Redevelopment of Greenwich Hospital (Concept)

Submission received 18/2/19
This absurd over the top over development that will cause major
traffic congestion in such a small area. Allowing such a large
development will cause parking problems as well as problems for
residents of St Vincents road trying to access their properties. It
will also be a major concern for the safety of school children that
use St Vincents road on their way too and from school. The green space
will be severely compromised.

Most of the trees adjoining St'Vincents Road are heritage listed and
therefore under no circumstances should be cut down.
The development should not be allowed in its current format and MUST
be reduced in size for the safety of residents and their quality of
life.

Submission received 25/03/19
SENIORS LIVING UNITS/VILLAS  Validity of building on "health
services facilities" zoned land - Hospital zoned SP-2. They do not
meet the objectives of the SEPP which is to provide facilities used to
promote the maintenance or improvement of health, or restoration to
health, or prevention of disease or treatment to injury to persons.
The building of residential "Seniors Living Apartments and Villas",
thus does not meet the objectives of the special uses zoning of the
site for hospital use.  The use of hospital land for seniors
living will cause that land to be lost to public infra-structure
forever and prevent the hospital from expansion when needed in the
years to come
 Height, bulk, scale - loss of amenity to hundreds of nearby
residents due to this and not compatible with current residential
buildings, expectations of residents, or the landscape.
 Destruction of the natural environment to build them. Villas
and underground car park would take bushland and valuable wildlife
habitat that many have worked hard to preserve, including Lane Cove
Council
HERITAGE ISSUE
 The height of the proposed main hospital building causes it
to dominate Pallister House and diminish views towards it and forever
impair the immediate environment of this Heritage-registered grand
residence
 The removal of trees and garden walls and the building of
villas within the curtilage will change the character of Pallister
House; thus Villas are unnecessary and inappropriate on Pallister
House's Heritage-zoned land
 The total area of Lot 4 is part of the Pallister House
grounds and, as such, is protected under the NSW Heritage Act, making
it illegal to build anything on it, let alone residential dwellings
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS, AMENITY AND BUSHLAND PRESERVATION
&; The removal of over 50% of the trees on the site, most associated
with the Seniors Living Apartments and Villas, will drastically change
the nature of the site and remove its "bush environment" forever.
Removal of much of the under-storey will exacerbate that.  The
affect that the proposal will have on the surrounding bushland. `The
development' includes buildings, internal roads, paving, landscaping
and terracing and storm-water works. It is incalculable what the
effects will eventually be on the surrounding bushland and Gore Creek
Valley. &; Habitat destruction. Many large and important trees are
slated for removal to build these buildings and that will destroy the
habitat of many kinds of aves (birds), reptiles, insects, arachnids
(spiders), and so on and their breeding territories forever gone.
&; Additional to visual overbearing by the over-sized hospital and
Seniors Living Apartment blocks, local residents will suffer from
privacy intrusion from residents & patients, lights operating 24 hours
per day, and increased noise from the activities associated with these
buildings - all incompatible with normal residential living
&; The building and improvement of roads in the hospital grounds will
cause vastly increased traffic with its consequent noise and lights,
thus damaging the amenity of nearby

The proposal has merit. I would like to see an increase in beds limit to
well over 50 beds as there appears to be a great need for these as the
population will increase in the Lane Cove area because of all the
units being built and the aging population. Also the retention of
hospital stays in separate accommodation has merit. My sister-in-law
was able to stay when ill but was able to prepare own meals etc. She
lives in the country and was able to live in whilst being treated and
we looked after her daughter.
I would like to ensure a new physiotherapy pool be built as well as a
more modern area for physio.
I am hoping a comfortable veranda is built for patients and visitors
to enjoy. This is a great facility.
Ensure greater security in the new complex. And increased parking
facilities. Good luck.

I voice my objection on the current proposal on the following items:
2 x New 7 storey Seniors Living Apartment blocks on Lower Carpark is
far in excess of current local surroundings and will create damage to
the local environment.
Impact on Greenwich Public school
Noise and Privacy impacts
Peak hour gridlock due to Traffic increases on River Road and St
Vincents Rd
Removal of trees on west and south perimeter facing Northwood
I reside in Fleming St, Northwood and it is already a nightmare trying
to exit on to River Rd, further traffic will be a disaster.

If an impact traffic study been obtained, these should be made
available and should include times and dates of the study.

I object to the development because it will generate more traffic in that
already busy area and will make it more dangerous for the children at
Greenwich School

1. It is a gross over-development of the site.
2. I am very sad at the proposed loss of so many trees.
3. I query the appropriateness of luxury villas for Seniors on this
site.
4. It is disappointing that the time frame for responses is so short.
5. The increase in height compared to the existing building will look
much greater because of its proximity to bushland and the Bob Campbell
Oval.
6. Impact on the amenity of Gore Creek Reserve, which has been
carefully managed by Lane Cove Council for decades, will be huge
because of the height and extent of the buildings, the loss of trees,
and the inevitable impact on the small waterfall (loved by many
residents).

I object to the development due to its size and height will have huge
impact to the area.

I have concerns about the proposed development of Greenwich Hospital. I
don't understand why a previous public health facility is now being
exploited for profit by a private company.

I have worked at the site and it is a unique setting with enormous
potential to provide health services to the community.

I have lived in Greenwich for 54 years and during that time the density
of the area has increased exponentially without a corresponding
increase in infrastructure, e.g. schools, public transport etc. I wish
to object in the strongest possible terms to HammondCare's proposed
re-development of the Greenwich Private Hospital site. Yes, we need
more palliative care beds, yes there needs to be more aged residential
accommodation, but the destruction of the site as proposed is not
acceptable. Cutting down trees, doubling the height of the hospital
and building unnecessary blocks of villas will destroy the bushland
and surroundings of the beautiful heritage Pallister House

The concept proposal seeks to double the height and size of the hospital,
add 80 new Seniors Living Apartments in two 6 level (including above
ground podium carpark) buildings plus 9 new Seniors Living Villas,
remove in excess of 50 trees from the site and double traffic volumes
on the site.

This Concept Proposal, if approved, is highly likely to have a
significantly adverse effect on my home and family both in the current
quiet enjoyment of our property, privacy and the future value of our
property. The Concept Proposal's inclusion and siting of the Seniors
Living Apartments and villas, which are residential apartments with a
different name, at the height, bulk and scale proposed, offers no
community benefit to the citizens of Greenwich and Northwood.

Also I understand that the State Significant Development approval
pathway is for a hospital for State beneficial infrastructure and the
residential accommodation is not part of a health facility although
the applicant may argue it is through their 'care model'. It has been
included incorrectly in a way to bypass the system.

The proposed development is too dense, too high, too big, destroys the
local area with its size, includes residential apartments disguised as
seniors living and doesn't fit with the area.

Also the extra traffic will also have an unfavourable impact on the
Greenwich Public School which is just undergoing major capital works
to cater for increased enrolments in the area.

Please consider my notes above and also the feedback from the
Greenwich community. The town planning rules are there for a reason
and company's even if they are charitable institutions (that still
function to make a profit) should comply with the law and the rules.

Thanks you in anticipation of your expert consideration.

Kind regards

The concept proposal seeks to double the height and size of the hospital,
add 80 new Seniors Living Apartments in two 6 level (including above
ground podium carpark) buildings plus 9 new Seniors Living Villas,
remove in excess of 50 trees from the site and double traffic volumes
on the site.

This Concept Proposal, if approved, is highly likely to have a
significantly adverse effect on my home and family both in the current
quiet enjoyment of our property, privacy and the future value of our
property. The Concept Proposal's inclusion and siting of the Seniors
Living Apartments and villas, which are residential apartments with a
different name, at the height, bulk and scale proposed, offers no
community benefit to the citizens of Greenwich and Northwood.

Also I understand that the State Significant Development approval
pathway is for a hospital for State beneficial infrastructure and the
residential accommodation is not part of a health facility although
the applicant may argue it is through their 'care model'. It has been
included incorrectly in a way to bypass the system.

The proposed development is too dense, too high, too big, destroys the
local area with its size, includes residential apartments disguised as
seniors living and doesn't fit with the area.

Also the extra traffic will also have an unfavourable impact on the
Greenwich Public School which is just undergoing major capital works
to cater for increased enrolments in the area.

Please consider my notes above and also the feedback from the
Greenwich community. The town planning rules are there for a reason
and company's even if they are charitable institutions (that still
function to make a profit) should comply with the law and the rules.

Thanks you in anticipation of your expert consideration.

Kind regards

I strongly object to the scale of this development, and decry the lack of
true aged care facilities. Senior residential apartments are fine, but
not everyone can afford such. Also the destruction of so many trees is
a crime against the environment. Access to and from River Road is
already dangerous, better traffic management will be essential.

This Concept Proposal, if approved, is highly likely to have a
significantly adverse effect on homes and families both in the current
quiet enjoyment of their properties, privacy, and the future value of
their properties. The Concept Proposal's inclusion of the Seniors
Living Apartments at the bulk and scale proposed and the siting of the
Seniors Living Apartments, offers no community benefit to the citizens
of Greenwich and Northwood.

The State Significant Development approval pathway adopted by the
development applicant, HammondCare, offers the applicant the
opportunity to exploit the State Significant Development status of a
health facility development and combine this with the lack of existing
town planning controls on the site under the Special Purpose zoning.
This pathway is detrimental to the local community in this instance as
the Senior Living Apartments and Villas which are included in the
Concept Proposal are not health related accommodation. In effect this
pathway enables the bypassing of planning application processes
legislated in New South Wales that seek to protect the interests of
the community and local citizens.

I do not object to development and refurbishment of the hospital in
some form and the continued delivery of high quality aged care
services to the community however the bulk, scale and density of the
proposal is disproportionate to the surrounding urban context, is not
required for a health facility and the siting of the development
heavily impacts on properties to the west of the hospital.

I am the owner of 39 and 41 Gore Street Greenwich NSW 2065.

I object to the Staged Redevelopment of Greenwich Hospital on the
following grounds:

1. The parcel is zoned for a SP2 Health Services Facility and not for
residential housing.
2. The area is/includes a Heritage Listing, not for re-development.
3.The area provides a sanctuary for local wildlife such as possums,
lizards, birds etc. and includes many mature trees which would be
largely destroyed by the proposed redevelopment.
4. Traffic would be greatly increased in an area, including a nearby
school, not suited for heavy traffic.
5. The proposed works would be very disruptive on a site not suited
for seniors and their housing.

The removal of so many mature trees in this bushland setting is
distressing, as is the height of the development in a residential
area. Destroying the tranquility of the bushland is unjust for every
resident in Greenwich, commercial overdevelopment must not be allowed
in this residential area, next the road will have to be widened,
further destroying trees and bushland.

This proposed building development is clearly wrong.
It will impact on many people living in the area and not only due to a
large building blocking out the skyline but the increase of traffic in
what is already a busy section of road.
This development must be stopped, it would be to the detriment of
Northwood. The value of homes is very important to residents and this
will no doubt decrease all the homes in a wide area.

Given the context of the proposed senior residential development on the
edge of a significant and remnant area of bushland, on the periphery
of the harbour and within a low density residential area, any new
development warrants a careful consideration of its impact of its
immediate surroundings.

The proposed development , as submitted, will unreasonably impact on
the surrounding bushland and residential are for the following
reasons:

1. The bushland area in and within the vicinity of Gore Creek Reserve
is zoned for recreational use and council has invested considerable
funding over many years to preserve the quality of this bushland and
the oval below the development. Also the residential land in Northwood
facing the development is zoned in recognition of the importance of
this remnant area of quality bushland with planning obligations
associated with that zoning. The area is an important habitat for
local flora and fauna and contains a rare species of fungi. The
closeness of the new development, situated close to the edge of the
cliff, will threaten the quality of the bush area below and make it
harder to retain it its natural state.

2. The visual impact of the development on the reserve below is
unreasonably intrusive and will thereby impact on views from important
parts of the parkland, from Northwood as well as from the oval below.


3. The development will compromise the Gore Creek Reserve's remote and
serene quality that is regularly used for passive and active
recreational pursuits by both local residents and international
tourists. It is part of the natural foreshore area that contributes to
the quality of Sydney Harbour as as international destination. All
development within this area should meet the objectives of its harbour
setting.

4. The bushland beneath the proposed development is fragile and will
be impacted by the development above. The development needs to be of a
scale that minimises this impact, respects the quality of the area and
constitutes an asset not a detriment to the overall development of the
area.

For the above reasons I object to the proposed plans in their current
form and recommend that the consent authority impose restrictions on
the building envelope so that any new development will have a less
intrusive impact on the bushland area to the south and west of the
site.

I am concerned that this building is going to dominate the skyline. I
purchased my house 3 years ago because of the peaceful natural bush
views.

Also, the plan shows a substantial reduction in natural bushland.

Finally, River Rd is currently close to capacity in the mornings and
afternoons. This development will further overload an already busy rd.
This will be especially so as I am assuming the set of traffic lights
already in place for the hospital will further slow traffic down due
to increased traffic to and from the hospital.

I am concerned that this building is going to dominate the skyline. I
purchased my house 3 years ago because of the peaceful natural bush
views.

Also, the plan shows a substantial reduction in natural bushland.

Finally, River Road is currently close to capacity in the mornings and
afternoons. This development will further overload an already busy
road. This will no doubt drastically increase as I am assuming the set
of traffic lights already in place for the hospital will further slow
traffic down due to increased traffic to and from the hospital, and
construction traffic.

To Whom it May Concern,

I am writing in objection to the proposed project for devlopment.
Greenwich is a nice area and with reviewing the traffic impact
statment . With the already congestion of traffic at Greenwich rd and
river road and current road conditions, i feel this will have adverse
affect.
With a proposed gate entrance at St Vincents road will bring imcreased
traffic to Gore st, Greenwich rd and kingnslany st. Not only this but
with the construction phase the residents will need to cope with
construction vehicles annd materials

My primary concern is the traffic on River Road. I object to increasing
the number of beds at the Hospital (by such an extreme amount) because
that will yield an excessive amount of traffic right across from the
school. Turning right from the hospital takes cars directly into the
path of students crossing to attend school. It is a recipe for
disaster.