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

I am writing to bring to your attention the serious risks associated with the proposed developments at 2-16 Pockley Avenue, 1-5 Pockley Avenue, and 2-4 Larkin Street, Roseville. The submission outlines several key points that highlight the need for urgent action.
The West-Roseville precinct is highly vulnerable to bushfires, with limited evacuation routes and increasing residential density. The proposed developments will add hundreds of new dwellings and car spaces, significantly exceeding safe evacuation thresholds. This poses a grave risk to residents, as demonstrated by scientific evidence and historical precedent.
Furthermore, the proposed building heights will result in overshadowing, detracting from the streetscape and the character of the neighbourhood. The increased density will also lead to traffic and parking congestion, complicating evacuation efforts during emergencies.
Environmental concerns are equally pressing. The developments will increase water runoff, potentially harming local ecosystems and waterways. Additionally, the endangered microbat population in the area is threatened by habitat disruption due to construction activities.
Given these risks, I strongly urge the NSW Government to halt all development approvals in the West-Roseville precinct until evacuation capacity is independently assessed and addressed. It is crucial to ensure that development aligns with safe evacuation thresholds and complies with planning regulations to safeguard public safety and the environment.

I'm concerned about getting out if there was a bushfire to come through again like my parents had to deal with in 1994. Its not just the extra cars introduced to the area but its the visitors and parked cars on the road which will make evacuation dangerous and you should be worried about litigation.
- it's very dangerous trying to go to the train station in the morning with lots of massive trucks and extra traffic, I have almost been hit twice walking to the station due to these trucks and extra traffic in our quiet little area.
- these units are much higher than any others in the area, I know development will happen, but it should be max 5-6 stories high, this will help with less traffic and safety for families to get to work and to the station.
- I'm worried our back yard will slowly erode due to excess water coming down our creek at the back of our house. the rain cant absorb as much as it will now if you put big units in with concrete taking away from the grass and dirt which currently sucks the water up.
- we also have endangered micro bats in the vicinity of your development and Powerful owls which need to be protected. You can kill the bush turkeys but there are endangered species in the area which need to be protected.

I agree with my neighbours view on this letter. Traffic management and bush fire risk is a real issue.

- I'm concerned about getting out if there was a bushfire to come through again like my parents had to deal with in 1994.
- it's very dangerous trying to go to the train station in the morning with lots of massive trucks and extra traffic, I have almost been hit twice walking to the station due to these trucks and extra traffic in our quiet little area.
- these units are much higher than any others in the area, I know development will happen, but it should be max 5-6 stories high, this will help with less traffic and safety for families to get to work and to the station.
- I'm worried our back yard will slowly erode due to excess water coming down our creek at the back of our house. the rain cant absorb as much as it will now if you put big units in with concrete taking away from the grass and dirt which currently sucks the water up.
- we also have endangered micro bats in the vicinity of your development and Powerful owls which need to be protected.

I am a resident of Nola road, having lived here for over 8 years. One of the main reasons I cherish this area is the surrounding natural environment, including the Blue Gum High Forest and the native wildlife it supports.

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 a resident of Kings Avenue, having lived here for over 10 years. One of the main reasons I cherish this area is the surrounding natural environment, including the Blue Gum High Forest and the native wildlife it supports.

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 do not object to the increased housing density of these developments; I actually support that outcome.
My objection relates to traffic and parking issues which are already a problem and are likely to become significantly worse for both existing residents and residents of the new developments.
The residents of Findlay Avenue, Alexander Parade, Kings Avenue, Maclaurin Parade, Pockley Avenue etc have limited vehicular entry and egress to and from the Pacific Highway. Only one intersection has traffic lights and permits both left and right turns when entering the Highway. Morning and afternoon traffic is already a problem; it is not uncommon to wait through several traffic light cycles before being able to cross the intersection.
I am concerned that the additional traffic management and parking demands due to these developments has not been thoroughly considered.
Furthermore, considering much of the area is bushfire prone land, the prospect of mass evacuation and access by emergency services seems problematic at best, life threatening at worst.

This project has building heights that are too tall to be in keeping with the surrounding character of the area. With no or little setback this development will be a blight on the streetscape.
The extra traffic and lack of parking will be extremely problematic. The roads here are narrow and hilly with very limited access out of the isolated area, particularly onto Pacific Highway. This will be potentially catastrophic in the event of a bushfire in the adjacent Blue Gum forest area.
The 9-10 story height will obviously lead to significant overshadowing of adjacent properties.
Environmental concerns associated with this development include increased water runoff and I am concerned about the endangered micro bat population in the vicinity.

- excess building heights
- traffic and parking congestion
- Bushfire evacuation risk and potential litigation
- overshadowing due to height
- streetscape
- environmental concerns, water runoff, threatened species due to endangered micro bat population in the vicinity

These proposals are a total abuse of the planning system and give no consideration to the safety of the existing and proposed residents.
The proposals given little thought s for the issues that the residents have opposed for the twenty years I have lived here.
The proposal is unacceptable due to:
-excess building heights
- traffic and parking congestion
- Bushfire evacuation risk and potential litigation
- overshadowing due to height
- streetscape
- environmental concerns, water runoff, threatened species due to endangered micro bat population in the vicinity

I object to this and the currently being built developments for the same reasons.

The scale of the development is excessive and will have significant negative impact on neighbouring properties around Alexander parade and Findlay avenue.

These properties adjoin bushfire risk areas and only have as outlets to pacific highway via maclaurin parade, Findlay and Corona Avenue.

Apartment blocks on maclaurin parade and Corona Avenue has already increased the density in the area and has resulted in heavy congestion especially during morning and afternoon ‘school run’ where traffic is often backed up at the maclaurin parade traffic lights awaiting to get out to pacific highway and from pacific highway into maclaurin parade.

The proposed overscaled development will only worsen this position and where there is an evacuation event , this choke point may lead to catastrophic consequences for existing residents that live deeper into the Alexander parade and Findlay Avenue pockets.

Thank you for the opportunity to make my submission and I hope a safe and sensible outcome results from this process.

The attached submission draws on scientific evidence, legal precedent, planning regulations, and lived community experience to demonstrate that the current and proposed scale of development in West-Roseville presents a foreseeable and escalating risk. It outlines the obligations of developers and government agencies under NSW planning law and climate risk policy and highlights the growing trend of climate litigation - particularly in cases where governments have failed to adapt to known risks.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NSW Government faces legal, reputational, and human safety risks if it approves further development in West Roseville without addressing known and escalating bushfire evacuation vulnerabilities.

1. Escalating Bushfire Risk
Bushfire risk in West-Roseville is not hypothetical—it is intensifying due to a non-stationary climate, with more frequent extreme fire days, longer fire seasons, and increasing temperatures. The precinct is surrounded by bushland, has a history of destructive fires, and is constrained by limited evacuation routes. Scientific evidence and recent simulations show that future fires will be more severe, and harder to escape—placing lives at risk if development continues unchecked.

2. Key Statistics
- Precinct: West Roseville (MacLaurin Parade, Larkin Street, Larkin Lane, Alexander Parade, Kings Avenue, Corona Avenue, Pockley Avenue, Findlay Avenue)
- Existing dwellings: 362
- Proposed dwellings: 427
- Total dwellings: 766

- Existing car spaces: 553
- Proposed car spaces: 686
- Total car spaces: 1239

- Exits to Pacific Highway: 3 (MacLaurin Parade, Corona Avenue, Findlay Avenue)
- Safe household threshold for bushfire evacuation (3 exits): 301–600 dwellings (Cova et al., 2005)

3. Legal and Planning Obligations
Under NSW Treasury’s Internal Audit and Risk Management Policy, all NSW Government agencies must consider climate risk when identifying risks to their objectives. This includes the Housing Delivery Authority, which assesses State Significant Development proposals. The SSD Guidelines and EP&A Regulation 2021 require developers to assess cumulative traffic impacts and risks to human safety, including from natural hazards such as bushfires.

Recommendations
1) Pause approvals until evacuation capacity is independently assessed.
2) Review evacuation capacity using climate projections and bushfire simulations.
3) Scale development to stay within safe evacuation thresholds.
4) Enforce planning laws requiring cumulative traffic and bushfire risk assessments.
5) Integrate climate risk into all planning decisions.

I'm of the view this proposed development doesn't align with the NSW TOD for Roseville. As a resident of the area I'm acutely aware of the current traffic load on our local limited streets and fear this proposal along with the other developments in the West Roseville area will generate grid lock. With hundreds of additional vehicles on these road I fear it will become extraordinarily difficult to take kids to school, go to work and just live in the area. Driving up MacLaurin Parade to exit to the Pacific Highway is already a challenge particularly during the peak hours in the mornings (7 am - 9am). This also poses a significant health and safety risk to residents in the event of bushfire where residents are required to exit on masse. I understand and appreciate there is a need for more housing on the north shore rail line, however the fundamentals of the TOD (transport oriented) appear to be getting lost in these proposed projects. I recommend the project is reconfigured to align with TOD guidelines.

The West-Roseville precinct is at a critical tipping point. Proposed high-density development in this bushfire-prone, ecologically sensitive, and traffic-congested area poses serious risks to human safety, environmental integrity, and legal accountability. This submission outlines why further development should be paused until these risks are properly addressed.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND BIODIVERSITY CONCERNS
West-Roseville is home to endangered species, including a known community of Powerful Owls—Australia’s largest nocturnal bird—and a vulnerable population of microbats, both of which rely on the mature tree canopy and forested corridors of the Blue Gum High Forest that surround the precinct. Increased development threatens to fragment their habitat, reduce biodiversity, and violate conservation protections. These species are indicators of ecosystem health, and their decline signals broader environmental degradation.

BUSHFIRE RISK IN A CHANGING CLIMATE
The precinct is surrounded by bushland and has a documented history of bushfire exposure, including the 1994 fire that destroyed 12 homes. With climate change accelerating, fire seasons are becoming longer and more intense. Scientific studies confirm that the risk is no longer hypothetical—future fires will be faster, more destructive, and harder to escape. The area’s limited evacuation routes and increasing population density make this a life-threatening scenario.

EVACUATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEFICITS
There are only three viable exits from West-Roseville, and they are already congested under normal conditions. With 766 dwellings and over 1,200 car spaces planned and existing, the precinct exceeds the safe evacuation threshold of 301–600 households. Narrow streets, on-street parking, and one-way traffic flow further restrict emergency access and evacuation during a crisis.

TRAFFIC, AND PARKING
Residents already face daily traffic delays, particularly at the MacLaurin Parade and Shirley Road intersections. The proposed developments will significantly increase vehicle numbers, worsening congestion and reducing road safety.

LEGAL AND PLANNING FAILURES
Under NSW law, developers and government agencies are required to assess cumulative traffic impacts, and climate risk. Current proposals fail to meet these obligations. Approving development under these conditions exposes the NSW Government to legal action, reputational damage, and financial liability—risks that are entirely foreseeable and avoidable.

RECCOMMENDATIONS
1) Pause all development approvals until evacuation capacity is independently reviewed.
2) Conduct a comprehensive assessment using bushfire simulations, climate projections, and traffic modelling.
3) Scale development to remain within safe evacuation thresholds.
4) Protect endangered species by preserving habitat corridors and enforcing biodiversity protections.
5) Enforce planning laws on traffic, bushfire risk, and building height.
6) Integrate climate and ecological risk into all planning decisions.

The West-Roseville precinct is facing serious and growing risks due to proposed high-density development in an area already vulnerable to bushfires, traffic congestion, and infrastructure limitations. This submission outlines why further development should not proceed without urgent review and reform.

1. Escalating Bushfire Risk
West-Roseville is surrounded by bushland and has a history of destructive fires. With climate change making bushfires more intense and frequent, the area’s limited evacuation routes pose a serious threat to public safety. Scientific research shows that future fire events will be faster and more dangerous, and the current planning does not reflect this reality.

2. Evacuation and Infrastructure Constraints
There are only three main exits from the precinct, and they are already prone to traffic delays. With 766 dwellings and over 1,200 car spaces planned or existing, the area exceeds the safe evacuation threshold. Narrow streets and parked cars make it even harder for emergency services to access the area during a crisis.

3. Traffic, Parking, and Building Impacts
Traffic congestion is already a daily issue for residents, and more development will only make it worse. The increase in vehicles will lead to more on-street parking and reduced road safety.

4. Legal and Planning Obligations
Government agencies are required by law to consider climate risk and ensure that developments meet safety and environmental standards. Current proposals do not meet these requirements, which could lead to legal action and loss of public trust.

5. Recommendations
- Pause all development approvals until evacuation capacity is properly assessed.
- Use climate data and fire simulations to guide planning decisions.
- Limit development to levels that can be safely evacuated.
- Enforce planning laws on traffic, bushfire risk, and building height.
- Make decisions based on long-term safety, not short-term convenience.

we live in this small pocket, with three exit points of high traffic. This is unsafe for the residents in this pocket who are trying to manage getting out of the house in the morning to get to work. This would increase traffic for the neighbourhood and overall decrease community wellbeing and quality of life. In the event of a fire it will not be possible to evacuate all the residents from the 3 exit points available, this will put lives at risk and put the government in jeopardy for litigation.

The intention of the NSW TOD was NOT to have 10 story dwellings down small residential streets. We live down hill from this site, and without the 2 current developments, access to travel southbound is ridiculous at peak hour traffic. This submission is taking about taking a handful of houses and transforming it into hundreds of residences. This is going to have a major impact to everyone's ability to exit the area should there be a fire escalating up the hill from Lane Cove National Park, and will seriously impact the local residents.
This is greedy developers overdeveloping a small congested pocket of the community - not sensible for the community and the government should take everything into account before making a decision. There are still other pieces of land in this small pocket of streets yet to put in their applications, butt the current two applications around Pockley will result in the area being overpopulated beyond the safe limit for fire evacuation given the limited exit points. The government will be stuck having to approve the additional applications with similar ambitions for building height and that will be a big problem. The climate risk litigation risk the NSW government will be subjecting itself to will be high risk for the NSW Government and this community will be holding the government to account should it be recklessly approved. Please review this and demand a lowering of the height back to the NSW government intented height under the original TOD.

1. The project will significantly increase the local traffic. At the moment, residents already experiencing issues / difficulty turning on the Pacific Highway from McLaurin Parade, Roseville EVERYDAY. With more residents coming, there will be no chance to get onto Pacific Highway, the waiting time will not just be two or three traffic lights long, it will be forever! It is affecting people’s everyday life. I am strongly opposing the project unless there is proper solution to this issue.
2. During construction period, there should be proper road management for the project. The road should be widened, not blocked by shipping trucks and construction cars. They are affected by day to day life of local residents.

More traffic from new developments will make getting on pacific highway at the intersection of mclaurin parade almost impossible at peak hour.

Whilst it is positive to see multi storey developments, it appears to be overloading a small precinct without additional infrastructure and thought of practical day to day activities.

The development provides a significant of dwellings ( 178) but has not provided any green space to counter the significant development of the land and provide for the additional 170 homes ( currently approx 8 in this block today) , I would also like to see:
- a plan for how water and electricty will be supplied to this site without impacting the other residents who use the same feeder main but are further along, will they have no water? )
- it is also concerning that there is minimal access to public amentities -including parks - none in walking distance in the KMC region, either KMC or the developer should be providing a green space including playground and dog facilities for the residents which could be up to 500 people.
- How will traffic from the site exit at the lights at MacLaurin and The Pacific Highway as an additional 170 units could increase vehicles by more than 200 , and the lights are already quite busy from the feeder streets who cannot enter the high way in other ways, what traffic management plan and changes are in place?
thank you