Byron Hospital

As I am one of the residents on the southern boundary of the proposed development we have a request relating to the landscaping of the buffer zone between our fence line and the hospital fence line.We are in support of the hospital but we would like to have that area NOT planted and left as grass land as it is today and we will be happy to continue to maintain the mowing. We need this area to be flat and cut grass otherwise it will attract snakes, rats and foxes and we fear for our children"s safety.

To whom it may concern,

The residents of lots 9,10 & 11 Parkway Drive Ewingsdale would like to express a request for change of landscaping plans for the southern side of the byron bay hospital development.
Currently the plan for the buffer zone between the southern section of the hospital and lots 9, 10 and 11 is to plant trees and native shrubs. We are concerned this area will become a safety hazard attracting snakes, rats and foxes.
Our request is for the development to leave the buffer zone in its current state and NOT plant trees and native shrubs.

Further to our request above we would be prepared to maintain the area ourselves to ensure safety.

We can be contacted on:

Selina Kelly [email protected] lot 10
Gil Plesser [email protected] lot 9
Stephen Newling [email protected] 11

Sincerely

To the Minister for Planning and Environment

Re Byron Shire Central Hospital

As a member of Byron Bay Hospital Aux, I have been interested in the planning process for the new Byron Shire Central Hospital since the first consultants were engaged by the Dept to consult with the local community, so probably for over 20 years. Along every step of this process I have attended numerous public meetings as well as meetings of the planning committee and was always assured that there would be no downgrading of the services available at the Byron Bay or Mullumbimby Hospitals until the new Hospital was built and we would keep all the current services available at both Hospitals and indeed add to these services, when the new hospital was built. I was astounded to see that the plans currently on exhibition make no mention of operating theatres or day surgery. The initial proposal incorporated two "state of the art" operating theatres. This later became theatres for day surgery procedures and now we have non at all!. As Byron Bay Hospital has facilities for day surgery and has had some form of theatre since it's inception, I find it totally unacceptable that the new Central Hospital has none at all and I say this whilst being well aware that the Area Health Board is looking for expressions of interest for a private provider to build operating theatres on the site, for them to buy back services from. I wish to strongly object to the fact that there is not allowance for operating theatres in these plans. These plans must include provision for at least day surgery in the event that no private provider is found, otherwise the people of the Byron Shire have been duped by the Health Department. This Hospital underwent a very lengthy and painful community consultation, there was much ill feeling in both communities over the loss of both hospitals. The community only agreed to the one Central Hospital provided there was no loss of services. They would not agree to what is now proposed in these plans.

Yours faithfully,

Janice Lang
234 Myocum Rd,
Ewingsdale, 2481

15.9.14

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a brief submission to this regionally significant development. My Submission relates mainly to the Landscape Plan, and some aspects of the Architectural Plan.

Architectural Plan:
The building is thankfully responsive to the north east aspect, and appears to be sited and positioned ideally for natural light gain and access, and protection from the hot western sun. Protection from Summer heat, and reduced power consumption and environmental 'fit' could be better achieved with pale roofing materials such as lichen or grass green rather than dark/ black/ slate grey all of which absorb heat. The number of pavilions has created large courtyards however the integration of these courtyards into the building fabric could be improved. This could be achieved through, at a minimum, more windows and doors to the courtyard areas. Even more effectively, this would be achieved through redesigning the walls (and therefore room sizes facing the courtyards) with small extrusions into the courtyard space, and intrusions of the courtyard space into the built environment. This would vastly improve solar access and views to the green courtyard spaces, improving patient health and not compromise on patient privacy.

Landscape Plan
General Design: Whilst the selected plants and character design of the planting palette deserves commendation, the overall design of the landscape plan is unfortunately disappointing. There are majorly missed opportunities to create numerous outdoor spaces for patients and family members to access, utilise and appreciate the outdoors whilst visiting the hospital. These spaces are critical for those in the mental health unit, relieving for those in palliative care, and ideal for those (with extended families) in the maternity wards. Outdoor seating spaces are quite insufficient for a hospital of this size. Of the seating spaces that are provided, public seating is obscurely placed by the car parks, rather than by buildings or within the courtyards with their own spatial qualities for privacy and access. The designs of these spaces appear to be simply based on the shadow diagrams of the built forms, opting for utilising constructed solid shadow rather than the creation of amicable light through designed spaces and dappled canopy vegetation. Spaces for the mental health unit appear to be insufficient, there should be at least two, and preferably three spaces provided. In-patients ought to have options for what company is appropriate and some privacy whilst sitting outside. Detailing the design of this space to be inclusive of healing nature based activities, particularly being inclusive of water is important and should not be left to chance. The maternity ward ought to have a specific sitting area and pioneer a nature based, outdoor birthing area, complete with easy access to medical care and facilities. In addition, an area for children to play in simple, nature based play activities with easy supervision would be ideal for waiting families (and fathers!). Finally there is no significant reference to indigenous communities and cultural values.

Numerous opportunities exist for this project to more effectively utilise the well proportioned and large Architectural courtyard spaces.
Whilst issues of privacy to adjacent wards, and a sense of rural landscape have been the stated intention and resulting plan of the design, the overall approach has insufficient and under- designed seating spaces, Too few trees to sufficiently achieve the referenced planting character palettes and achieve amicable outdoor shade, and most importantly, misses the chance to more effectively integrate nature into the 'healing' aspect of our medical system. This is particularly possible with the high proportion of expected ambulatory care. The overall guiding principles of the design statements state the importance of this aspect of the site and project- recognising the importance of the landscape and nature as an important contributor to clinical outcomes for health and wellbeing. The proposed plan, whilst having many merits, does not achieve this and rather than contributing and complementing the noble and bold intentions of the architectural design, appears content to sit, sometimes quite literally, in the buildings shadow.

James Nash

I am generally in favour of the hospital being built. However
I am highly disappointed at the continued lack of consultation with the actual surrounding (that is Ewingsdale) community. The EIS is a large & complex document, and there has been no effort made to explain it to the local community which will have to live with this development and its effects. Accordingly I am opposed to the development as it stands.

My specific comments on the EIS follow.

1. EIS states P 25: "Vehicular Access - The development proposes a total of three vehicle crossovers, comprising of two crossovers on Ewingsdale Road and one crossover from Parkwalk Drive"
1.1 We presume that the third crossover is supposed to be Parkway, not Parkwalk, Drive
1.2 This is not mentioned anywhere in Attachment 3
1.3 Given that:
a. there are two access points off Ewingsdale Rd
b. the nearest part of the hospital to the third crossover is the mental ward
c. would involve a significant break in the buffer zone to the residential areas
d. Parkway Drive has no shoulder or provision for parking
I object to this third crossover. All of the land South of the right of way should be a vegetated buffer zone.

2. There is no provision for extending the existing bikeway/pedestrian along Ewingsdale Rd from Parkway Drive to the Hospital. This despite this being mentioned as "Provision of better, safer (in terms of route alignment as well as security) bicycle and pedestrian routes. This measure should be devised in consultation with Council and other authorities." The "no shoulder" stretch of Ewingsdale Rd from McGettigan's Lane to William Flick Lane is now by far the most dangerous section for bike riders and pedestrians, with several accidents occurring per annum. I regard the provision of this shared pedestrian bikeway as a necessary part of the hospital infrastructure.

3. While Attachment 3 , p11 proposes a bus stop this is not shown in the plans. The current bus stops are rudimentary in nature and no safe pedestrian crossing has been provided. These facilities should be significantly upgraded as part of the overall traffic plan.

4. The entire traffic strategy of the proposal is based on AADT's. This is misleading and most inappropriate as it is very well known that Ewingsdale Rd experiences massive traffic peaks, particularly at holiday times, with traffic jams from Byron Bay to the Pacific Highway Interchange. The stretch of Ewingsdale Rd from McGettigan's Lane to William Flick Lane is not lit, has no shoulders and is generally unsafe. The traffic strategy does not take into account other current & proposed developments along this stretch of road. Hospital traffic should be handled by the addition of a full service road with appropriate intersection designs & lighting and incorporating bikeway & pedestrian access. The traffic issues must be resolved prior to hospital construction and not left to Council to deal with in the future, as the Council's finances & record in such areas is not strong.


5. I object to the proposed large scale on-site sewerage treatment plant as an alternative to the connection of the hospital to the Shire West Byron sewerage treatment plan. Such an on-site plant is most inappropriate in an area adjacent to many residences and in the gateway to Byron Bay. These plants require a large area and constant maintenance, with the potential for nasty odours and malfunctions (e.g. during power outages). The hospital must be connected to the Shire treatment plant.

See Attached PDF File

Please see attached submission

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

Please find attachments x2 to support our earlier Submission.