Bulli Aged Care Centre

As an ageing resident in the area I am delighted to see the Department of Health and local authorities planning for the elderly in an area where many residents hope to age in their homes. Many have families in the area for support, but a quality medical facility such as this will allow people to age well and continue to contribute to the life of their communities and families. It will provide a model for other parts of the State as to how we can best accommodate the wellbeing needs of our growing ageing population and allow them to contribute as long as possible to society.

My concern as a resident for 62 years in Northern suburbs of Wollongong is watching the over development in a known slip area.Also I am concerned about the the amount of flooding downstream of this development .The downstream of this catchment area already floods ie Ursulla Rd and Benalong St.
The duel ownership between government and IRT is giving away assets that that were donated by mine workers.This seems illegal or at the least immoral.Wake up to yourself Mr Baird.
Also the financing with the public putting in 34 million dollars and the IRT puts in only 16 million dollars and they then make all the profits to feed into their other assets
This is a rort.

I wish to object to the fact of a private company being involved in a public health system.
This is privatisation of the public health system by stealth.
A public hospital should be built on the existing car park and then the existing hospital be rebuilt.
There is a definite need for a public hospital at Bulli as more people are living in the area as shown by the fact that Woolworths has built their because of growing demand.
The State government does not own the land -it was donated by the miners and built by the miners.So how can they give it away..
Its interesting that $35million of public money is being put in while the IRT is supplying $16 million and they get the profit.
The argument that the government has no money is false.
Kevin Rudd has given billions of dollars to the UN to try and get elected to the UN.Both Rudd and Gillard gave $500million to the Clinton foundation and for what.We now have Ley taking money for herself to travel and purchase property.
There is plenty of public money for public hospitals is just our politicians feel it is for them not the Australian public.
As for the IRT- I have personal dealings where staff were cut at the lower level and people were given food but could not feed themselves and no one was available to feed these people.
IRT being not for profit.
What salaries are the managers at IRT on and what is in place to stop rorting by both managers and contractors of public moneys.
So I object to this development and support a total public hospital being built for the above reasons
Thank you

Objections to proposed Bulli Hospital/Aged Care development report

We live at 33 Organs Road and have recently completed major renovations to the rear of our property that shares a rear boundary with the proposed Hospital/Aged Care development. The above extension, which is not noted on the proposal's out-dated survey plans, extends along our property towards the rear boundary.

Our living area and master bedroom are at the rear of the house and therefore will be significantly affected by the proposed hospital development as will other residents on that northern boundary.

We have set out below areas of concern pertaining to the development, areas where there is insufficient information and recommendations.

Loading Bay
* The loading bay area is directly adjacent to our rear boundary and we are very concerned about the amount of noise generated by delivery trucks and the frequency of vehicle arrivals and departures.
* The rubbish bay is also situated in this area and is of great concern due to noise and odour. Hospital Road residents often complain about the waste odour at the current hospital site and this is despite assurances by the department that the waste on that site is dealt with according to strict health guidelines. Such occurrences in the proposed development would adversely affect our living and bedroom areas and neighbouring properties.
Recommendations: limiting hours of operation, erecting acoustic screening, combining filtration systems into the proposal to eliminate any odour contamination to adjoining properties, a detailed analysis of potential odour pollution.

Mechanical Gas Store
* This building lies directly adjacent to our rear boundary and due to the lack of information in regards to its function we are greatly concerned about the possible noise, fire and odour effects it may incur.
* The plans have insufficient detail in regards to offset boundary measurements and finish floor and roof heights. Our concern is that any excavation in this area could cause root damage to a large tree situated to the rear of our property which provides vital screening from the proposed development. Also the sheer bulk of the building at this location is difficult to determine.
Recommendations: more detailed plans and specifications outlining finished RLs, purpose of building and potential hazards; screening to soften bulking of this building

Generator
* Due to the insufficient information in regards to RL and overall dimensioning of this building it is difficult to determine the impact it will have in terms of bulk and scale. Also we have concerns of possible root damage to existing screen trees during excavation as the plans indicate that the floor level is to be significantly lower than the surrounding buildings.
Recommendations: more detailed plans and arborist report required to ascertain potential damage to existing tree roots

Hydraulics
* The proposed OSD tank is noted as requiring a capacity of 90m3 on the hydraulic plans but is stated as only requiring 65m3 of capacity within the hydraulic report. Due to the approximate location of this tank lying within the root zone of existing screening trees and with the ambiguity of size we are concerned root damage may occur during excavation.
* It states on the hydraulic plan that the OSD tank is to be discharged through the existing ambulance station pit. Our concern is that if this existing pit drains into the creek then the volume of water being discharged into the creek during heavy rain will increase dramatically. As this creek forms the Riparian corridor to the rear of our property and properties down stream there needs to be more consultation in terms of environmental effects to ensure that the hydraulic design is adequate and appropriate.
Recommendations: more detailed plans re size and location of OSD tank, confirmation of stormwater outlet

Terraces Balconies and Windows
* The terrace dining area on level 3 to the northern face of the development is an area of concern in terms of noise transfer and privacy. As this area could possibly be open outside of normal business hours we are concerned it may have an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents.
* The terrace on the north east corner should be properly screened as should all windows overlooking the residents to the north
Recommendations: acoustic screening and privacy screening required and limiting hours of use of outdoor dining area.

Plant Room
* The plant room exceeds Wollongong Council's overall height levels for this type of development and although this part of the building has been set back from the Hospital Rd streetscape its bulk and size will adversely affect the northern residents. We are also concerned about potential noise and odour transfer from this part of the building.
Recommendations: more information required as to potential noise transference and odours.

Conclusion
We are not totally against the development as we understand the need for publicly funded aged care centres. We are however concerned about the negative effects the proposed development will have on ourselves and neighbouring residents. Addressing issues such as those listed above combined with further community consultation should minimise these concerns.

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on the Bulli Aged Care Centre of Excellence application.

I support the development but I object to any tree removal on the northern boundary.

My submission relates mainly to tree preservation and removal on the site particularly along the northern boundary. There are significant trees there as well as quite a number of smaller trees that provide a riparian corridor along the creek line and an aesthetic typical of the leafy Bulli area and also provide a privacy screen to residents.

I do not support the removal of any trees on the northern boundary for this reason nor the significant Iron Bark fronting Hospital Road.

Even if these trees are non endemic or native they still provide the above functions and will continue to provide visual amenity and privacy for hospital patients and residents alike.

The arborist report states that the majority of the trees are in great health and I propose that a suitable setback be made that allows these trees to continue to flourish along the northern boundary and not be affected by the building works. This includes the weeping figs, camphor laurels and silky oaks which are beautiful large trees.

I would also like to add that the recommendations from Moore Trees Arborist Report do not appear to match the 1.3 Site Understanding Arborist Assessment plan prepared by Arcadia, this makes it confusing to know what trees are actually proposed to be removed.

Of course new trees can be planted, but it would be many many years before they will be of a significant size like the existing trees which already provide several important functions: riparian vegetation, bank stabilisation, visual amenity, privacy screening.

kind regards


30 Jan 2017

I am concerned about vegetation on the northern boundary as some is earmarked for removal. It is very important that these are retained as such large significant trees provide riparian function to the creek, habitat corridor, privacy screening for residents and future patients and visual amenity to the area.

Thank you for notifying Sydney Water of the proposed development listed above. We have reviewed the proposal and can provide the following comments for your consideration.

Due to the proximity of the proposed development to Sydney Water assets, we recommend that Council imposing the following conditions of consent:

Building Plan Approval
The approved plans must be submitted to the Sydney Water Tap in™ online service to determine whether the development will affect any Sydney Water sewer or water main, stormwater drains and/or easement, and if further requirements need to be met.

The Sydney Water Tap in™ online self-service replaces our Quick Check Agents as of 30 November 2015.

The Tap in™ service provides 24/7 access to a range of services, including:
* building plan approvals
* connection and disconnection approvals
* diagrams
* trade waste approvals
* pressure information
* water meter installations
* pressure boosting and pump approvals
* changes to an existing service or asset, e.g. relocating or moving an asset.

Sydney Water's Tap in™ online service is available at:
https://www.sydneywater.com.au/SW/plumbing-building-developing/building/sydney-water-tap-in/index.htm

Section 73 Certificate
A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water.

It is recommended that applicants apply early for the certificate, as there may be water and sewer pipes to be built and this can take some time. This can also impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. For help either visit www.sydneywater.com.au > Plumbing, building and developing > Developing > Land development or telephone 13 20 92.

If you require any further information, please contact Manwella Hawell of City Shaping on 02 8849 4354 or e-mail [email protected].

Please see attached.

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached