Submissions

What should I say in my submission?

Tell Council what your particular concerns are, what you would like to see for Gladesville village centre and what you don’t want to see. There are some suggested points below, but unique submissions are best, so try to put your points in your own words. Submissions don’t have to be long, just a few paragraphs will do.

Numbers matter!

The more submissions Council receives regarding particular issues (e.g. building height) the more likely they are to make amendments, so please encourage your friends and neighbours who have concerns about the proposal to make a submission!

Where to lodge your submission

You can lodge your submission on Council’s website at https://connect.huntershill.nsw.gov.au/gladesville-masterplan

or on the NSW Planning Portal at https://pp.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/ppr/under-exhibition/gladesville-masterplan

or you can email it to info@huntershill.nsw.gov.au

Submission close 24 April 2026!

Submission thought starters

The development is just too big, with too many apartments on the one site (allowed by increased floor space ratio of 4:1). This leads to:

- Unacceptable increases in building heights as a trade off for the desired area of

publicly-accessible open space

- Increased traffic and pressure on public transport

Increased building height of up to 70 m is excessive. This leads to:

- Towers that are out of character and scale with the surrounding area, particularly the

low-rise residential areas directly behind them

- Overshadowing of neighbouring properties, including Gladesville Public School

- Overshadowing of the public open spaces within the site

No consideration of potential 30% increase in density and height if developer applies for affordable housing bonus later

Council should update the Economic and Feasibility Study to reflect more recent apartment sales in Gladesville. This would likely show that a lower density and height option is feasible.

Council’s failure to act on feedback from the last round of community consultation – they said they would investigate lower height options but did not.

Council should show the community modelling of what a lower height option using the same density (FSR of 4:1) recommended in their proposal would look like.

Lack of community consultation on this significantly changed new Planning Proposal prior to Gateway Determination

Lack of safeguards for good design outcomes (such as ensuring minimum area of publicly-accessible open space) in recommendations for changes to the planning controls (the LEP)