I am very concerned that my previous submission has not been adequately considered. The risks associated with bushfires are real and continuing to affect the lives of residents in the Roseville West Ward community. Ongoing traffic issues are also significant and worsening over time. Approving this project without properly addressing these serious community concerns would be irresponsible and reckless.

I formally oppose this project and request that the planning office provide a clear explanation of how approval could be granted without fully considering and addressing the above concerns.

I am deeply concerned that my previous submission has not been adequately considered by the planning office. The risks associated with bushfires are so real and continuing to affect the lives of residents in the Roseville West Ward community. Ongoing traffic issues are also significant and worsening over time. Approving this project without properly addressing these serious community concerns would be irresponsible and reckless.

The developments in roseville west are already over populated, I don't understand why any new development will still be considered. I formally oppose this project and request that the planning office provide a clear explanation of how approval could be granted without fully considering and addressing the above community concerns.

As a longtime resident on Corona ave, I am very concerned that my submission has not been adequately considered. The risks associated with bushfires are clear and continuing to affect the lives of residents in the Roseville West Ward community. Ongoing traffic issues are also significant and worsening everyday. Approving this project without properly addressing these serious community concerns would be irresponsible and reckless.

I formally oppose this project and request that the planning office provide a clear explanation of how approval could be granted without fully considering and addressing the above concerns.

I am deeply concerned that my previous submission has not been adequately considered. The risks associated with bushfires are real and continuing to affect the lives of residents in the Roseville West Ward community. Ongoing traffic issues are also significant and worsening over time. Approving this project without properly addressing these serious community concerns would be irresponsible and reckless.

I formally oppose this project and request that the planning office provide a clear explanation of how approval could be granted without fully considering and addressing the above concerns.

I have previously made an objection submission to this development. Unfortunately, none of the objections have been looked into especially significant issues with traffic which appear to be largely overlooked by the approval process. A major issue is the driveway entry/exit onto Maclaurin Pde that remains which is an extremely dangerous choice and has to be moved to Pockley Ave.
Now the development has been made worse due to the following:
going even taller,
taking away car spaces,
increasing dwelling numbers,
Increasing floor space ratio
All of the above impacts' bushfire evacuation for all of us and is a potential litigation issue if the emergency services cannot access properties and we cannot evacuate.

SSD-77825469 - 2-16 Pockley Ave, Roseville, NSW, 2069
My objection is for the following reasons:-
1) This project, along with other projects within the vacinity will create high volumes of traffic which will impact access to Pacific Highway (both in and out) for all residents. Other zonings around this development are even more dense and will, in the future, add to these traffic volumes immensely. Our access via Maclaurin Pde traffic lights is already problematic and this increase in traffic movements will create real traffic problems causing gridlock at Maclaurin Pde and Pacific Highway. Traffic studies need to be done for the precinct as a whole taking into account the cumulative effect of all future developments now that the state government have finalised land zonings. This should include proper consultation with the local residents who know and understand the area.
We currently have 3 projects that are still in building stage and these will add another 167 car parks from these 3 projects. The extra traffic volumes are yet to be tested and I envisage we won't know the impact that this extra traffic will have until say December 2026.
2. The precinct's streets are full of winding streets, narrow lanes, narrow streets and blind corners and I envisage problems with feeder streets entering Maclaurin Pde ie Nola Ave, Pockley Ave and Larkin Street and Larkin Lane.
3. Bushfire Evacuation Hazzard - Our safety and amenity is jeopardised by your authorities simply ignoring the facts that Alexander Pde and Findlay Ave both back onto BUSHFIRE PRONE LAND and it is not unreasonable to state that an LA BUSHFIRE DISASTER OR A KOOLEWONG BUSHIRE EVENT could and most likely will occur in this area at some time in the future as they have occurred back in 1994 and early 2000's. Bushfires race up a hill very quickly (the steep gradient of Maclaurin Pde and Pockley Ave are examples of this type of scenario).
Evacuation in this situation would be very difficult and problematic. I even wonder how the fire brigade would even get to a fire in our precinct as traffic along Pacific Highway increases every year and will eventually choke and gridlock the highway preventing ambulances and fire trucks to get to a disaster. Fires spread by embers and when windy they spread like wildfire.
4. The buildings are too high especially when taken into account that they sit on a steep slope blocking sunlight, overshadowing and creating hard surfaces for water runoff.
5. Sewerage Pipes
I do wonder what impact this and surrounding developments will have on our old sewerage systems and whether they will be able to cope.
I object to this development as to it is too high and dense for the site. That it, along with future developments make bushfire evacuation very difficult and impossible for residents to escape a bushfire. By approving this development it sets a PRECEDENT for height and density. Planning should be HOLISTIC taking into account cumulative traffic increases etc and not on a stand-a- lone basis.
6. The entry/exit at Maclaurin Pde will prove to be dangerous and would be better placed in Pockley Ave or Larkin Street.
There is a huge volume of apartments that you, the State Government have approved for West, South Roseville Precinct , the number of apartments I have estimated as something like 3,500 apartments (and it is probably more) which means traffic increase of say 5,250 vehicles.
This precinct cannot take this increase in traffic and you must not approve this development without taking future developments into account.

Being a resident in 9-15 Kings Avenue 2069 I object on a number of grounds:
- Predominately the traffic and access to and from the neighbouring streets,
- limited off street parking on a steep hill
- no continuous footpath exists from Pockley Avenue or Maclaurin Parade that runs to the Pacific Highway for the disabled or people with prams or bicycles
- pedestrian and child safety on a steep, narrow and busy street
- lack of children's playgrounds/areas
- lack of supporting infrastructure including lack of available schools (only private schools in the area which would contradict the "affordable housing" basis for the development); all the surrounding public and private schools are already at maximum capacity
- no existing childcare centres in the immediate area - further exacerbating the traffic problem
- the overpowering bulk of the proposed development,
- the visual and noise impact of it and the dramatic effect of traffic noise on the surrounding (steep hillside) streets as traffic attempts to access the Pacific Highway.
- the amended proposal has increased the height of the development, reduced the number of car parking spaces, increased the number of dwellings and increased the floor space ratio.
- the amended proposal also includes a communal rooftop - creating the strong possibility of additional noise from groups using the rooftop in a quiet suburban neighbourhood and valley where the smallest of noises carries across significant areas
- the relevant issues raised in objections to the original submission have been ignored out of hand
- there is no provision for the evacuation of residents in the case of a bush fire
- further complicating an existing issue with access of emergency services to the area during any event.

My further objections are as follows.


Visual/Environmental Impact
The transition from a single storey property at number 6 Kings Avenue that lies at the bottom of McLaurin Parade/ Pockley Avenue means this single-family residence will lie immediately adjacent to a ten-storey apartment block, restricting daylight, sun and creating an undesirable visual impact - lying some three metres lower than the lowest part of the proposed development.

The height of the ten-storey building C significantly impacts on the apartments of the mid-rise flatted development at 9-15 Kings Ave, overpowering it and reducing sunlight.

The applicant’s proposal is twice the height of the highest recent developments and EIS 4.8 shows the massing of Block C to be the greatest of the three towers at the point where it has most adverse impact to properties at the bottom of Mclaurin Parade.

The applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIA) is only a desk top study and not based on an actual traffic study. It makes no reference to the implications of the additional vehicles accessing the Pacific Highway from the 178 properties in this development or the Cumulative Impact of the new developments in Corona Avenue, Pacific Highway, McLaurin Parade, Larkin Lane and Pockley Avenue. These will in result in 425 properties seeking to access Pacific Highway at the Mclaurin Parade junction without recognition of that or there are likely to be further applications in the future.

Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA)

TIA 3.1 Road Hierarchy

The comments do not reflect the status of Pacific Highway at the junction with Mclaurin Parade. The Pacific Highway is two lanes, not three, in both directions with one southbound turning bay. The increased traffic from the proposed development at this bottleneck will lead to significant congestion at the junction, on McLaurin Parade and the streets leading to it. McLaurin Parade is both a school bus route and path for emergency vehicles with congestion leading to delays and danger, in particular in the event of bush fires which have previously encroached on Finlay Avenue (1994). In addition, Maclaurin Parade is an extremely steep and narrow street but limited in its length. With additional traffic it will increase noise, will be high risk of accident and increased risk of an injury/ fatality of pedestrians with prams and or disabled/wheelchair bound people trying to get to the Pacific Highway and the Roseville Station.

TIA 3.6 Projected Traffic Generation

Claims. “That projected change in the traffic generation potential of the site as a consequence of the development proposal is minimal and will clearly not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity”. This assessment refers only to the capacity of pacific Highway and does not take account of traffic entering from Mclaurin Parade, the only controlled junction allowing traffic to access the Pacific Highway in both directions. Accessing the Pacific Highway from Maclaurin Parade is already problematic due to vehicles blocking the intersection - this will be exacerbated with such a significant number of additional vehicles, should the development be approved. A proposal to connect Pockley Avenue to Shirley Avenue is not assured to meet the needs of access and egress of traffic to the area and a full assessment is necessary.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIS)

2.2.8 Surrounding Development

Asserts in support of the application that the area has both medium and high-density residential development. This is inaccurate and the proposed development is twice the height of the most recent development - which is already significant.

Operational Traffic Management

Asserts in support of the development “the development will not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity” This statement takes no account of the impact of the area being nominated as a TOD and the 425 additional properties recently completed or proposed in current applications. No consideration has been given to already approved projects that are yet to be completed nor any future development applications.

Community Feedback.

Environmental Impact Assessment EIS 6.2

Multiple respondents expressed concern regarding the implications for traffic accessing the Pacific Highway Traffic & on-street parking

• Multiple attendees from the drop-in session noted existing difficulties with respect to accessing the Pacific Highway particularly during peak hours. There is limited right-turn access from Maclaurin Parade onto the Pacific Highway, which creates congestion by preventing left-turning vehicles from proceeding.

• Concerns were highlighting existing challenges with on-street parking and sought assurances on parking provisions within the development.

• Concerns in relation to adding new dwellings on an already congested access point to the Pacific Highway, particularly considering another development under construction at the corner of Pacific Highway and Maclaurin Parade.
No recognition or mitigation is planned for the concerns raised and a connection to Shirley Avenue will create an undesirable ‘rat run’ through narrow residential streets.

Green Travel Plan

The Green Travel Plan does not meet the objectives of:
Reducing Dependence on Private Cars
Reducing Congestion in the Local Area
In fact, it is highly likely that there will be significant increases in dependence on private vehicles and congestion - which is confirmed by the amended development to increase the number of parking spaces on the development site. If the principle is to develop close to public transport hubs and railway stations, it should not be necessary to provide parking for 250 cars for 178 apartments.

Cumulative Impacts

EIS 3.4 Recognises that future development in the catchment area should be a consideration for cumulative impacts (of the area being designated a TOD)

Conclusion

The proposed development exceeds the guidelines, seeking to maximise the apartment numbers and in doing so has an undesirable impact on the neighbouring properties. Block C should be reduced in height to allow for a sympathetic transition from the single storey house adjacent and reduce overshadowing the property at 9-15 Kings Ave.

The impact of the additional traffic from this proposal cannot be taken in isolation and approval should be withheld until Ku ring gai council has completed its Traffic Study, identifying the full traffic impact and proposed solutions to the increased volume of traffic for the whole area within the TOD.

I am a resident of 9-15 Kings Avenue 2069 I objected to the extension of height (from 8-10 stories) of the proposed development, the visual impact of it and the dramatic effect on the surrounding streets of the traffic accessing the Pacific Highway. The amended proposal has increased the height of the development, reduced the number of car parking spaces, increased the number of dwellings and increased the floor space ratio.

The issues raised in objections to the original submission have been ignored outright further impacting the bush fire evacuation issues and restricting the access of emergency services to the area during an event.

My further objections to the proposal are as follows.
Visual/Environmental Impact
The transition from a single storey property at number 6 Kings Avenue that lies at the bottom of McLaurin Parade/ Pockley Avenue means this single-family residence will lie immediately adjacent to a ten-storey apartment block, restricting daylight, sun and creating an undesirable visual impact, lying some three metres lower than the lowest part of the proposed development.
The height of the ten-storey building C significantly impacts on the apartments of the mid-rise flatted development at 9-15 Kings Ave, overpowering it and reducing sunlight.

The applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIA) is not based on an actual traffic study. There is no reference to the implications of the additional vehicles accessing the Pacific Highway this development or the Cumulative Impact of the new developments in Corona Avenue, Pacific Highway, McLaurin Parade, Larkin Lane and Pockley Avenue. These will in result in 425 properties seeking to access Pacific Highway at the Mclaurin Parade junction .

Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA)
TIA 3.1 Road Hierarchy
The comments do not reflect the status of Pacific Highway at the junction with Mclaurin Parade. The Pacific Highway is two lanes, not three, in both directions with one southbound turning bay. The increased traffic from the proposed development at this bottleneck will lead to significant congestion at the junction, on McLaurin Parade and the streets leading to it. McLaurin Parade is both a school bus route and path for emergency vehicles with congestion leading to delays and danger in particular in the event of bush fires.

TIA 3.6 Projected Traffic Generation
Claims. “That projected change in the traffic generation potential of the site as a consequence of the development proposal is minimal and will clearly not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity”. This is a clearly misguided statement with no factual assessment of the actual capacity of traffic entering up ONTO the pacific highway. This assessment refers only to the capacity of pacific Highway and does not take account of traffic entering from Mclaurin Parade, the only controlled junction allowing traffic to access the Pacific Highway in both directions. A proposal to connect Pockley Avenue to Shirley Avenue is not assured to meet the needs of access and will only create significant rat runs through local streets.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIS)
2.2.8 Surrounding Development
Asserts in support of the application that the area has both medium and high-density residential development. This is inaccurate and the proposed development is twice the height of the most recent buildings. The proposed development is also in the valley and there has been no assessment of the noise travel from the proposal to include communal rooftop spaces where many residents could potentially gather and create an absolute wave of noise into the surrounding valley where the sound is trapped and bounces.

Operational Traffic Management
Asserts in support of the development “the development will not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity” This statement takes no account of the impact of the area being nominated as a TOD and the 425 additional properties recently completed or proposed in current applications. No consideration has been given to future applications.

Community Feedback.
Environmental Impact Assessment EIS 6.2
Multiple respondents expressed concern regarding the implications for traffic accessing the Pacific Highway Traffic & on-street parking
• Multiple attendees from the drop-in session noted existing difficulties with respect to entering Pacific Highway
during peak hours. There is limited right-turn access from Maclaurin Parade onto the Pacific Highway, which creates congestion by
preventing left-turning vehicles from proceeding.
• Concerns were highlighting existing challenges with on-street parking and sought assurances on parking provisions within the development.
• Concerns in relation to adding new dwellings on an already congested access point to the Pacific Highway, particularly considering another development under construction at the corner of Pacific Highway and Maclaurin Parade.

Cumulative Impacts
EIS 3.4 Recognises that future development in the catchment area should be a consideration for cumulative impacts (of the area being designated a TOD)
Council feedback
Ku ring gai Council was asked:
Q: Why has Council prepared the housing scenarios prior to having traffic studies completed?
A: Council was given minimal warning before the NSW Government’s TOD provisions commenced in May 2024. Accordingly, due to time constraints Council commenced supporting studies including Traffic Impact Assessments while simultaneously investigating alternate housing scenarios. The Traffic studies are expected to be completed later this year subject to TfNSW’s time to review and respond.
Conclusion
The proposed development exceeds the guidelines, seeking to maximise the apartment numbers and in doing so has an undesirable impact on the neighbouring properties. Block C should be reduced in height to allow for a sympathetic transition from the single storey house adjacent and reduce overshadowing the property at 9-15 Kings Ave.
Approval should be withheld until Ku ring gai council has completed its Traffic Study, identifying the full traffic impact and proposed solutions to the increased volume of traffic for the whole area within the TOD.

Being a resident in 9-15 Kings Avenue 2069 I objected to the overpowering bulk of the proposed development, the visual impact of it and the dramatic effect on the surrounding streets of the traffic accessing the Pacific Highway. I now find the amended proposal has increased the height of the development, reduced the number of car parking spaces, increased the number of dwellings and increased the floor space ratio.

The relevent issues raised in objections to the original submission have been ignored out of hand further impacting the bush fire evacuation issues and restricting the access of emergency services to the area during an event.

My further objections are as follows.


Visual/Environmental Impact
The transition from a single storey property at number 6 Kings Avenue that lies at the bottom of McLaurin Parade/ Pockley Avenue means this single-family residence will lie immediately adjacent to a ten-storey apartment block, restricting daylight, sun and creating an undesirable visual impact. This will be exacerbated by 6 Kings Avenue and 4a-10 Mclaurin Parade lying some three metres lower than the lowest part of the proposed development.

The height of the ten-storey building C significantly impacts on the apartments of the mid-rise flatted development at 9-15 Kings Ave, overpowering it and reducing sunlight.

The applicant’s proposal is twice the height of the highest recent developments and EIS 4.8 shows the massing of Block C to be the greatest of the three towers at the point where it has most adverse impact to properties at the bottom of Mclaurin Parade.

The applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIA) is only a desk top study and not based on an actual traffic study. It makes no reference to the implications of the additional vehicles accessing the Pacific Highway from the 178 properties in this development or the Cumulative Impact of the new developments in Corona Avenue, Pacific Highway, McLaurin Parade, Larkin Lane and Pockley Avenue. These will in result in 425 properties seeking to access Pacific Highway at the Mclaurin Parade junction without recognition of that or there are likely to be further applications in the future.

Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA)

TIA 3.1 Road Hierarchy

The comments do not reflect the status of Pacific Highway at the junction with Mclaurin Parade. The Pacific Highway is two lanes, not three, in both directions with one southbound turning bay. The increased traffic from the proposed development at this bottleneck will lead to significant congestion at the junction, on McLaurin Parade and the streets leading to it. McLaurin Parade is both a school bus route and path for emergency vehicles with congestion leading to delays and danger in particular in the event of bush fires which have previously encroached on Finlay Avenue (1994).

TIA 3.6 Projected Traffic Generation
Claims. “That projected change in the traffic generation potential of the site as a consequence of the development proposal is minimal and will clearly not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity”. This assessment refers only to the capacity of pacific Highway and does not take account of traffic entering from Mclaurin Parade, the only controlled junction allowing traffic to access the Pacific Highway in both directions. A proposal to connect Pockley Avenue to Shirley Avenue is not assured to meet the needs of access and egress of traffic to the area and a full assessment is necessary.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIS)

2.2.8 Surrounding Development
Asserts in support of the application that the area has both medium and high-density residential development. This is inaccurate and the proposed development id twice the height of the most recent.

Operational Traffic Management
Asserts in support of the development “the development will not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity” This statement takes no account of the impact of the area being nominated as a TOD and the 425 additional properties recently completed or proposed in current applications. No consideration has been given to future applications.

Community Feedback.

Environmental Impact Assessment EIS 6.2
Multiple respondents expressed concern regarding the implications for traffic accessing the Pacific Highway Traffic & on-street parking

• Multiple attendees from the drop-in session noted existing difficulties with respect to
accessing the Pacific Highway particularly during peak hours. There is limited right-turn
access from Maclaurin Parade onto the Pacific Highway, which creates congestion by
preventing left-turning vehicles from proceeding.
• Concerns were highlighting existing challenges with on-street parking and sought
assurances on parking provisions within the development.
• Concerns in relation to adding new dwellings son an already congested access point t
the Pacific Highway, particularly considering another development under construction at
the corner of Pacific Highway and Maclaurin Parade.

No recognition or mitigation is planned for the concerns raised and a connection to Shirley Avenue will create an undesirable ‘rat run’ through narrow residential streets.

Green Travel Plan
The Green Travel Plan does not meet the objectives of

Reducing Dependence on Private Cars
Reducing Congestion in the Local Area

If the principle is to develop close to public transport hubs and railway stations, it should not be necessary to provide parking for 250 cars for 178 apartments.

Cumulative Impacts
EIS 3.4 Recognises that future development in the catchment area should be a consideration for cumulative impacts (of the area being designated a TOD)

Council feedback

Ku ring gai Council was asked:
Q: Why has Council prepared the housing scenarios prior to having traffic studies
completed?

A: Council was given minimal warning before the NSW Government’s TOD provisions
commenced in May 2024. Accordingly, due to time constraints Council commenced supporting studies including Traffic Impact Assessments while simultaneously investigating alternate housing scenarios. The Traffic studies are expected to be completed later this year subject to TfNSW’s time to review and respond.

Conclusion
The proposed development exceeds the guidelines, seeking to maximise the apartment numbers and in doing so has an undesirable impact on the neighbouring properties. Block C should be reduced in height to allow for a sympathetic transition from the single storey house adjacent and reduce overshadowing the property at 9-15 Kings Ave.

The impact of the additional traffic from this proposal cannot be taken in isolation and approval should be withheld until Ku ring gai council has completed its Traffic Study, identifying the full traffic impact and proposed solutions to the increased volume of traffic for the whole area within the TOD.

The Traffic Jam is very serious now. All residents in the Findlay Ave, Alexander Parade, Kings Ave, Corona Ave, Maclaurin Parade, Pockley Ave, Larkin st Roseville need turn to Chatswood / city direction and boundary street at the traffic light at Maclaurin Parade / Pacific High way . As the distance between the traffic light at Maclaurin Parade / Pacific High way and the traffic light at boundary street / Pacific High way is very short. therefore It is very hard for local residences to turn to Pacific Hig Way at Maclaurin Parade traffic light. The proposal development project has 180 apartments with 284 car parks will definitely make the current serious traffic issue even more worse. The Pockley Ave is the highest point in terms of terrain.The proposed project has 10 stories which will make the surrounding residents feel very oppressed.