Residential development with in-fill affordable housing, Pockley Avenue, Roseville

Ku-ring-gai Council have submitted a Preferred Scenario, which if approved by the Minister, will replace the current TOD planning controls.
The Agenda of the KMC Extraordinary meeting of 31 March 2025 includes the following;
1. The Preferred Scenario aims to preserve as much environmentally sensitive land as possible while still achieving housing targets and supporting development near stations and centres. This is accomplished in two ways:
first, by avoiding locating new development within environmentally sensitive sites where feasible, and
second, by increasing the minimum deep soil requirement to 50% for residential zones, ensuring the retention of biodiversity and riparian areas.
2. The Preferred Scenario prioritises the protection of existing tree canopy cover while also creating opportunities for its expansion. All high-density residential areas are subject to a minimum 50% deep soil requirement, which will result in no net loss of canopy.
The proposed plan for SSD-77825469 states that the Deep Soil area is 770m2 out of 6539m2, which is only 11.8%. Therefore, the proposed plan does not meet the requirement of the KMC Preferred Scenario for 50% deep soil.

SSD-77825469 2-16 Pockley Ave, Roseville
I am a resident of Findlay Ave, Roseville and have lived in the same house for 28 years.
As well as the problems that I will point out below, this building is excessively high and out of character for the area.
We have 3 new apartment blocks under construction at the moment and they will generate 167 extra cars into the precinct and we have no way of knowing at this stage what impact this will have on our traffic. This development will add 285 extra motor vehicles.
Although we have been told many times that traffic studies are currently being made we have never seen one. There should be a traffic plan for the cumulative increase in traffic volumes and traffic flow implications for this development which takes into account all future developments (zoned under TOD 400m to 800m) for South West Roseville.
Maclaurin Lights – Access (right turn) onto Pacific Hwy
Our small precinct has only one safe way of turning right onto the Pacific Highway and that is via the one set of lights at Maclaurin Pde.
During peak hour, the traffic along the highway chokes up this intersection making it very difficult for access onto the highway. The traffic travelling volumes along Pacific Highway has been increasing quite rapidly every year. When taken into account all of the new zonings (TOD etc) for South West Roseville it is obvious that traffic will come to a total gridlock. This accumulative increase of traffic will eventually make it impossible for us to turn Right onto the highway.
The vehicles from this development will add to our already difficult access onto Pacific Highway (to do turn right) and because of this and other points below I object to the height and number of apartments within this development.
Journey to the lights up Maclaurin Street
Note that Maclaurin Pde is a steep hill and the topography of the land is hilly, windy and steep with narrow streets and blind corners. You have a photo of it in your SSD but it doesn’t really depict the angle of the slope or the true incline and length of Maclaurin Parade.
A trip to the Maclaurin Pde lights from my house in Findlay Ave is likened to the “big dipper”:-
- A blind intersection at Findlay and Alexander Pde
- then two very sharp, blind corners, one at Alexander and then Kings Ave (just where 9-15 Kings Ave Apartments underground garage entrances are situated (23 apartments in that block)
- then there are cars that can come out of the feeder streets from Pockley Ave, Nola Rd, Larkin St and Larkin Lane and there will be many of these once this development and future developments are built
- Then the lights at Maclaurin where:-
o If a pedestrian is crossing Pacific Highway it means only one car can turn Left which holds up that lane and as a consequence, there really is only one lane to turn Right onto Pacific Highway and that is if you can get out onto the highway due to traffic choke

The 285 vehicles from this development will add to our already difficult access onto Pacific Highway (to turn right).
This massive increase in vehicle and pedestrian traffic generated from the land that has been rezoned for highrise in this precinct will have a cumulative effect that will cause traffic chaos at the lights and all along Maclaurin Pde.
Currently we have 3 new apartment blocks being built and soon to be occupied which will bring in 167 new vehicles so we do not know, as yet, the impact that these vehicles will have on our traffic issues.
Feeder Streets to Maclaurin Pde (Nola Ave, Pockley Ave, Larkin St, Larkin Lane
I am very concerned about how vehicles will join into Maclaurin Pde from the feeder streets. As Maclaurin Pde is very steep, any vehicle driving up Maclaurin Pde towards the lights will have to slam on their brakes if a car/s comes out of one of these feeder streets (and there will be many cars doing this once all proposed development is complete).
Three Point Turns
I am sure you are not aware that people continually make three point turns at Larkin Lane to avoid the traffic queue to turn Right into Boundary from Pacific Highway. When I went to video these turns I was shocked as I counted over a 2 minute period 4 vehicles who did three point turn (from 7:31 am to 7:33 am on 21st November 2024.
Turning into Maclaurin Pde from Pacific Highway from South direction
We do not have a green arrow to turn Right into Maclaurin Pde and the only way to turn is on a red arrow during afternoon peak times. This means that often only one car can turn per light phase. The turning lane is very short and with extra traffic the cars will bulge out to the middle lane which will block traffic heading South.
General traffic issues
This precinct has blind corners, narrow streets and unsafe intersections and the topography is extremely steep in parts. This, in time as traffic increases will cause many traffic hazards for both vehicles and pedestrians.
Surely you cannot approve such a large project without looking at the cumulative effect that all of these future developments will have. A traffic flow study including a complete assessment of the traffic in the area must be done before any of these new developments are approved.

Proposed new Road Pockley to Shirley
This new road is only going to make traffic issues worse as cars in the afternoon peak hour will use this as a rat run to get to Ryde. Starting at Findlay Ave (which has parts that are one lane). Whilst it gives us a means of heading South, we would be unable to turn Right when we arrived at Shirley Rd. Even if we could, that intersection is also problematic. So this new road does not benefit residents who want to turn Right onto the Pacific Hwy at all and just adds to the Shirley Rd intersection traffic problems.
Bushfire Evacuation
Bushfires are highly probable to occur in the future both around Findlay Ave and Alexander Street and the increase in density creates a fire evacuation hazzard. We had fires in 1994 and early 2000’s that threatened our area and the only thing that saved the area was a wind change. It is not ridiculous to say that we could have an LA Fire situation here in Roseville under the right conditions and with climate change this is highly possible. This development only adds to the congestion making safe bushfire evacuation process very difficult.
The preferred scenario that Kuring-gai Council has designed for you predominantly accounts for Heritage and no factors such as safety, traffic and amenity have been taken into account throughout their planning process. I would think that Safety, traffic management and amenity were more important than heritage factors.
Spring Low Sun – no vision
There is a period of about 2 weeks in early spring where the sun is low and you cannot see a thing whilst driving up Maclaurin Pde.

Entry/Exit of development onto Maclaurin Pde
This would be extremely problematic.
Summary
So my objection to this development is on the grounds of traffic implications and bushfire evacuation reasons. The original TOD was for 6 stories and this is 9-10 stories and along with all other future development will create traffic chaos and takes away our safety and amenity.
I ask that you look at this development not just on its own but as part of the new zonings as a whole and that as planner, you actually do a very thorough site visit before you make these important decisions that once made have implications that cannot be corrected.

I am writing to formally oppose developments SSD-77825469 and SSD-77829461 for the following reasons:

1. Overdevelopment and Traffic Congestion
The two proposed developments would add 289 residential units. Combined with other nearby developments—7, 9, and 11 Pockley Avenue; 4A, 6A, 6, 8, and 10 Maclaurin Parade; the Roseville Memorial Club site; and the recently completed 1–3 Corona Avenue—the total rises to 427 new units and an estimated 686 additional vehicles. This scale of development will place enormous strain on already congested local roads, especially Maclaurin Parade. The traffic congestion will significantly affect daily commutes and emergency response times.

2. Environmental Impact
The developments pose a serious threat to the local environment. The Blue Gum High Forest is a critically endangered ecological community and home to approximately 40 native animal species. These projects risk permanent destruction of habitat and biodiversity, which cannot be restored once lost.

3. Bushfire Risk and Emergency Evacuation Concerns
According to bushfire simulations conducted by Ku-ring-gai Council, both proposed developments are located in areas classified as "very high risk" in the event of a bushfire. During the 1994 bushfires, 12 homes in this area were completely destroyed. In the event of a similar disaster, traffic in and out of Maclaurin Parade would likely be completely cut off, making evacuation and emergency access impossible.

Conclusion
I strongly urge the planning committee to reject these development proposals and stop further development proposals. Approving them without major upgrades to local traffic infrastructure and a detailed bushfire evacuation strategy would put the local community at unacceptable risk. While I understand the need for housing, developments of this scale must be sustainable and responsible. Without clear plans to address environmental impacts, traffic congestion, and bushfire safety, these proposals are detrimental and irreversible.

I am writing to formally oppose developments SSD-77825469 and SSD-77829461 for the following reasons:

1. Overdevelopment and Traffic Congestion
The two proposed developments would add 289 residential units. Combined with other nearby developments—7, 9, and 11 Pockley Avenue; 4A, 6A, 6, 8, and 10 Maclaurin Parade; the Roseville Memorial Club site; and the recently completed 1–3 Corona Avenue—the total rises to 427 new units and an estimated 686 additional vehicles. This scale of development will place enormous strain on already congested local roads, especially Maclaurin Parade. The traffic congestion will significantly affect daily commutes and emergency response times.

2. Environmental Impact
The developments pose a serious threat to the local environment. The Blue Gum High Forest is a critically endangered ecological community and home to approximately 40 native animal species. These projects risk permanent destruction of habitat and biodiversity, which cannot be restored once lost.

3. Bushfire Risk and Emergency Evacuation Concerns
According to bushfire simulations conducted by Ku-ring-gai Council, both proposed developments are located in areas classified as "very high risk" in the event of a bushfire. During the 1994 bushfires, 12 homes in this area were completely destroyed. In the event of a similar disaster, traffic in and out of Maclaurin Parade would likely be completely cut off, making evacuation and emergency access impossible.

Conclusion
I strongly urge the planning committee to reject these development proposals and stop further development proposals. Approving them without major upgrades to local traffic infrastructure and a detailed bushfire evacuation strategy would put the local community at unacceptable risk. While I understand the need for housing, developments of this scale must be sustainable and responsible. Without clear plans to address environmental impacts, traffic congestion, and bushfire safety, these proposals are detrimental and irreversible.

I urge that the implications for local traffic and emergency evacuation be given serious consideration in regards to this project. The proposed increase in population carries significant risk to life in the event of an emergency such as a bushfire, due to the current limitations of access and egress in this area.

The residential pocket encompassing Findlay Avenue, Alexander Parade, Kings Avenue, Corona Avenue, Pockley Avenue, Larkin Street, and Larkin Lane has only three exit points to the Pacific Highway—via Corona Avenue, Findlay Avenue, and Maclaurin Parade. Of these, only Maclaurin Parade has traffic lights to assist with turning right onto the Pacific Highway. The turn from Findlay Avenue has no traffic control and is extremely hazardous and I'd question whether a right turn at this point is safe at all, and Corona Avenue only allows a left turn. This makes both everyday traffic management and emergency evacuation difficult and dangerous. These risks are further evidenced by the multiple accidents and fatalities that have occurred at these intersections.

An easement exists between Findlay Avenue and Dulwich Road, and opening this connection would provide an essential additional route for both emergency egress and to relieve local congestion.

It is worth noting that our property at Findlay Avenue is restricted from increasing density due to local council planning controls
in a heritage/conservation zone It is difficult to understand how, at a state planning level, such a significant increase in population density can be proposed in direct contradiction to those local controls. To ignore this conflict would represent a serious failure of duty of care to current and future residents.

I strongly urge that any increase in residential density in this area be accompanied by comprehensive planning to improve access and egress for both daily traffic and emergency situations.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this serious matter.

I urge that the implications for local traffic and emergency evacuation be given serious consideration in regards to this project. The proposed increase in population carries significant risk to life in the event of an emergency such as a bushfire, due to the current limitations of access and egress in this area.

The residential pocket encompassing Findlay Avenue, Alexander Parade, Kings Avenue, Corona Avenue, Pockley Avenue, Larkin Street, and Larkin Lane has only three exit points to the Pacific Highway—via Corona Avenue, Findlay Avenue, and Maclaurin Parade. Of these, only Maclaurin Parade has traffic lights to assist with turning right onto the Pacific Highway. The turn from Findlay Avenue has no traffic control and is extremely hazardous and I'd question whether a right turn at this point is safe at all, and Corona Avenue only allows a left turn. This makes both everyday traffic management and emergency evacuation difficult and dangerous. These risks are further evidenced by the multiple accidents and fatalities that have occurred at these intersections.

An easement exists between Findlay Avenue and Dulwich Road, and opening this connection would provide an essential additional route for both emergency egress and to relieve local congestion.

It is worth noting that our property at Findlay Avenue is restricted from increasing density due to local council planning controls
in a heritage/conservation zone It is difficult to understand how, at a state planning level, such a significant increase in population density can be proposed in direct contradiction to those local controls. To ignore this conflict would represent a serious failure of duty of care to current and future residents.

I strongly urge that any increase in residential density in this area be accompanied by comprehensive planning to improve access and egress for both daily traffic and emergency situations.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this serious matter.

Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development - Residential development with in-fill affordable housing, Pockley Avenue, Roseville - Submission (SUB-86314713) - which I understand is currently under review by your department.
As a resident of the local area, I am increasingly concerned about the strain that this proposed development will place on already overburdened infrastructure—particularly with respect to traffic congestion and road safety.
This area is already experiencing significant traffic congestion, especially during peak hours. The existing road network is frequently gridlocked, with bottlenecks forming at key intersections ( Notably the intersection of Pacific Highway and Maclaurin Parade, as well as the intersection on Findlay Avenue and Pacific Highway) and the limited capacity for additional vehicle flow.
The proposed development would significantly increase the number of vehicles entering and exiting the area, exacerbating these issues further.
Of particular concern are:
Access points: The proposed access routes for the development feed directly into already busy thoroughfares such as, which are currently ill-equipped to handle increased traffic volumes, without significant infrastructure changes..
Emergency vehicle access: Increased congestion could severely impact emergency vehicle response times, endangering public safety.
Pedestrian safety: More vehicles will heighten risks for pedestrians, especially near schools, parks, and shopping precincts where foot traffic is high.

I respectfully request that the planning authority either reject this proposal or require a comprehensive and independent traffic impact assessment before any approval is granted. This assessment should include transparent community consultation and tangible measures to mitigate traffic-related risks if the project proceeds.

Practical solutions to consider are as follows;
1. provide a right hand turn arrow into Maclaurin Parade from Pacific Highway when travelling south and
2. provide a KEEP CLEAR road markings on the Pacific Highway for cars egressing Findlay Avenue so that north bound Pacific Highway and Right hand turn traffic on Pacific Highway to NOT block this intersection for multiple sets of traffic light changes.
I trust the NSW Major Projects Dept will consider the long-term implications of approving a development in a location that is already struggling to cope with existing demand.

I am happy to provide detailed photographic evidence to support my submission upon request.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Brook
1 Findlay Avenue Roseville, NSW, 2069
0478800447
[email protected]

The proposed development is too large to allow timely access to the Pacific Highway for the residents in this area. Even with the current number of residents it can take up to 10 minutes to be able to exit MacLaurin Parade to turn right towards Chatswood. The problem is made worse by the fact that morning peak hour traffic from Lindfield stops across the intersection of MacLaurin Parade as a result of not being able to proceed because of the Red light at Boundary Street. However, instead of stopping before getting to the intersection of the Highway and MacLaurin Parade they park across it. As a result on 2 cars can actually exit MacLaurin Parade and the rest of us are still in MacLaurin Parade sometimes for up to 10 minutes. The addition of 178 units, with 285 car spaces, will make the exiting from MacLaurin Parade even worse as this is the only exit from our area. All residents require proper egress facilities and this current proposal defies all logic as its scale increases the current number of vehicles by over 50% without any change to the current traffic problems being experienced.
The proposal for a road to be constructed from the bottom of Pockley Avenue to Shirley Road will be of little value unless the road is wide enough for parking on both sides and for 2 cars to pass in the opposite directions. The bottom end of Pockley Avenue which goes through to MacLaurin Parade near Nola Road, will also need to be widened to allow for parking on both sides as well as for 2 cars to pass each other. There will be a large amount of traffic using this road by residents from Corona Avenue, Alexander Parade and Nola Avenue as well as from Pockley Avenue itself. The wide streets for both the MacLaurin Parade to Pockley Avenue end and the extension of Pockley Avenue to Shirley Road is also required as many residents in unit blocks do not park in their garage in the unit block but out in the street. Pockley Avenue is already always full of parked cars. The capacity of the parking in front of the existing 8 residences is 15 cars! The proposed development requires parking for 285 cars which is 270 spaces more than currently required or available! This totally inappropriate development for such a small area will mean, inter alia, that Pockley Avenue, the new roads at the bottom of the street linking MacLaurin Parade to Shirley Road and MacLaurin Parade itself on the Southern side of the proposed 3 blocks will have parked cars everyday, all day. This problem will be further exacerbated as a result of the new apartment block on MacLaurin Parade backing on to Nola Road currently being built. This block will see a further 68 vehicles clogging up MacLaurin Parade and worsening the already disaster of trying to exit MacLaurin Parade to join the Highway. Has anybody in the NSW Department of Planning actually looked at this proposal in any depth? Has anybody bothered to actually visited the site? If they had done so the proposal would not have got to this ridiculous stage.
No development should proceed until a detailed and accurate review of the traffic and parking problems is actually made. This means that people doing the traffic report actually VISIT the area rather than make uninformed opinions sitting in front of a computer at their desk. We have even had our own councillors make decisions not only without any facts but have not even visited the sites!
The traffic problem would have fatal consequences in the event of a bush fire. This is not a comment made lightly. The beautiful blue gum forest which comes up between Alexander Parade/MacLaurin Parade/Nola Road and Shirley Road will burn like an inferno from a fire which starts in the National Park, fanned by a Westerly wind and goes all the way up Pockley Avenue. The embers from any fire extend well beyond the actual flames. A comprehensive review of such an event and the residential issues associated with it needs to be undertaken by independent and qualified personnel who are not engaged by or have any business dealings / connections with the developer. The lives and future lifestyle will be damaged forever if this review is not undertaken properly.
I also object to the project as it does not make any provision for any recreational areas or parks which are essential for units which do not have backyard or any type of facility available for children, parents or retired people. This development must include a high quality and substantial facility for the residents of the 178 units which will be home to around 350-550 people. Failure to do so will adversely impact the amenity of not only the owners of any unit but the existing residents who have been able to enjoy the benefits of a backyard for their children, their grandchildren and themselves. The design of an outrageously large block of units without taking into account the lives of all people involved must not be permitted.
I also object to the proposed building as there is no detail provided as to the evacuation capacity of any of the 9-10 storey unit blocks is provided. There has been an increase in the number of fires in units in recent times and no approval should be given until the the residents of this area are advised of the details of such evacuation provisions.
Clearly a significant review of the basic but essential aspects of any development are properly assessed by a totally independent and expert body.

I strongly object to this proposal going ahead because of the following reasons:
- excess building heights
- traffic and parking congestion
- environmental concerns, water runoff, threatened species due to endangered micro bat population in the area
- overshadowing due to height especially the new apartments being built in MacLaurin Parade
- Bush fire evacuation risk and potential litigation. There were bush fires in the area in 1994 and embers in our back yard and lack of water.

Safety and wellbeing concerns of residents must be addressed. The proposed developments could lead to serious catastrophic scenarios in future.

I strongly object to this development going ahead because -
- Evacuation from this area is very limited should we get a repeat of the 1994 bush fires and similiar to the recent Los Angeles bush fires. You must pause approval until evacuation capacity is independently assessed. The scale of this development must remain within safe thresholds. There was an absence of a bush fire plan in the SSD reports.
- Very little of the original Blue Gum High Forest is remaining in Ku-ring-gai and its critically endangered ecological community. An extra 300 dwellings built right beside this remaining forest would be a disaster.
- storm water runoff into Blue Gum Creek would cause bank erosion and loss of land for properties, the detention basins built are always too small and never maintained.

Problems are
1. Road to narrow to cope with the traffic and parking
2. Bushfire evacuation risk- the blue gum valley is a funnel if a fire starts
3. Too large for the area with building heights, overshadowing .
4 Flood risk due to water run off, current problem not resolved and would become worse with the proposal
5. No gurantee that the purchaser of the new proposed properties would use public transport. Current congestion levels at the top of the street suggest everyone is driving
6. Sun level at street lights limits visability. Major traffice hazard.
7. We currently cannot get out of our street with the traffice levels.
8 Blue Gum tree reserve for the valley was set up 20 years ago with council. What protection (if any ) is in place for trees, wild life as it is a bird habitat, bats etc. This would destroy the enviroment.
9 lack of consultation with residents of Alexander Parade.

The height of the development will create substantial shading to the west and the south.
The main objection is the fact that the additional traffic will overburden the Maclaurin intersection with the Pacific Highway. This is the only intersection with traffic lights that allows access for cars wishing to turn left into the Pacific Highway.
It is also the only intersection that allows southbound traffic to turn right from the Pacific Highway into this area.
The additional cars resulting from the development will overburden this intersection and it will cease to function effectively.

Over development incongruous with area, traffic jam enhancing at only right turn intersection with Pacific Highway;reduce tree cover

The Western side of the Pacific Highway already contains a large amount of medium density housing. This proposal is of a scale and density that is both out of character with the area and will create traffic congestion for new and existing residents. The proposal takes no account of the fact that this area has limited entry and exit points to the Pacific Highway - with Maclaurin Street being the primary intersection with the Pacific Highway. The Maclaurin intersection is currently frequently overburdened with traffic and the number of additional vehicles will create a traffic gridlock at this intersection which will prevent vehicles including emergency vehicles having reasonable access to this area.

I have attached my objection

To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to object to the proposed high-density developments at and around Pockley Avenue, Roseville. While I acknowledge the importance of increasing housing supply — including affordable housing — these developments raise serious concerns about traffic congestion, infrastructure strain, and the erosion of local character in our suburban neighborhood.

Traffic Congestion
The intersection of MacLaurin Parade and the Pacific Highway is already under immense pressure. During peak periods, it can take multiple traffic light cycles just to merge southbound due to heavy congestion and blockages caused by the adjacent Boundary Street intersection. Even residents trying to turn left are often stuck behind right-turning vehicles, leaving no clear path through.
Weekend traffic mirrors weekday congestion, and this issue has grown markedly worse with recent developments in Corona Avenue, Kings Avenue, and now MacLaurin Parade. The addition of over 200 new dwellings through the proposed projects will increase daily vehicle movements significantly. Without serious upgrades to local road infrastructure, we are facing gridlock and worsening safety risks for both drivers and pedestrians.

Parking and Street Overflow
Many of the surrounding streets are already struggling with limited on-street parking. If the developments under consideration do not provide sufficient off-street parking — and affordable housing units often come with reduced allocations — we can expect a major overflow into nearby streets. This not only disrupts existing residents’ lives but can also block sightlines, increase hazards at intersections, and restrict access for emergency services.

Infrastructure and Services
Beyond traffic, we are concerned about the strain on local infrastructure. Basic services such as garbage collection, sewerage, and stormwater drainage are not designed for this sudden and concentrated increase in density. Public transport services are limited, local schools are nearing capacity, and there has been no indication that supporting facilities will be upgraded in line with the growing population.

Neighborhood Character and Suitability
Roseville is a low-rise, family-oriented suburb with a quiet, green streetscape. The proposed nine-storey apartment blocks are entirely out of character with the surrounding area. Their scale will dominate the skyline, overlook neighbouring homes, and impact privacy and sunlight.

Environmental and Heritage Impacts
The proposed developments may also result in the loss of mature trees and green cover, contributing to heat island effects and habitat loss. We are also concerned about possible impacts on heritage streetscapes that give this neighborhood its distinct charm and identity.

Cumulative Impact and Consultation
This is not an isolated proposal. Large-scale developments have recently been approved or completed nearby — yet no corresponding investment has been made in road upgrades, transport options, or community facilities. It feels as though each proposal is being assessed in isolation, without any serious consideration of the cumulative impacts on the area.
Moreover, many residents feel left out of the planning process. While exhibition periods exist, there has been little meaningful consultation or community engagement. We urge the department to listen to the voices of local residents who know these streets and live with the consequences of poor planning decisions.

In Conclusion
We ask that this development be reconsidered or significantly scaled back until proper traffic solutions, infrastructure upgrades, and planning controls are in place. A sustainable future for Roseville must include thoughtful urban planning — not ad hoc high-rise developments in low-rise neighborhoods.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
The Sheppard family

I have attached my letter of Objection

I am writing to formally oppose developments SSD-77825469 and SSD-77829461 for the following reasons:

1. Overdevelopment and Traffic Congestion
The two proposed developments would add 289 residential units. Combined with other nearby developments—7, 9, and 11 Pockley Avenue; 4A, 6A, 6, 8, and 10 Maclaurin Parade; the Roseville Memorial Club site; and the recently completed 1–3 Corona Avenue—the total rises to 427 new units and an estimated 686 additional vehicles. This scale of development will place enormous strain on already congested local roads, especially Maclaurin Parade. The traffic congestion will significantly affect daily commutes and emergency response times.

2. Environmental Impact
The developments pose a serious threat to the local environment. The Blue Gum High Forest is a critically endangered ecological community and home to approximately 40 native animal species. These projects risk permanent destruction of habitat and biodiversity, which cannot be restored once lost.

3. Bushfire Risk and Emergency Evacuation Concerns
According to bushfire simulations conducted by Ku-ring-gai Council, both proposed developments are located in areas classified as "very high risk" in the event of a bushfire. During the 1994 bushfires, 12 homes in this area were completely destroyed. In the event of a similar disaster, traffic in and out of Maclaurin Parade would likely be completely cut off, making evacuation and emergency access impossible.

Conclusion
I strongly urge the planning committee to reject these development proposals and stop further development proposals. Approving them without major upgrades to local traffic infrastructure and a detailed bushfire evacuation strategy would put the local community at unacceptable risk. While I understand the need for housing, developments of this scale must be sustainable and responsible. Without clear plans to address environmental impacts, traffic congestion, and bushfire safety, these proposals are detrimental and irreversible.

I am writing to formally oppose developments SSD-77825469 and SSD-77829461 for the following reasons:

1. Overdevelopment and Traffic Congestion
The two proposed developments would add 289 residential units. Combined with other nearby developments—7, 9, and 11 Pockley Avenue; 4A, 6A, 6, 8, and 10 Maclaurin Parade; the Roseville Memorial Club site; and the recently completed 1–3 Corona Avenue—the total rises to 427 new units and an estimated 686 additional vehicles. This scale of development will place enormous strain on already congested local roads, especially Maclaurin Parade. The traffic congestion will significantly affect daily commutes and emergency response times.

2. Environmental Impact
The developments pose a serious threat to the local environment. The Blue Gum High Forest is a critically endangered ecological community and home to approximately 40 native animal species. These projects risk permanent destruction of habitat and biodiversity, which cannot be restored once lost.

3. Bushfire Risk and Emergency Evacuation Concerns
According to bushfire simulations conducted by Ku-ring-gai Council, both proposed developments are located in areas classified as "very high risk" in the event of a bushfire. During the 1994 bushfires, 12 homes in this area were completely destroyed. In the event of a similar disaster, traffic in and out of Maclaurin Parade would likely be completely cut off, making evacuation and emergency access impossible.

Conclusion
I strongly urge the planning committee to reject these development proposals and stop further development proposals. Approving them without major upgrades to local traffic infrastructure and a detailed bushfire evacuation strategy would put the local community at unacceptable risk. While I understand the need for housing, developments of this scale must be sustainable and responsible. Without clear plans to address environmental impacts, traffic congestion, and bushfire safety, these proposals are detrimental and irreversible.