in question. Additionally, I would suggest that all levels of government, including local councils, have a duty to ensure that frequent public transportation can be used to serve the many and not just a select few and as such need to seek to increase the density of buildings permissible to be built around metro and train line stations.

1046

New South Wales 2199

05/06/2025

Support

Website

Close to M1 metro station with future conversion of Bankstown line, for more job opportunities around the area and beyond and close to most individuals/ communities needs.

1021

New South Wales 2113

04/06/2025

Support

Website

Hi there, I’m a resident of [REDACTED], directly neighbouring the proposed Stockland Triniti development. I’m writing in strong support of this project because developments like this are the reason I could afford to buy a home here. The original large-scale rezoning of this precinct enabled more housing supply, which brought prices within reach for people like me. Without it, I would have been priced out of the area. I believe others should have the same opportunity to live close to jobs, public transport, and green space. In the three years since I bought my home, I’ve seen friends and family struggle with massive increases in rent. The additional rental stock this project brings—especially Build-to-Rent housing—can help relieve pressure in the rental market and offer more people access to stable, well-located housing. Some residents have raised concerns about overdevelopment and view loss, but in a city facing a housing crisis, we need more homes in the right places. This project delivers that, with a well-designed, mixed-use precinct that will support a vibrant and walkable community. My only suggestion is that a portion of the developer’s contributions be directed toward improving pedestrian access to North Ryde Metro station. At present, residents south of the station must walk up stairs and backtrack back downstairs due to the lack of an entrance from the Network Place side. This means the singular lift can get overwhelmed at peak times and can lead to residents choosing to drive for some trips. Enhancing this connection would have a greater impact on reducing traffic than direct improvements to the road network. The Triniti proposal aligns with the 2013 rezoning and the strategic vision for the Macquarie Park Corridor. It’s the kind of smart, infrastructure-connected growth Sydney needs. Please support this development and give others the same chance I had to live here.

1026

Redacted

04/06/2025

Support

Website

This development proposal epitomises the kind of homes we need to start fixing the housing crisis that faces people across Sydney. A large stock of rental units, like this proposal will provide, will do a lot to ease the strain on the community as it currently exists. The location of the proposed development is in a location I, and doubtless many others, would feel absolutely privileged to live in. It is very close to a metro station that will allow great public transit links even beyond the CBD, and close to a large number of shopping amenities. The increased shopping amenities that the proposal itself will provide will also undoubtably benefit current residents of the area, and help to grow a community in North Ryde. The NSW government has made a commitment to provide thousands of new homes near public transit hubs, and this would be a huge step in the right direction. The positive impacts on both current and prospective residents of North Ryde should most certainly outweigh other concerns.