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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I am a long-term resident of Corona Avenue, having lived here for over 15 years. One of the main reasons I cherish this area is the surrounding natural environment, including the Blue Gum High Forest and the native wildlife it supports.

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

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

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

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

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

I respectfully request that the committee deny the current applications and require the developer to submit a revised proposal with a more appropriate number of units and a comprehensive plan to mitigate the impacts on local infrastructure and the environment.

There are too many high rise building built or is building, there is no way to turn to south on Pacific highway . so no more building in a heritage listed street.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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