Residential with in-fill affordable housing - 159-167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale

This SSD states it will install 1-3 stories of underground parking at this Basset street west site - this will be installing a concrete dam in a floodplain - this whole site was once part of wetlands. The community will then be left to pick up the tab for the problems and flooding this will cause. It is reasonable to expect, during current increasing floods and storms, that the government not only requires proposals to be 'site specific' to specifically sensitive environments. Not only should the clear grab for profit DA be reduced, there should be a state government mechanism which requires the government to hold enough $ from each DA to address future problems caused by the same.

To Whom It May Concern

I am writing to express my disapproval of the following six-story development 159-167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale SSD-91496958 comprising 1 as it will place an unacceptable strain on our already overburdened local infrastructure.

Our existing transport network is not equipped to accommodate the significant increase in residents and will inevitably worsen traffic congestion along surrounding roads that are already operating at or near capacity. These surrounding roads that would be impacted include Pittwater Road, Park Street and Kunari Place. 

The lack of adequate on-site parking will further compound the problem, pushing additional vehicles into an already congested town centre and forcing overflow parking onto surrounding (above mentioned) residential streets.

This will directly impact existing households along Darley Street West, reducing parking availability, compromising safety, and diminishing the overall liveability of the area.

The cumulative effect of these issues has clearly not been sufficiently addressed and raises serious concerns about the long-term consequences for the local community.

The Northern Beaches, and Mona Vale in particular, are geographically constrained by the Pacific Ocean to the east and Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park and waterways to the west, which severely limits transport corridors. As a result, Mona Vale effectively relies on a single primary arterial route—Pittwater Road—for both north–south access, functioning as the main road in and the main road out of the area. There are no parallel highways or alternative through-routes capable of absorbing significant traffic volumes, meaning any increase in population places immediate pressure on this one corridor. When incidents, peak-hour congestion, or roadworks occur, there are very limited detour options, causing widespread delays across the suburb and surrounding areas. This lack of redundancy in the road network makes Mona Vale particularly vulnerable to congestion and highlights the serious risks of high-density development without corresponding transport upgrades.

Kind Regards

Kim Malakou

Traffic and Access Objection
Residential with In Fill Affordable Housing
159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale
Application Number: SSD 91496958
1. Introduction
I object to the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale on the grounds that the traffic, access, and transport impacts have been significantly understated and are incompatible with the physical constraints of the street, the surrounding road network, and the transport limitations of the Northern Beaches.
The proposal will materially worsen congestion, reduce safety, impede emergency access, and place unreasonable pressure on a road system already operating beyond capacity.
2. Darley Street West is fundamentally unsuitable for increased traffic
2.1 The street is narrow, constrained, and heavily parked
Darley Street West is a narrow residential street with cars parked along both sides for most of the day. This reduces the effective carriageway to a single lane in many sections, forcing vehicles to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass.
The traffic report fails to acknowledge:
• The reduced lane width caused by constant on street parking
• The limited passing opportunities
• The poor sightlines created by bends and parked vehicles
Any increase in vehicle movements will amplify these constraints and create additional conflict points.
2.2 The site sits within a cul de sac
The development is located near the end of a cul de sac, meaning:
• All traffic must enter and exit via the same constrained point
• There is no alternative routing or dispersal
• Turning movements increase congestion and risk
Cul de sac locations are inherently unsuitable for medium density developments generating higher traffic volumes.
2.3 Traffic increase has been significantly understated
The proponent’s traffic modelling does not reflect real world conditions. It underestimates:
• Peak hour movements
• Visitor and service vehicle trips
• Deliveries, trades, and support services
• The higher car ownership rates typical of senior residents in areas with poor public transport
The modelling assumptions are unrealistic and materially downplay the true impact.
3. Dangerous intersection and traffic light conditions
The intersection at the entry to Darley Street West is already dangerous, with:
• Poor visibility
• High turning volumes
• Drivers accelerating to beat the lights
• Pedestrians crossing without dedicated protection
Adding more vehicles from this development will increase the risk of collisions and near misses.
4. Emergency vehicle access will be compromised
Darley Street West’s narrow, single lane conditions already make it difficult for large vehicles to pass. The increased traffic load will:
• Delay ambulances, fire trucks, and police vehicles attempting to reach properties in the cul de sac
• Increase the likelihood of blockages caused by parked cars, delivery vans, or service vehicles
• Reduce the ability of emergency vehicles to turn around or manoeuvre safely
• Create unacceptable response time delays for elderly residents, who are statistically more likely to require urgent medical assistance
Emergency access is a critical safety issue. Any development that worsens response times places lives at risk.
5. The development is likely to be occupied by seniors – increasing transport pressure
5.1 Steep topography makes walking impractical
The site sits at the bottom of a steep hill, making walking difficult for older residents or anyone with mobility limitations.
5.2 The nearest B Line stop is 1.1 km away (16 minute walk)
A 16 minute uphill/downhill walk is not realistic for seniors, especially in poor weather or with shopping, medical needs, or mobility issues.
5.3 No rail or light rail options exist
Unlike other Sydney regions, the Northern Beaches has:
• No train line
• No light rail
• No scalable mass transit alternative
Residents are therefore forced to rely on cars, increasing traffic volumes through Mona Vale and beyond.
6. Regional traffic constraints will worsen
6.1 More cars travelling north and south
Residents will need to drive for most trips, adding pressure to:
• Newport
• Avalon
• Palm Beach
• Mona Vale town centre
• The arterial routes toward Sydney
More cars and more buses mean more congestion, not less.
6.2 Mona Vale already experiences peak hour gridlock
Traffic regularly comes to a standstill due to:
• Vehicles entering from Powder Works Road
• Mona Vale Road narrowing into a “country lane” beyond the Bahá’í Temple
• Bottlenecks at roundabouts and traffic lights
The network is already at capacity.
6.3 Wakehurst Parkway closures worsen congestion
Wakehurst Parkway is regularly closed due to flooding, forcing all traffic onto Mona Vale Road (already overburdened).
Any additional vehicle load from this development will compound these unavoidable congestion events.
6.X Southbound traffic is already severely constrained
All southbound traffic from Mona Vale is funnelled into only two corridors: Wakehurst Parkway or Pittwater Road. Both operate under chronic congestion and have no realistic capacity to absorb additional vehicle demand generated by this development.
Pittwater Road is frequently delayed when passing through:
• Narrabeen, due to tidal traffic surges and multiple signalised intersections
• Collaroy, where lane merges and pedestrian activity slow throughput
• Dee Why and beyond, where traffic regularly comes to a complete standstill during peak periods
Further south, conditions deteriorate significantly:
• Spit Bridge creates predictable bottlenecks due to its opening schedule and limited lane capacity
• Mosman and Neutral Bay experience continuous congestion from high turning volumes and constrained road geometry
• Sydney Harbour Bridge is subject to ongoing construction and maintenance works, further reducing reliability and increasing delays
These systemic constraints mean that any additional traffic generated by this development — and by the many other proposed developments in the region — will compound congestion across the entire corridor. The southbound network has no spare capacity, no alternative routing, and no feasible mitigation measures capable of accommodating further demand.
7. Parking shortages in Mona Vale town centre
Mona Vale suffers from:
• Chronic parking shortages
• Drivers circling for spaces
• Traffic backing up as vehicles wait to reverse into spots
• Frequent road rage incidents caused by delays
Adding more residents who must drive to access shops, services, and transport will worsen these conditions.
8. Conclusion
The proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West presents unacceptable traffic, access, emergency response, and transport impacts that cannot be mitigated within the constraints of the existing road network.
The street is too narrow, the cul de sac location is inappropriate, the traffic increase is understated, and the broader Mona Vale transport system is already overburdened. The steep topography, distance to public transport, and lack of scalable mass transit mean residents will rely heavily on cars, further worsening congestion, safety risks, and emergency vehicle delays.
For these reasons, the development should be refused on traffic, access, and emergency response grounds.

To Whom It May Concern,
Re: Development Application – 159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale
I write to formally lodge a strong objection to the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale.
I strongly oppose the proposal due to its unacceptable impacts on traffic congestion, parking availability, residential amenity, environmental conditions, limited local services and public transport, cumulative strain on infrastructure, and its incompatibility with the established character of the area. When considered both individually and cumulatively with other developments in Mona Vale, the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site and the surrounding road network.
Lack of Off-Street Visitor and Service Vehicle Parking
The proposal does not provide off-street parking for visitors or service vehicles. As a result, all visitor vehicles, along with delivery vans, tradespeople, cleaners, gardeners, and maintenance vehicles, will be required to find parking within the surrounding street network.
This street is a small cul-de-sac with limited capacity. Increased demand for on-street parking will reduce road width, restrict vehicle movement, and impede access for emergency vehicles, waste collection, and service vehicles. Vehicles circulating within the cul-de-sac while searching for parking will further increase congestion, turning movements, and safety risks.
The absence of dedicated visitor and service parking will directly contribute to congestion and is inconsistent with reasonable expectations for residential development in this location.
Inadequate and Incomplete Traffic Assessment
The traffic assessment submitted with the application significantly underestimates the true impacts of the development. It fails to adequately account for the cumulative effect of additional vehicle movements and associated parking demand, including delivery and courier vans, tradespeople and contractors, cleaners and maintenance services, and visitors.
These vehicles do not simply add to traffic volumes; they must also circulate within the cul-de-sac while searching for available parking. This will occur regularly and often during peak periods, compounding congestion, safety risks, and access constraints within the street and at nearby intersections.
Unsuitable Local Road Network and Limited Public Transport
Darley Street West is a small cul-de-sac that is not designed to accommodate increased traffic volumes or intensified parking demand. Turning movements are already constrained, and increased vehicle activity and parking will further reduce safety and manoeuvrability.
Public transport services in Mona Vale are limited, with infrequent bus services and restricted route coverage. As a result, residents, visitors, and service providers are highly car-dependent. The proposal does not adequately address this reliance on private vehicles, further increasing traffic and parking pressures.
Turning right from Darley Street West onto Pittwater Road is already difficult due to heavy traffic volumes, particularly during peak periods. Any additional traffic generated by the proposed development will exacerbate delays and increase the risk of accidents.
Unrealistic Affordable Housing Outcomes
The inclusion of affordable housing within this proposal is unrealistic given the prevailing property values in Darley Street West and the broader Mona Vale market.
Recent sales in Darley Street West include units selling for approximately $2.4 million, $3.9 million, and $4.8 million. These sale prices are consistent with broader Mona Vale market trends, where strong demand, limited supply, and proximity to services have resulted in sustained high property values.
In this context, the site is not suitable for delivering genuinely affordable housing. In practice, such dwellings are likely to be acquired by investors, potentially negatively geared during the mandated affordability period, and sold at a substantial profit once the 15-year period has elapsed. This does not meaningfully address housing affordability and does not deliver a lasting community benefit.
Environmental and Residential Amenity Impacts
There are existing environmental concerns in the area, including a nearby stormwater/sewage tank that frequently emits strong and unpleasant odours. This issue persists despite repeated attempts by the Water Board to resolve it.
Increasing residential density at 159–167 Darley Street West raises concerns regarding health, residential amenity, and the overall suitability of the site for intensified residential use.
Cumulative Impact on Mona Vale Shopping Centre
The scale of this development, when combined with other approved and proposed developments in Mona Vale, will have a significant cumulative impact on traffic congestion and parking availability in and around the Mona Vale shopping centre.
The centre already experiences congestion and parking shortages and functions as a regional service hub, attracting people from surrounding suburbs due to its banks, medical practices, and allied health facilities. Limited public transport options further increase reliance on private vehicles. The cumulative increase in residential density will place unacceptable pressure on already constrained roads and parking infrastructure.
Incompatibility with Surrounding Development
The proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West is not in keeping with the established scale, form, and character of surrounding properties. The area is characterised by lower-density residential development, and the proposal represents an overdevelopment that is inconsistent with the existing streetscape and neighbourhood character.
Conclusion
When considered in its entirety, and particularly in the context of cumulative development impacts and limited public transport provision in Mona Vale, the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West will place unacceptable pressure on local roads, parking, infrastructure, and residential amenity.
For these reasons, the proposed development should not be supported.
Yours sincerely,
Lynne Spencer

Submission Regarding Proposed Development at 159–167 Darley Street, Mona Vale
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to lodge a formal submission regarding the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street, Mona Vale, involving three towers of six storeys located at the end of a cul‑de‑sac. While I support appropriate and sustainable development in our area, I have significant concerns about the scale, traffic impacts, and parking shortfalls associated with this proposal.
1. Inappropriate Scale and Bulk for a Cul‑de‑Sac Location
Positioning three six‑storey towers at the closed end of a cul‑de‑sac creates an urban form that is inconsistent with the surrounding neighbourhood character. The height and density proposed are excessive for a street with only one point of entry and exit. This configuration concentrates a large population into a confined traffic environment that was never designed to support such intensity.
2. Insufficient Traffic Controls and Road Capacity
Darley Street already experiences congestion during peak periods, particularly at its intersections with Pittwater Road and nearby feeder streets. The proposal does not adequately address:
• The lack of traffic lights or controlled intersections to safely manage increased vehicle movements
• The single‑access nature of the cul‑de‑sac, which limits circulation and creates bottlenecks
• The increased risk to pedestrians, cyclists, and school‑aged children who use the area daily
• Emergency vehicle access, which may be compromised by higher traffic volumes and constrained turning space
The traffic assessment provided by the applicant appears to underestimate the cumulative impact of hundreds of additional daily vehicle movements funnelled through a single exit point.
3. Inadequate On‑Site Parking Provision
The proposed parking allocation is insufficient for a development of this scale. Mona Vale is not a high‑frequency public transport hub, and most households rely on private vehicles. Under‑provision of parking will inevitably push overflow parking into surrounding residential streets, which are already under pressure.
Key concerns include:
• Insufficient resident parking relative to the number of units
• Limited or inadequate visitor parking
• No realistic strategy for managing spill‑over parking in a cul‑de‑sac with restricted kerb space
• Increased congestion and reduced safety due to vehicles circulating in search of parking
This shortfall will have a direct and negative impact on existing residents’ amenity and access.
4. Cumulative Impact on Local Infrastructure
A development of this magnitude will place additional strain on local infrastructure, including:
• Road networks
• Public transport capacity
• Pedestrian pathways
• Waste collection logistics
• Stormwater and drainage systems
The proposal does not demonstrate that these impacts have been fully assessed or mitigated.
5. Request for Reconsideration and Revision
Given the issues outlined above, I respectfully request that Council:
1. Reject the proposal in its current form, or
2. Require the applicant to substantially revise the development to address:
• Reduced height and density
• Improved traffic controls and intersection upgrades
• Adequate on‑site parking
• A more appropriate design for a cul‑de‑sac location
A development of this size must be compatible with the existing road network, neighbourhood character, and safety of the community.

The Secretary, Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure

Objection to SSD-91496958 Residential Development with in-fill affordable housing at 159-167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale

Dear Sir

I live in Darley Street West, Mona Vale and I write to strongly object to SSD-91496958 for the reasons below:

STREETSCAPE:
The size, scale and density of the proposed 82 unit development of 3 x 6 storey towers is inconsistent with the existing character of Darley Street West being a small, quiet cul-de-sac approximately 300m long and currently containing 161 premises. It is completely out of scale with the surrounding 1-2 storey housing, a mix of townhouses, dual occupancies and free standing homes. Increasing the street’s housing density by approximately 50% is unacceptable. After careful planning and consideration, Pittwater Council’s LEP2014 determined that the site was suitable for only approx 30 dwellings. The fact that 82 dwellings can now be “squeezed” onto the site under the NSW Low-Mid Rise Housing Reforms does not mean the site is actually suitable for that scale. Good town planning determines that higher density housing is located within commercial and town centres transitioning down to lower density housing further out in the residential areas. As the Mona Vale town centre and industrial zones are exempted from the LMR housing reforms, this development will create an inverse effect to what the planning reforms are trying to achieve. This development is located at the very outer limit of the LMR zone and having 3 x 6 storey towers popping up out of the streetscape surrounded by 1-2 storey residential dwellings will have a profoundly detrimental visual impact.

TRAFFIC/PARKING IMPACT:
A 50% housing density increase of 82 units adding 164+ vehicles to an already congested cul-de-sac and to the nearby already dangerous intersection with Pittwater Road is a major safety concern for me. My lived experience of peak periods at this intersection is already unsafe with limited vision turning right into a congested Pittwater Road. This continues to and beyond the Mona Vale Town Centre causing further safety issues at the Park St intersection and significant congestion at the Bungan St roundabout. The intersection at Darley Street West is misaligned and the directional arrows heading west from Darley Street cause a lot of safety issues. If any development was to proceed this intersection would need to be upgraded. The traffic impact statement states that the 4 existing dwelling houses on the site have a traffic generation potential of 3 vehicles per hour (vph) during both the morning and afternoon peak periods. It also states that the proposed development will result in a nett increase of 13 vph in the AM peak period. How can only 4 dwellings generate 3 vph whereas 82 dwellings would only generate 16 vph? These figures are not factual. The Traffic and Parking assessment report paragraph 2.7 is incorrect as the narrow cul-de-sac turning head at the western end of Darley Street West does in fact contain “no parking” restrictions (image no. 001). There is no allowance for visitor parking, trades, delivery and emergency vehicles. As no parking is allowed at the turning head of the cul-de-sac these vehicles will be forced to park outside other residences that already have difficulty exiting driveways due to poor sight lines (image no. 002). Darley Street West parking is already congested as it is commonly used for parking by workers from the nearby town centre and industrial zone. During demolition and excavation there is likely to be another 30-60 vehicles parking on Darley Street West, exacerbating safety hazard issues. The noise generated and significant truck movements (entering and exiting the same way) during demolition and construction from such a large scale development in a small quiet cul-de-sac will be detrimental to the well-being of existing residents.

ENVIRONMENTAL:
The Pittwater LGA uniquely has geographical and environmental constraints. Only two roads lead to Mona Vale – Mona Vale Road partly single lane and Pittwater Road. Leading out to the north is Barrenjoey Road that terminates at Palm Beach and is ultimately a dead-end road. During the rain event of 17th January 2026 Wakehurst Parkway was closed and Mona Vale, Pittwater and Barrenjoey Roads were all at various times inaccessible due to flooding. Nearby Narrabeen was subject to an evacuation order. During the catastrophic bushfires in 1994 these roads were periodically closed due to bushfire, resulting in traffic gridlock. Increased density at Mona Vale would severely compromise emergency evacuation ability for the greater Pittwater LGA.

FLOODING:
The proposed development is located in a flood planning area located in the Cahill Creek catchment. Bayview Golf Course directly across the road to the site is considered a high risk flood precinct, with the adjacent area at the end of Darley Street West and Kunari Place a medium risk. Darley Street West regularly floods during heavy rainfall and the gutters become a torrent. Existing underground retention tanks at all the existing townhouses in the street pump water continuously and in times of heavy rain become overwhelmed and flood their basements. During the rain event of 17th January 2026 I am aware of at least 5 townhouse complexes (including mine) that were up at all hours of the night manually pumping stormwater out of their flooded basement garages and moving cars out of danger, with the NSW fire brigade in attendance to assist some complexes (image no. 004). I was up until 1:00am and it was only due to the rain easing that we were able to bring the flooding of our basement garage under control (see image no’s 005/6). The townhouse complexes at 139-145 Darley Street West were still pumping out their retention tanks over one week later. Two weeks later stagnant water remains at the end of the street and smells which is a public health risk. The proposed development includes 3 level basement carparking below street level on a steep downhill site and lived experience tells me that the proposed development WILL flood in heavy rain. The water pumped out from the retention tanks and stormwater runoff from the site will heavily impact neighbouring properties and the Bayview Golf Course. This is a public health risk and the Environmental Impact Statement ignores those impacts on neighbouring properties, garages and streets.

BUSHFIRE:
Bushfire risk from surrounding bushland was not adequately addressed in the planning documents. Although Darley Street West is not located in a bushfire prone zone, it can still be affected by bushfire as it is located to nearby bushland and National Parks making it a bushfire risk area subject to ember attack.

INFRASTRUCTURE:
Two roads only lead to Mona Vale – the single lane of Mona Vale Road west won’t be updated for several years if at all (image 003) and Pittwater Road, which also leads out to the Spit Bridge that opens 6-8 times per day causing a backlog of traffic congestion. At Mona Vale there is no train line, trams, ferries, dedicated rapid bus lane, east west rapid bus link, major cross regional transport and the Northern Beaches tunnel has been cancelled. We are totally reliant on the congested road network. The only major transport service is the B Line bus to the city only, operated by a private company. It is already near capacity and subject to extensive queuing at peak times with the Mona Vale parking station full by 7.15am, there’s driver shortages and limitations on the ability for this service to expand. The impact of increased density by this proposed development and the greater area of Mona Vale on the bus transport service will be untenable.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING:
It is ludicrous to afford the developer a bonus two storeys for including 10 “affordable housing” units, especially on all 3 towers as they are all only located in Block C. Considering the high property values of Mona Vale and that this proposed development is for luxury 2-3 bedroom apartments (with golf course views) with expected sale prices in the multi millions of dollars and subsequent high rental rates, this proposed development cannot meaningfully be regarded as “affordable housing”. There is no way essential workers, first home buyers, mature singles or young families could afford to rent, let alone buy, these apartments and therefore the in fill “affordable housing” bonus of two storeys should be removed from the development, at least from Blocks A & B.

COMMUNITY:
The overdevelopment of this site does not address the local housing needs of Mona Vale, conversely it will destroy the character of the area and leave lasting negative impacts to the existing residents. This is evidenced by the fact that the completed residential unit complex “Maya” at 19 Bungan Street Mona Vale also developed by the proponent has only been able to so far sell around half of their 33 units after 3 years and so far fill only one of their 6 commercial units (see image no’s 008/9) . If they can’t fill 33 residential units at that complex how are they going to manage to fill 82 units at this proposed development? It is simply not the type of housing sought after in Mona Vale and should therefore be scaled down to a more appropriate size in keeping with the area. In regards to the low and mid-rise housing proposals, Chris Minns said: “This Bill is about clearing the path for the right development, in the right places, with the right outcomes for the community” SMH. This proposal has none of those features and will not help address the housing crisis facing NSW and the needs of our local community. In fact, it will have an adverse impact on the community by adding additional density pressure to an already very congested and busy town centre (see image no. 010 - Woolworths carpark at capacity).

In light of the above objections I hereby request that SSD-91496958 in its current form be rejected.

Objection to Proposed Darley Street West Proposal

I strongly object to the proposed development at 159-167 Darley Street West in Mona Vale NSW. The development does not fit in with existing buildings and neighbourhood which mainly consist of 2 storey townhouses and single level houses on a small street with only 1 way in and 1 way out with no through traffic and limited capacity.

In reviewing the proposed affect on traffic indicated in proposal documents, it would indicate no actual review of Darley Street West was conducted and assumptions on traffic affect were simply based on mathematical assumptions.

Darley Street West is a cul-de-sac located on a narrow street with parking on both sides. It is not possible for 2 automobiles, 1 travelling east and 1 travelling west, to go side by side causing 1 automobile to back up or pull over to allow passing, especially with many Utes or large SUV’s using Darley Street West.

Secondly, the traffic light and lane arrangement at the intersection of Pittwater Road and Darley Street is poorly established where turning right on to Pittwater Road from Darley Street West is dangerous as traffic turning left from Darley Street West do not stop when light changes, often preventing ability to proceed to turn right as the traffic light changes. In addition, due to this intersection and light set up, it often limits only 1 automobile able to make a right turn. I have had to wait 3 light changes before I could safely and legally make a right turn. If travelling straight across Pittwater Road from Darley Street West to Darley Street, often drivers making a right turn from Darley Street to Pittwater Road do not stop for drivers heading straight across Pittwater Road as they believe they have right away. I have witnessed many close calls to accidents due to this action by inconsiderate drivers.

With the addition of potentially 164+ automobiles using Darley Street West to exit as well as additional automobiles travelling west on Darley Street to Darley Street West, this intersection will not be able to cope with the additional traffic. Add traffic from additional proposed developments in the Mona Vale area, you have further traffic bottlenecks and frustrated residents, culminating in an accident waiting to happen.

Thirdly, for existing residents who live closer to the traffic light at Pittwater Road and Darley Street West, it will become increasingly difficult to exit their driveways onto Darley Street West. Even today, it is difficult to exit your driveway due to poor visibility, due to parked automobiles and due to drivers racing down a narrow crowded street to get through the traffic light at Pittwater Road and Darley Street.

Lastly, due to limited and restrictive parking in Mona Vale, numerous Mona Vale workers park on Darley Street West in front of residential properties, creating restricted residential parking, narrowing street access and restrictive views of oncoming traffic. Add the potentially 164+ automobiles, you now have a very crowded short residential cut-de-sac with extremely limited access and flow with a poorly designed traffic light and intersection.

I am not against progress and development and would propose the development planned for Darley Street West be reduced by at least 50%. There should also be a ban on any further developments on Darley Street West as it will not be able to cope with any further developments.

In reference to EIS for 159-167 Darley Street West Mona Vale.

1. Section 163. It is stated that the proposal is ‘just’ within 800 metres to qualify for R3. I could not see any survey or other method to prove and verify this statement. And is the project legally viable at all, if only part of the land is within the 800 metres limit?

2.Section 180 (3). It seems to me that the point and intention of this part of legislation is useless and of no effect, if developers can contrive to circumvent it, through throwing more money at it, and throw in what is effectively a tokenistic pitch for in fill affordable housing. The EIS lists the cost of construction @$104,915,325 including GST, but excluding costs of purchase of land and financing costs of project. The estimate for cost overrun is in the very low side.This puts the bare cost of breaking even for 82 apartments at around 1.4-1.5 million. Their sale cost will of course will far exceed this level, particularly in view of the high level of 3 bedroom apartments. How does apartment prices approaching and exceeding 2 million dollars ( and consequently very high rentals)promote affordable housing aims? The truth of the matter is that the project has nothing to do with affordable housing, and the legislative intent of state significant development criteria. It has everything to do with maximising profits for greed, at the expense of neighbours and the local community. As a starting point ( if the development proposal in its entirety falls within 800metres of the town centre map?), the development should be confined to 4 storeys ( a FSR of 1.5:1, and maximum height of 17.5 metres). The development proposal should then be considered in the context of other matters listed below.

3. Visual Impact Analysis.
This development application should be refused in its entirety through this criteria alone. Schedule 9 of State Environmental Planning ( Housing) details design principles for residential apartment development. Sch 9 1 (1) ‘ Good design responds and contributes to its context, which is the key natural and built features of an area, their relationship and the character they create …….’. Sch 9 1 (3) ‘ Well designed buildings respond to and enhance the qualities and identity of the area including the adjacent sites, streetscape and neighbourhood’ Sch 9 1 (4) ‘ Consideration of local context is important for all sites, including in sites in the following areas-
(a) established areas ………’
Sch 9, 2 Built Form and Scale. ‘(1) Good sign achieves a scale, bulk and height appropriate to the existing or desired future character of the street and surrounding buildings ‘. Sch 9, 3 Density. ‘(1) Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each apartment, resulting in a density appropriate to the site and its context.

I will stop here, and simply refer you to the balance of criteria list in Schedule 9.

At paragraph 6.1 of the EIS there is the heading ‘Built Form and Urban Design’, wherein there is an attempt to downplay the severe and unacceptable impact of this proposed devolpment particularly on residents of Darley Street West, but also the wider Mona Vale suburb and village community.

Paragraph 6.3.1 of the EIS the developer addresses the Visual Impact, wherein it is said ‘ Due to the site having a greater height than that prevailing in the surrounding areas, the overall magnitude of the nature of the change proposed is moderate’ Without blinking it then proceeds with the further statement, ‘Whilst acknowledging that the proposal will have a visual impact, overall, on the balance of relevant considerations this impact is considered acceptable and as such, further assessment is not required’.

The impact would not be moderate but at the high end of extreme. The impact would be totally unacceptable. And further and close assessment is required in the context of the criteria detailed in Schedule 9. The development application should be refused through application of this legislative criteria.

Darley Street West Mona Vale is a street where the existing development is confined to suburban houses, apartments and townhouses limited to one storey above ground level. It is a quiet street with cul de sac or dead end, with limited street parking. The developer is proposing to create not one, but three six storey eyesore towers, totally out of keeping with existing character of the street, and Mona Vale village and suburb.

The size and bulk of the project is completely over the top and unacceptable, and as I have said does not meet legislative criteria, regardless of the attempt to sell the project through the filing of this EIS.

If this project is approved it creates a very dangerous precedent, that will over time destroy the suburb and it social fabric. The mistakes of the sixties and seventies will be repeated, such as happened in suburbs like Dee Why.

4. Flooding.
The site is classified at medium risk flood risk level with flood management planning control.
The EIS does not sufficiently address this risk, and proposes eleven (11) metre excavation, plus, for underground parking.

On 17 January 2026 there was severe flooding in our one (1) below ground level parking environment at 151-153 Darley Street West. The SES were called who did a wonderful job in arresting what could have serious damage to owners garages.

There was a similar event three years before that.

Climate change is resulting in more frequent and increasingly worse events, such as that which occurred on 17 January last.

On those occasions the water flowing down Darley Street West from the eastern end to the western was like Iguazu Falls. An exaggeration but I hope it creates a mental picture of the type of flooding that does occur.

I believe that there is a risk of damage and subsidence through the proposed excavation works, and structural damage to neighbouring properties, if this development is approved. I believe the above demonstrates there is a lack of flood resilient design, safety measures, and proof the development proposal will not worsen flooding in the street and neighbourhood.

5. Overshadowing and Solar Access
There will be profound overshadowing and greatly reduced ( and in some cases total) solar access, with the erection of three six storey tower eyesores, if the development is approved, particularly for 155-157 Darley Street West property owners.

6. Visitor Parking and Traffic, and Parking and Infrastructure resources in Mona Vale.

There is no visitor parking in the proposal. The claimed opportunity in the EIS for visitors to avail themselves of street parking is not correct. There is very limited parking available now.

There will a large increase in traffic in the one lane each way of Darley Street West, Darley Street and Pittwater Road, if the development application is approved. This will have a knock on effect for all residents in Mona Vale, and those travelling via Pittwater Road from suburbs such as Bayview and Church Point.

Parking in the village, and parking areas below Coles, Woolies and Aldi is already at capacity. The suburb does not have the infrastructure for large scale development, such as that demonstrated by this proposal.

7. Bushfire risk.

Whilst noting that the development application does not need to address this criterion, I would emphasise that is this is a real and present risk nonetheless. There is a golf course over the road from the proposed site. Heaven help those on the mid to upper floors, in the event of a bushfire, if this development proposal is approved.

Thank you for taking the time to read and consider this objection to the development proposal for 159-167 Darley Street West Mona Vale.

Regards,

David and Sheila Langford.

30 January 2026.

To Whom It May Concern,
Re: Development Application – 159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale
I write to formally lodge a strong objection to the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale.
I strongly oppose the proposal due to its unacceptable impacts on traffic congestion, parking availability, residential amenity, environmental conditions, limited local services and public transport, cumulative strain on infrastructure, and its incompatibility with the established character of the area. When considered both individually and cumulatively with other developments in Mona Vale, the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site and the surrounding road network.
Lack of Off-Street Visitor and Service Vehicle Parking
The proposal does not provide off-street parking for visitors or service vehicles. As a result, all visitor vehicles, along with delivery vans, tradespeople, cleaners, gardeners, and maintenance vehicles, will be required to find parking within the surrounding street network.
This street is a small cul-de-sac with limited capacity. Increased demand for on-street parking will reduce road width, restrict vehicle movement, and impede access for emergency vehicles, waste collection, and service vehicles. Vehicles circulating within the cul-de-sac while searching for parking will further increase congestion, turning movements, and safety risks.
The absence of dedicated visitor and service parking will directly contribute to congestion and is inconsistent with reasonable expectations for residential development in this location.
Inadequate and Incomplete Traffic Assessment
The traffic assessment submitted with the application significantly underestimates the true impacts of the development. It fails to adequately account for the cumulative effect of additional vehicle movements and associated parking demand, including delivery and courier vans, tradespeople and contractors, cleaners and maintenance services, and visitors.
These vehicles do not simply add to traffic volumes; they must also circulate within the cul-de-sac while searching for available parking. This will occur regularly and often during peak periods, compounding congestion, safety risks, and access constraints within the street and at nearby intersections.
Unsuitable Local Road Network and Limited Public Transport
Darley Street West is a small cul-de-sac that is not designed to accommodate increased traffic volumes or intensified parking demand. Turning movements are already constrained, and increased vehicle activity and parking will further reduce safety and manoeuvrability.
Public transport services in Mona Vale are limited, with infrequent bus services and restricted route coverage. As a result, residents, visitors, and service providers are highly car-dependent. The proposal does not adequately address this reliance on private vehicles, further increasing traffic and parking pressures.
Turning right from Darley Street West onto Pittwater Road is already difficult due to heavy traffic volumes, particularly during peak periods. Any additional traffic generated by the proposed development will exacerbate delays and increase the risk of accidents.
Unrealistic Affordable Housing Outcomes
The inclusion of affordable housing within this proposal is unrealistic given the prevailing property values in Darley Street West and the broader Mona Vale market.
Recent sales in Darley Street West include units selling for approximately $2.4 million, $3.9 million, and $4.8 million. These sale prices are consistent with broader Mona Vale market trends, where strong demand, limited supply, and proximity to services have resulted in sustained high property values.
In this context, the site is not suitable for delivering genuinely affordable housing. In practice, such dwellings are likely to be acquired by investors, potentially negatively geared during the mandated affordability period, and sold at a substantial profit once the 15-year period has elapsed. This does not meaningfully address housing affordability and does not deliver a lasting community benefit.
Environmental and Residential Amenity Impacts
There are existing environmental concerns in the area, including a nearby stormwater/sewage tank that frequently emits strong and unpleasant odours. This issue persists despite repeated attempts by the Water Board to resolve it.
Increasing residential density at 159–167 Darley Street West raises concerns regarding health, residential amenity, and the overall suitability of the site for intensified residential use.
Cumulative Impact on Mona Vale Shopping Centre
The scale of this development, when combined with other approved and proposed developments in Mona Vale, will have a significant cumulative impact on traffic congestion and parking availability in and around the Mona Vale shopping centre.
The centre already experiences congestion and parking shortages and functions as a regional service hub, attracting people from surrounding suburbs due to its banks, medical practices, and allied health facilities. Limited public transport options further increase reliance on private vehicles. The cumulative increase in residential density will place unacceptable pressure on already constrained roads and parking infrastructure.
Incompatibility with Surrounding Development
The proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West is not in keeping with the established scale, form, and character of surrounding properties. The area is characterised by lower-density residential development, and the proposal represents an overdevelopment that is inconsistent with the existing streetscape and neighbourhood character.
Conclusion
When considered in its entirety, and particularly in the context of cumulative development impacts and limited public transport provision in Mona Vale, the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West will place unacceptable pressure on local roads, parking, infrastructure, and residential amenity.
For these reasons, the proposed development should not be supported.
Yours sincerely,
Lynne Spencer

This proposed development takes advantage of recent NSW Government planning reforms that considers low and mid-rise (LMR) housing near town centers, as identified in Chapter 6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021. Whilst we support the intent of the planning reforms to deliver more housing, this proposal fails that test.

The purpose for the NSW Government to introduce mid-rise development was to increase housing supply in areas that can handle growth by replacing single dwelling land holdings with consolidated developments in suburbs that have major public transport infrastructure (ie trains). Along Darley Street West, Pittwater Road and many surrounding streets in Mona Vale NSW, the majority of sites are already townhouses (i.e. densified housing) with a few freestanding residences.

The proposed, three, 9 storey tower development far exceeds any built form in the suburb of Mona Vale.
The size, bulk and scale of this building is not in keeping with the character of the immediate neighbourhood. There is no residential building north of Narrabeen that resembles the sheer scale, density and height of the proposed development.

Consequently, this development, by virtue of its isolation from similar buildings, will not be in keeping with existing community design and amenity and will be a blight on the streetscape for generations. This application is no more than a “spot rezoning”. Such spot rezonings, in the past, have never been supported by Northern Beaches Council.

If this development were to be approved, and providing a precedent for future developers, two major negative impacts will occur long term;
1) The traffic volume will increase significantly on the surrounding residential roads, causing disruption, particularly during peak times. Also, safety concerns need to be considered due to the high numbers of children using Pittwater High School
2) The public transport bus system will become overcrowded. It is not possible to provide sufficient bus numbers to cater for passengers coming out of Mona Vale if the developments permitted with the rezoning were to go ahead. This would also cause overcrowding further down the bus route, as the buses are regularly full by the time they reach Collaroy. Buses simply cannot replicate the people moving capacity of trains!!!

It is our opinion, and the opinion of most local residents, consider that the proposed development is totally out of scale in terms of bulk and density for the site at 159-167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale. It detrimentally intrudes on many neighbouring properties and the development should be refused

I OBJECT to the State Significant Development Application SSD-91496958.

While I acknowledge the importance of delivering additional housing, including affordable housing, this SSDA raises SERIOUS AND UNRESOLVED CONCERNS regarding transport safety, infrastructure capacity, cumulative precinct-wide impacts, social equity, and the public interest.

In particular, the proposal FAILS to adequately address:

- Road capacity, traffic safety, emergency access and evacuation risk;
- Water, wastewater, stormwater/flooding and waste servicing capacity;
- The cumulative impacts of similar six-storey redevelopments now enabled in Mona Vale
- Northern Beaches Council’s formally minuted opposition to the NSW Government’s Low and Mid-Rise Housing reforms; and
- The significant social and housing equity impacts on older and retired residents arising from accelerated strata collective sales.

These points are expanded as follows:

1. Transport, Traffic and Road Safety Impacts

The proposal introduces 82 apartments (and includes only 10 affordable housing units) and 164 resident car spaces, replacing four detached dwellings. This represents a dramatic increase in density and vehicle movements on a short, constrained local street, with only a marginal increase in affordable housing.

The Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) is fundamentally inadequate. It:

- Assesses impacts in isolation, not cumulatively;
- Assumes unrealistic public transport mode share in a suburb with no rail and already congested bus services;
- Relies on outdated modelling more than five years old;
- Makes no allowance for visitor, trade or delivery parking; and
- Fails to demonstrate unimpeded access for emergency vehicles, including fire appliances and ambulances.

Darley Street West already experiences congestion, poor sightlines, and difficulty exiting safely at the Pittwater Road intersection. The addition of up to 164 vehicles will materially worsen these conditions and increase the risk of traffic injury or death for residents, pedestrians and cyclists.

The TIA also fails to consider:
- Peak-hour congestion impacts on Darley Street, Mona Vale Road and Pittwater Road;
- Emergency evacuation capacity during bushfire or other disasters; and
- Cumulative traffic impacts from other six-storey redevelopments enabled by the same planning reforms.

Approval would therefore exacerbate increasingly UNSAFE conditions and set a precedent for further intensification without commensurate road or transport upgrades.

2. Public Transport Capacity

The EIS assumes existing bus services can absorb increased demand but provides no evidence of spare capacity and no commitment from Transport for NSW to expand services.

Walking distance to bus stops does not equate to transport capacity. Approving high-density residential development without guaranteed transport upgrades is inconsistent with orderly and economic planning.

3. Water, Stormwater, Flooding and Servicing

The site is affected by overland flow paths and flooding constraints. While local mitigation is proposed, the EIS:

- Does not assess downstream impacts on the broader drainage network;
- Does not model cumulative impacts from further redevelopment in the catchment; and
- Does not demonstrate confirmed spare capacity in water or wastewater systems.

Infrastructure adequacy is assumed rather than proven and validated, with no funded upgrade commitments or delivery timelines. This shifts infrastructure risk onto the existing community which is UNACCEPTABLE.

4. Waste and Servicing Impacts

Waste management is assessed only at the site level. The EIS fails to adequately consider:

- Increased waste collection vehicle movements on constrained streets; and
- Cumulative impacts from multiple high-density developments.

5. Cumulative Impacts and Council Opposition

This proposal is among the first six-storey developments in Mona Vale arising from the NSW Government’s Low and Mid-Rise Housing reforms.

Northern Beaches Council has formally opposed these reforms, has publicly called for them to be abandoned or substantially revised, and has passed resolutions warning that the resulting uplift is not supported by existing or planned infrastructure.

Despite this, the SSDA is assessed as though infrastructure impacts can be managed site-by-site. This approach is fundamentally inconsistent with Council’s resolutions and ignores foreseeable, precinct-wide cumulative impacts.

6. Social and Housing Equity Impacts of Strata Renewal

The development uplift enabled by these reforms is accelerating collective (strata) sales of existing apartment buildings, particularly older complexes near centres such as Mona Vale.

While strata renewal is now permitted on a 75% approval threshold, the planning system must consider the social consequences of development patterns that materially increase redevelopment pressure.

For many older and retired residents, apartments represent long-term or retirement housing intended to support ageing in place. Forced participation in collective sale can cause severe disadvantage, as compensation based on market value does not reflect:

- Replacement costs within the same locality;
- Loss of established social networks;
- Increased transaction costs; or
- The inability of elderly residents to re-enter a rapidly escalating housing market.

At least two couples I am aware of in the Mona Vale area are currently subject to a forced collective sale process, under NSW strata law, and face DISPLACEMENT from the Mona Vale community where they planned to retire.

The nominal “market value” compensatoin offered by the developer is not sufficient to enable these retirees to purchase an equivalent home locally and therefore to remain in the Mona Vale community due to the significant additional imposed costs (eg stamp duty, legal fees etc) of a forced sale, compounded by the accelerating increases in real estate prices, themselves fueled in part by the recent extension of the first home owner grants. Such displacements are not isolated cases: rather they are a predictable outcome of early approvals that signal increasing re-development across the Mona Vale precinct.

Cumulatively, these policies and approvals produce DISPLACEMENT of older people, concomitant increased PRESSURE on aged-care services, and SOCIAL INEQUITY that is not addressed in the EIS and is directly relevant to the public interest under section 4.15 of the EP&A Act.

Noting that the Minister has NOT yet directed that a public hearing be held, I therefore REQUEST that the consent authority recommend the Minister direct that a PUBLIC HEARING should in fact be scheduled as soon as possible.

7. Inappropriate Growth in a Constrained Region

NSW planning has long recognised that not all regions can accommodate the same level of population growth. Areas such as the Blue Mountains, Ku-ring-gai and flood-prone parts of the Hawkesbury are subject to managed or constrained growth due to infrastructure, environmental and evacuation limits.

The Northern Beaches shares these constraints. It is geographically isolated, lacks rail infrastructure, relies on congested road corridors, and faces bushfire and evacuation risks that cannot be resolved through incremental development.

Applying uniform Low and Mid-Rise uplift targets to Mona Vale DISREGARDS these realities and SHIFTS State-wide housing pressure onto communities least able to absorb it.

8. The SSDA FAILS to Meet Legislated Requirements

The proposal FAILS TO SATISFY the requirements of section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 because it:

- FAILS to properly consider cumulative impacts (s 4.15(1)(a)(iv), (b));
- Relies on OUTDATED and inadequate traffic modelling, failing to demonstrate safe access and evacuation (s 4.15(1)(b), public interest);
- ASSUMES infrastructure adequacy without confirmed capacity or funded upgrades (s 4.15(1)(b));
- IGNORES formally expressed and documented local government opposition by the Northern Beaches Council, undermining orderly and economic planning (s 4.15(1)(a), (b));
- FAILS to adequately assess social and housing equity impacts, including displacement of older residents (s 4.15(1)(b));
- Sets an UNSAFE and UNSUSTAINABLE precedent for further redevelopment in a constrained precinct.

Conclusion and Requested Outcomes

Approval of this SSDA would:

- UNDERMINE locally-led planning;
- CONTRADICT Council’s formally expressed position;
- ADVERSELY affect liveability and amenity;
- CONTRAVENE legislated planning requirements;
- ERODE community trust in the NSW planning system.

In light of the above, I can only conclude that, this SSDA is:

- premature,
- infrastructure-deficient,
- socially inequitable,
- legislatively non-compliant and
- CONTRARY to the public interest.

I therefore REQUEST that the consent authority:

1. Given the significance of the concerns outlined above, advise the Minister to DIRECT that a public hearing be scheduled;

2. Give significant weight to Northern Beaches Council’s formally minuted OPPOSITION and DOCUMENT how this has been taken into account in coming to a decision on this SSDA;

3. Recognise the proponent’s failure to assess cumulative impacts, and REQUIRE RESUBMISSION by the proponent of a revised and compliant SSDA;

4. REQUIRE comprehensive, precinct-wide infrastructure modelling and funded upgrade commitments; and

5. REFUSE consent unless and the necessary infrastructure upgrades are demonstrably funded, and in place prior to completion of the project.

The proposal does not reflect the character of the surrounding streets, it will generate a very large volume of additional traffic which will have negative flow on affects to the Mona Vale Town Centre which does not have adequate parking and the flow of traffic which is already very slow. This project and others like it will ruin the the town centre through unwanted traffic conjestion

Submission to Northern Beaches Council concerning DA 2026/0033 at 159-167 Darley Street West Mona Vale
Name: Carol Duval
Address: 21/38 Park Steet, Mona Vale NSW 2013
Phone: 0424676139
Email: [email protected]
I would like to lodge a submission opposed to the proposed development DA 2026/0033 at 159-167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale.
(I attempted to upload a Word document but the portal would not allow me to do that. Apologies for the basic text submission.)

Last year I downsized from the lower north shore to Mona Vale, not far from the proposed development. Although my postal address is Park Street, my unit is on Pittwater Road.

After witnessing the transformation of much of the lower north shore where cottages and modest units are being demolished to make way for soulless tower blocks, with the ensuing loss of community cohesiveness and local character, I was looking forward to living in Mona Vale where these qualities have been preserved. Instead, it seems that this pretty little suburb is under attack by developers whose plans for expensive apartments will impact the village in multiple, negative ways. Here are just a few that concern me the most.

1. Water management
With only two roads exiting the peninsula, clogging the roads and building more dwellings is irresponsible. Climate change is already impacting our area with water run-off from the surrounding plateau and hills flooding low-lying areas which were formerly environmentally useful mangroves.
In the last few years we have experienced multiple flooding events in these low-lying areas. We must face the reality that many areas on the northern beaches face eventual devastation from flooding, erosion and bushfires, bringing further problems as many homes become uninhabitable. If this sounds alarmist, it is. Why not mitigate these future problems now rather than allow further development that will only increase them?

Why put our vulnerable area in the position that Somerset, UK, now finds itself? That is, why be forced to act reactively in the future rather than act proactively now?

This, from The Guardian last week after another flooding event:
Mike Rigby, the lead member for economic development, planning and assets on Somerset council, said the topography of Somerset – much of it low-lying and surrounded by high ground including Exmoor and the Blackdown Hills – made it susceptible to flooding.
The water poured off the hills into places where people live and work. “Because of that geography, we have a massive risk,” Rigby said.
Places that had not flooded before – such as the Wades’ street – had been hit this time. “We’ll have to investigate that.”
Rigby said the council tackled drains “reactively”. He said: “When they block and we find that out from our own observations or from reports from the public, we’ll go out and unblock them, but what we’d like to do, frankly, is to have a proactive function.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jan/28/somerset-flooded-residents-storm-chandra-water-managed

Regarding the development itself, the proposed three levels of underground parking would put it at risk of flooding during our now frequent downpours.

2. Increased Traffic Flow
The proposed development will worsen traffic within the local area putting potentially 164 cars on to quiet streets where traffic flow is already difficult, especially on garbage pick-up days. In addition, it seems that the plan does not allow for visitor parking, which exacerbates the problem even further.

The impact on the already busy intersection with Pittwater Rd, which children cross to reach Pittwater High School, will be significant. The same applies to the Park Street and Pittwater Rd intersection and the Bungan Street roundabout, which are already dangerous with cars turning to reach the shopping areas and heading towards the very busy Barrenjoey and Pittwater Roads.

With every development the increase in traffic becomes worse. Turning right into Park Street at the Pittwater/Barrenjoey Rd lights is already a bottle neck at busy times, with cars frequently stranded in oncoming traffic when Park Street is clogged with cars driving into and out of parking spots.

3. Pressure on public transport
If the NSW government wishes to increase housing along main transport hubs, building in the northern beaches will not fulfil this goal. With the typography of plateau, hills, bushland, valleys , flood zones and ocean, there is a limit as to what transport options are viable. The B-line bus service is very popular and already stretched and during peak hours, especially when school children are out, it is very difficult to find a seat. Further development will of course make this even worse. What might happen during bushfires if the two roads are blocked is another consideration that is rarely addressed.

4. Incompatibility with local area
The proposed development of six storeys is incompatible with its neighbours which are mainly single or two storey dwellings. Six storey buildings with all the attendant overshadowing, noise and light pollution problems, would be totally out of character and problematic for local residents.

5. Confused state government goals
If the state government’s intention is to increase the supply of affordable homes, this area will not accomplish this. Every new development here entails demolishing present dwellings to build luxury apartments and does nothing to achieve that goal. This area with its beaches mostly appeals to retirees and families. Mona Vale and surrounding suburbs are already well served for senior living and cashed-up downsizers. Developers are not interested in the kind of homes the area most needs, which are affordable homes for small households and families. Every new development now has required the demolition of exactly that sort of property i.e. family homes and affordable flats and townhouses.

Once approvals are granted and buildings are built, the damage is done. It is in the best interests of local residents and their wellbeing that our governments—local, state and federal—take a long term approach to environmental sustainability and population increase when planning and assessing what should happen in our built environment.

Yours sincerely
Carol Duval (owner)

Submission concerning Environmental Impact Statement SSD 91496958
159-167 Darley Street West Mona Vale

by
Bruce Lakin of 2/151-153 Darley Street West Mona Vale 2103


I wish to strongly object to the SSD 91496958 development for many reasons.
I seek your consideration of the following comments and request your rejection of this project.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT - 5.0

Despite the Trustees claims, under Appendix D&G, there has been minimal contact with affected residents in Darley Street West.
There has little evidence of this consultation
The Community information flyers appear to have been distributed at distance from the site of the development
NO email feedback has been received by Darley Street West residents
NO resident has disclosed the telephone survey. The report provided gives no detail of actual sample size.
However there was a webinar conducted on 2 October 2025 between 1880 -1900.
NO detailed project presentation was provided to Residents, beyond a Powerpoint summary showing an artist’s impression of the building profiles. The slides were not made available post webinar.
During this webinar the representatives of the Trustees announced that this session would satisfy the SSD legislative consultation requirement.
Many issues were raised by the approximately 40 attendees.

Significantly, NO modifications to the project are evident and many issues are acknowledged but remain unresolved.


RESIDENTIAL AMENITY - 6.2

NO INCREASE IN INFRASTRUCTURE
The project, as represented in Appendix B, gives no regard to the fact that
Darley Street West is a small cul-de-sac with a busy inspection with Pittwater Road and bounded
on the northern side by Bayview Golf Course.
There is
NO planned increase in the capacity of essential services, for example
NO increase in water supply,
NO increase in sewerage management,
NO increase in electricity supply,
NO increase in internet capacity
NO increase in onstreet parking

However there is a planned increase of 82 residences and extra 215 residents.
This will effectively double the population of a relatively small one way street!

TRAFFIC & PARKING - 6.4

INCREASE IN TRAFFIC, REDUCTION IN AVAILABLE CAR PARKING
The traffic study, under Appendix M, suggests an increase in traffic movement of 3 vehicle per house in AM peak and 3 vehicles per hour in PM peak.
It could be presumed that these are the same vehicles leaving and returning.
What are the users of the other 161 carparks in the development doing??

The Darley Street West/Pittwater Road intersection is very heavily used through the daylight hours. This development will apply much pressure to the existing load and there appears no planned action to manage this.

There is NO visitor parking included in this development!
The Trustees acknowledge that the Pittwater DCP requires 27 car parks for a development of this size but they incorrectly state that there is onstreet parking to accomodate the visiting parkers.
My complex of 12 residences provides 5 off street visitor car parks.
The limited available car parkingon Darley Street West is used by golfers attending the Bayview Golf Club, commuters using the Pittwater Rd bus stop, plus children in residence (who own cars) and visitors of residents.
There is NO capacity to service the requirements of this development.




WASTE MANAGEMENT - 6.9

The Trustees have offered a plan, under Appendix O, which under estimates the difficulty of managing waste bins in Darley Street West.
When the garbage trucks are operating, the street is effectively closed because there is no room to pass.This development will cause major disruption for the 24 hour period of bin collection.

My complex of 12 residences utilises the Council standard allocation of
4 x Red general waste, 2 x Yellow glass/plastic waste, 2 x Blue paper waste and 6 x Green green waste, totalling 14 bins for 12x 3 bedroom residences.
This development proposes the use of 72 bins for 82 residences.

This is clearly insufficient.


PROJECT JUSTIFICATION - 7.0

OVERDEVELOPMENT
This development is excessive and a imposition on the land and its community.
Darley Street West is a small one way street of mainly 2 storey town houses.
The density proposed is grossly in excess of what the domain can accomodate.
The Northern Beaches Council has conducted many studies to develop its LEP and DCP.
Notwithstanding the stated amendment to the density limit, the Council has previously rejected
development on this land for reasons of over development.

The community does not oppose development but any project should be consist with the existing landscape and definitely not of the size and scale of this project.

CONCLUSION - 8.0

MISLEADING STATEMENTS
There are many statements made in the EIS that do not represent the
current reality.
I suggest that these are made to conceal and/or minimise concern over certain elements of the project.

I am hopeful that examination by qualified personnel from NSW Planning will ensure that these are addressed.

I strongly object to the SSD 91496958 which I am positive will irrefutably change the character and landscape of the peaceful cull de sac I moved into several years ago. I object for the following reasons.
1. With 181 car spaces provided for the proposed SSD, the parking in Darley Street West and the traffic getting out of this street at the intersection of Pittwater Road will be a problem. Navigating our street when cars are parked either side and E bikes are whizzing up and down the street is already dangerous although infrequent at present. Getting out of our driveway is also going to be more difficult. and more dangerous. There are only 2 roads into and out of Mona Vale and they will suffer congestion in peak hour as parents ferry their children to and from school. More buses will be required and these will also increase traffic congestion
Mona Vale shops will be far more crowded where parking spots are already difficult to find.
2. There are already drainage problems in our street after heavy rain. For example, on Saturday night, the 17th of this month, most garages of units and town houses on the southern side flooded and had to be manually pumped out by residents. Next door to the proposed development (where there is an underground creek) the flooding was so bad they needed help from fire fighters.
3. The smell of sewage is detectable down the lower end of our cull de sac and especially strong after rain so with all 81 units situated right at the lower end, each occupied by possibly 2 or more people how will the sewage situation be dealt with? Hopefully the Water Board can alleviate this problem despite nothing having been done in all the years I have lived here.
4. I understand the need for more housing but I doubt whether Mona Vale will ever be 'affordable' for young families. Baby boomers who have chosen to downsize are the demographic in this street and many other Mona Vale streets where units and townhouses prevail. How does the developer get to have 3x 6 storey buildings and yet only one building will have so called affordable units for sale? Investors on high salaries are more likely to purchase the affordable units and as rents have to be kept low for 15 years will gain enormous tax benefits from negative gearing. The greedy developers and the wealthy investors are the main beneficiaries while we suffer the consequences of this inappropriate development.
For these reasons I am totally opposed to this SSD.
Diane Franklin

Objection to SSD -91496958 159-167 Darley Street West Mona Vale.
Reasons of objection
1. Increased traffic will put pressure on an already congested area. The Mona Vale village currently struggles to provide parking. Where are all the construction workers going to PARK???
2. Safety – Darley Street West is narrow and there will be nowhere for large vehicles to turn. Large vehicles will create POOR visibility and increase safety issues for car drivers and most importantly PEDESTRIANS. I personally walk past this area on a daily walk, and I am afraid the increase of large trucks and construction vehicles will put my safety at MAJOR RISK. If by chance there is an ACCIDENT how are EMERGENCY VEHICLES able to navigate, there is no way safe way to pass cars in this area. TRAFFIC will bank up come to a standstill and if this happens in SCHOOL time drop offs and pickups, MAJOR STRESS for both children and parents. It will IMPEDE response time. I live in the area, and my observation is there are a lot of EVs going through the area on a daily and nightly basis. Traffic management for safety reasons is required.
3. The scale - of the development is way out of proportion to the existing area and the shadow of such a large development that will be created will impact residents - NO SUN from 9am to 3pm, noise from the apartments, AIR CONDITIONERS, TV’S, LIGHT pollution and most importantly LOSS OF PRIVACY. The out of character scale will dominate and have adverse domination of the streetscape
4. Stormwater capacity - may I ask where all the water is going to go in a storm, the area is struggling to cope and the smell from the creek is off putting ALREADY.
The Government’s push for Affordable Housing is not really apparent to me in this application whom may I ask is going to be able to afford to purchase a unit?? Ten units out of 82?? Why only 10? It smacks of collaboration with the developers and to me seems there is NO TRANSPARENCY. It is a way for greedy developers to come into a beautiful area make their money and then hit the road once the damage has been done and for the residents and the people who love the area to be left with the consequences.
I am totally against this development on the grounds outlined above. It is totally out of character for Mona Vale and the infrastructure is not there to support it.
Yours Sincerely
Resident of Mona Vale
31.1.26

1. Introduction
I object to the proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale on the grounds that the traffic, access, and transport impacts have been significantly understated and are incompatible with the physical constraints of the street, the surrounding road network, and the transport limitations of the Northern Beaches.
The proposal will materially worsen congestion, reduce safety, impede emergency access, and place unreasonable pressure on a road system already operating beyond capacity.
2. Darley Street West is fundamentally unsuitable for increased traffic
2.1 The street is narrow, constrained, and heavily parked
Darley Street West is a narrow residential street with cars parked along both sides for most of the day. This reduces the effective carriageway to a single lane in many sections, forcing vehicles to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass.
The traffic report fails to acknowledge:
• The reduced lane width caused by constant on street parking
• The limited passing opportunities
• The poor sightlines created by bends and parked vehicles
Any increase in vehicle movements will amplify these constraints and create additional conflict points.
2.2 The site sits within a cul de sac
The development is located near the end of a cul de sac, meaning:
• All traffic must enter and exit via the same constrained point
• There is no alternative routing or dispersal
• Turning movements increase congestion and risk
Cul de sac locations are inherently unsuitable for medium density developments generating higher traffic volumes.
2.3 Traffic increase has been significantly understated
The proponent’s traffic modelling does not reflect real world conditions. It underestimates:
• Peak hour movements
• Visitor and service vehicle trips
• Deliveries, trades, and support services
• The higher car ownership rates typical of senior residents in areas with poor public transport
The modelling assumptions are unrealistic and materially downplay the true impact.



3. Dangerous intersection and traffic light conditions
The intersection at the entry to Darley Street West is already dangerous, with:
• Poor visibility
• High turning volumes
• Drivers accelerating to beat the lights
• Pedestrians crossing without dedicated protection
Adding more vehicles from this development will increase the risk of collisions and near misses.
4. Emergency vehicle access will be compromised
Darley Street West’s narrow, single lane conditions already make it difficult for large vehicles to pass. The increased traffic load will:
• Delay ambulances, fire trucks, and police vehicles attempting to reach properties in the cul de sac
• Increase the likelihood of blockages caused by parked cars, delivery vans, or service vehicles
• Reduce the ability of emergency vehicles to turn around or manoeuvre safely
• Create unacceptable response time delays for elderly residents, who are statistically more likely to require urgent medical assistance
Emergency access is a critical safety issue. Any development that worsens response times places lives at risk.
5. The development is likely to be occupied by seniors – increasing transport pressure
5.1 Steep topography makes walking impractical
The site sits at the bottom of a steep hill, making walking difficult for older residents or anyone with mobility limitations.
5.2 The nearest B Line stop is 1.1 km away (16 minute walk)
A 16 minute uphill/downhill walk is not realistic for seniors, especially in poor weather or with shopping, medical needs, or mobility issues.
5.3 No rail or light rail options exist
Unlike other Sydney regions, the Northern Beaches has:
• No train line
• No light rail
• No scalable mass transit alternative
Residents are therefore forced to rely on cars, increasing traffic volumes through Mona Vale and beyond.
6. Regional traffic constraints will worsen
6.1 More cars travelling north and south
Residents will need to drive for most trips, adding pressure to:
• Newport
• Avalon
• Palm Beach
• Mona Vale town centre
• The arterial routes toward Sydney
More cars and more buses mean more congestion, not less.
6.2 Mona Vale already experiences peak hour gridlock
Traffic regularly comes to a standstill due to:
• Vehicles entering from Powder Works Road
• Mona Vale Road narrowing into a “country lane” beyond the Bahá’í Temple
• Bottlenecks at roundabouts and traffic lights
The network is already at capacity.
6.3 Wakehurst Parkway closures worsen congestion
Wakehurst Parkway is regularly closed due to flooding, forcing all traffic onto Mona Vale Road.
Any additional vehicle load from this development will compound these unavoidable congestion events.
7. Parking shortages in Mona Vale town centre
Mona Vale suffers from:
• Chronic parking shortages
• Drivers circling for spaces
• Traffic backing up as vehicles wait to reverse into spots
• Frequent road rage incidents caused by delays
Adding more residents who must drive to access shops, services, and transport will worsen these conditions.
8. Conclusion
The proposed development at 159–167 Darley Street West presents unacceptable traffic, access, emergency response, and transport impacts that cannot be mitigated within the constraints of the existing road network.
The street is too narrow, the cul de sac location is inappropriate, the traffic increase is understated, and the broader Mona Vale transport system is already overburdened.
The steep topography, distance to public transport, and lack of scalable mass transit mean residents will rely heavily on cars, further worsening congestion, safety risks, and emergency vehicle delays.
For these reasons, the development should be refused on traffic, access, and emergency response grounds.

The proposal for a 6 storey building - more than 800 meters from central Monavale - is developement overklill. The addition of 160 cars onto a short hilly dead end street is just a disaster with already limited visibility. Currently there is a constant stream which runs underneath this block and you will create a 3 storey parking pool - current buildings run pumps continuously to cope with water flow. Sydney Water sewage is just 200 meters down the hill. It already overflows after heavy rain - WE can only imagine what it would be like with another 80 apts .
A 2/3 storey developement woul;d be acceptable to local residents Thats it!!!

This development is totally inappropriate for this site. While i am not anti development, they must be sympathetic with the environment, infrastructure and local residents. The additional traffic feeding into an already overloaded Pittwater Rd is not sustainable. I challenge the decision makers to visit the Darley St and Pittwater Rd intersection at peak times and school drop off and pick up times.
Then we have these faceless developers making the planning departments look like amateurs by taking advantage of 'affordable housing' exemptions to grossly over develop this site.
Let's look at development in Mona Vale as one, not as a number of individual developments. That way we can have responsible development and still preserve our suburb.

I strongly object to the planned overdevelopment at 159-167 Darley Street West, Mona Vale.

Traffic congestion in Mona Vale will be a MAJOR outcome if this development is allowed to proceed.
There are two primary schools within 400m. People who live further away often drive their children to/from school, in the mornings and afternoons. Residents of Church Point, Bayview and the area around Cabbage Tree Road, Mona Vale drive along Pittwater Road, often having to stop at lights at the Darley Street West intersection, before attempting to turn right into Park Street.
Similarly, Pittwater High School is within 400m. Again, drop offs/pick ups/driving to and from school, plus buses, cause a build up of traffic before and after school, especially at the aforementioned traffic lights. With the additional cars expected to exit from the proposed development, there will be major hold ups, especially if attempting to turn right into Pittwater Road. As it is, the village of Mona Vale already becomes highly congested at peak times, especially at the roundabout on the corner of Bungan Street and Pittwater Road.
I wonder - just how many more cars are the two roads in and out of Mona Vale, i.e Mona Vale Road and Pittwater Road, expected to service?
Clearly, 3 x apartment towers in Darley Street West, consisting of 82 apartments, will play absolute havoc with traffic entering and driving along Pittwater Road.

I have concentrated on just one area of concern I have for this development. However, I seriously question:
1. How these oversized towers will in anyway assist the NSW government’s desire to provide housing for essential workers. Sure, 10 of them may be dedicated to essential workers ….. but at what price? The remaining 72 apartments will sell for between 2 and 3 million dollars each - hardly affordable housing!
2. The overall visual impact this development will have is massively out of character with the surrounding neighbourhood, a cul de sac made up substantially of townhouses just 2 storeys high.
3. As well, I sure have sympathy for the adjacent block of town houses to the east of the planned development, which will suffer from a massive amount of afternoon shadowing.
4.My final objection to this planned development is to do with drainage. Whenever we have a major storm (twice over the past year) the garage of my town house at 151-153 Darley Street West has flooded. Thank goodness the RFS arrived in time to help pump out the storm water, on the last occasion. But will residents at the planned development be happy to find their underground garages flooded??? I think not.