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

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.

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.

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.