Redevelopment of Greenwich Hospital (Concept)

See attached.

Please find my Submission attached.

Please see attached.

Please see uploaded word file.

Please view attached document

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached.

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

Refer to attached statement.

We object to the proposal. After consideration of the current Proposal,
our submission is overall supportive of an upgrade and increase (in
some form) in the aged care services for Greenwich Hospital with
several objections to this Concept Proposal. A summary of these is
listed below -
* The planned living apartments are clearly outside of the primary
function as a critical asset aged care/palliative care facility. The
living apartments are more than 50% of the proposed new plans and
would prevent expansion of the aged care facility as future needs
arose.
* The bulk, scale and density of the proposal is disproportionate to
the surrounding urban context. The siting of the development heavily
impacts (reduce sunlight and privacy) our house and other residents
west of the site.
* Widening of the west road entry and retaining wall directs increase
site traffic close to our property and removes the current garden
buffer
* We note the removal of a significant number of trees along the front
and west side of the property resulting in i) reduced privacy with
exposure to hospital traffic and residents in the proposed buildings
along-side our property 2. Increase traffic noise
* There are current issues with water run off along the west boundary
that have not been addressed in the proposal. The impact on water run
off with removal of the trees along the west side also needs to be
assessed.
* The significant increase in (100%) traffic outside a large and
expanding Primary School and a main thoroughfare from surrounding
districts to North Sydney/CBD will contribute to congestion and noise

My objection letter is attached as a pdf.

See attached objection statement.

Please find attached objection of the Greenwich Community Association Inc

I am submitting that this is not an appication to extend a hospital
this is ILU proposal. We may need more ILU but not in this particular
location.

The current application includes a 9 storey hospital, additional
parking, senior living villas and 2 x 7 storey blocks for independent
seniors living. These are not hospital related but will be privately
owned. Independent Living Units will be residential high rise which
will mean less space to expand the hospital in the future.
The site is zoned SP2 which is designated infrastructure - health
services, by the LCC therefore residential high rise should not be
included.
All the surrounding area is zoned R1 which has a height restriction of
9.5m. This is a huge development and will tower over the communities
of Greenwich and Northwood.
The development is opposite Greenwich Public School which raises
safety concerns for children during the redevelopment (traffic
movement, dust and noise).
The plans will result in overshadowing of the Bob Campbell Oval.
The redevelopment has the potential to damage the bushland corridor
which volunteers and Lane Cove Council have been working hard to
regenerate and requires the removal of 50 established trees.
This development not only impacts the immediate surrounding residents,
but additionally, poses concerns to all members of the Lane Cove
community with potential for major traffic congestion and hazards on
River Road. This section of River Road is notorious for accidents (see
ITC list of top 10 accident spots in Lane Cove).
The Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment Report Executive Summary
states that "Taking into account the estimated traffic generation from
the proposed development, existing traffic flow conditions and speed
environment along River Road, it is considered that the expected
increase in traffic generated would have a minimal impact on the
safety and operating efficiency to the road frontage. There would be
no nexus or warrant to upgrade River Road as a result of any
additional traffic generated by the development. The Traffic and
Parking Impact Assessment concludes that the subject site is suitable
for the propose intensification of use of the site in relation to the
impact of traffic, vehicle access, parking and safety considerations.
The development is considered to have negligible effect on the safety
and operating outcome of the surrounding transport network."
The traffic report has ignored the fact that Independent Living Units
occupants are active members of the community who drive, have
visitors, have deliveries etc. It is woefully inadequate for a road
that has over 20 000 cars a day. See attached photo of the mayhem
yesterday as the Greenwich school is being upgraded next door.

The "concept" application now before the Department also includes two
multi-storey apartment complexes containing 80 relatively large,
up-market apartments and 9 spacious "villas" that will be restricted
to ownership and occupancy by aged people or people with disabilities.
This has been facilitated by virtue of the fact that while dwellings
are nominally a prohibited use under the site's local zoning, this
prohibition is effectively set aside by the applicability of State
Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a
Disability) 2004, which nominally permits certain types of separate
accommodation and independent housing on the site, subject to merit
considerations.

Overall, the scheme is projected to cost in excess of $141 M, with the
housing component costing over $69 M. Notably and perhaps most
revealingly, however, the Gross Floor Area of the private housing
component of the project (some 14,400 m2) will actually exceed that of
the enlarged hospital (some 13,900 m2.).

Arguably, therefore, the project is not simply a proposal to
significantly upgrade an existing private hospital; it is in fact a
far more complex and consolidated project that includes a substantial
private apartment complex and relatively exclusive private "villas"
that will be discrete from the operations of the hospital and will in
effect fill out what is at present a relatively modest private
hospital in what is in effect a bushland setting of some considerable
significance and value to the local community. The applicants describe
this consolidation of separate and distinct uses as a "campus". By all
means upgrade the Hospital but don't make this a residential area.

This Association support some aspects of the proposal