Rosebery Seniors Living Development

I object to the height of the project, the height of the building will leave my apartment will very minimal daylight. I own an apartment on the ground floor and will be completely overshadowed by the height of the proposed buildings,
I also object to entrance of the car park being located in Dalmeny Avenue, this road has no through fare and will become gridlocked with cars on the already narrow road.
I object to the trees on Dalmeny street being taken down as these give a leafy aspect to the street, I believe taking these down with affect the value of the property on the street.

I am writing to share my concerns about the proposed development at 108 Dalmeny Avenue, Rosebery. After carefully reviewing the proposal, I have identified several critical issues that I believe need to be addressed before any approval is granted.

1. Inadequate Parking Provisions

The development plans to include 170 independent living units comprising 12 one-bedroom, 101 two-bedroom, and 57 three-bedroom apartments. However, the allocation of only 191 parking spaces for residents, staff, and visitors is patently inadequate. Given the composition of the apartments, it is reasonable to expect that a significant number of residents will own vehicles. Additionally, parking for staff and visitors must be taken into consideration. The current proposal does not meet the likely demand for parking, which will lead to overflow into surrounding streets, exacerbating local parking issues and increasing congestion. For comparison, Kimberly Estate, where I live, has a chronic problem with illegal visitor parking which is sure to get worse with the parking issues the Rosebery Seniors Development will introduce to Dalmeny Ave.

2. Traffic Congestion and Safety Concerns

The proposed driveway entry is approximately 130 meters from the traffic lights at Epsom Road. This location poses a significant risk for traffic congestion. Residents and visitors will need to make a right turn to enter the development, which will likely lead to traffic build-up, particularly during peak hours. This congestion could have a detrimental impact on westbound traffic on Epsom Road, creating delays and potentially hazardous conditions for all road users. This will only worsen when Meriton launch their development on the Suttons site which has an entrance-exit closely aligned to the mouth of Dalmeny. Note that you can't underestimate the traffic volumes on a small road like Dalmeny. Kimberly Estate alone has nearly 1,000 cars for residents and staff and we are just one among a large number of high density developments on Dalmeny Ave.

3. Misleading Information in Public Communications

The newsletter distributed by Corio Projects, in conjunction with the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, incorrectly states that the four buildings on the perimeter of the development will be 7 storeys high. However, the actual application indicates that these buildings will be 8 storeys. This discrepancy is concerning as it suggests a lack of transparency and accuracy in the information being provided to the public. Residents deserve honest and clear communication regarding the scale of the development and its potential impact on the community.

4. Unsuitable Location for Entrance and Exit

Dalmeny Avenue is a small cul-de-sac with high-density developments and the potential for even more development, given that there are still warehouses to be redeveloped. This small street is already home to thousands of people and cars, making it unreasonable and unfair to place the additional load of this new development on it. The developer's lot is double-fronted, and an entrance and exit on Rosebery Avenue, a much larger road with better connectivity both north, south, and towards the west, would be far more suitable. Rosebery Avenue is particularly wide at the proposed development site and can better accommodate the traffic generated by the new development.

I urge the planning authorities to reconsider the current proposal, taking into account these significant issues. It is essential to ensure that the development proceeds in a manner that is both sustainable and considerate of the existing community’s needs. Adequate parking facilities, proper traffic management, and transparent communication are crucial to achieving this goal. Most critically, the entrance and exit must be placed on Rosebery Ave.

I live in the RC1 area in the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. I oppose the project due to the restriction of light into my apartment due to the development, the significant impact on noise during the 2-year construction phase, and the use of the space. On the latter, I think there are many different uses of this space apart from residential apartments. Rosebery has a large quantity of medium-to-large density residential apartments (with more on the way) and the area risks becoming overflowed with a single type of building.

If the project is to go head, I think it is reasonable to ask that special consideration be given to the requests of residents who live nearby given that RC1 is extremely close to the proposed development (approximately 6M).

I ask that construction be prioritised on the part of the building that is closest to RC1. This would reduce the amount of noise and disturbance that occurs over the 18-24 months construction period.

I strongly support the proposed extension of the thoroughfare outside RC1. While still being a significant restriction on the amount of light entering my apartment, extending the gap between the two buildings will reduce the problem compared to if the building were in the same spot as the current warehouse. I request that the builder strictly abides by this commitment to extend the gap by the length committed to (or longer).

I would also like further information on whether that extended thoroughfare will be accessible by vehicles? I think it is best for the pathway to remain just for pedestrians and cyclists, particularly given the nature of the two buildings (both residential, one for senior citizens who may be more sensitive to noise).

NOISE AND CONSTRUCTION HOURS
In the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, it states that hours of work have not been determined, but they will likely use the recommended hours in the EPA’s ICNG (7AM to 6PM Mon-Fri, 8AM-1PM on Sat, and no work on Sun). This differs from the City of Sydney LGA work hours which are available online. I would like further information about what hours construction will occur.

I request that any commitment to work within specified hours is strictly abided by and that the behaviour of workers (having conversations, playing music) is restricted (especially closest to residential areas like RC1).

My wife and I are concerned about another building site that would be close by for few years that would add even more noise/ dust and after completion more people/ cars as well to an area already over developed and far to congested already ( especially the nearby Zetland area).

Department of Planning Housing and Infrastructure

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed seniors high-rise development at 22 – 40 Rosebery Avenue Rosebery through to Dalmeny Avenue.

1. HEIGHT
The most important issue I have with the development is the extension of the height restrictions as set in the SLEP 21. I understand the real need for growth and development of this sector, but I believe that this particular project poses significant concerns regarding privacy, natural light, and the overall character of our neighborhood. I also believe the development could better achieve it’s footprint allowance using by other means. Instead of infringing on neighbours privacy and lifestyle by exceeding height restrictions particularly in the south-west of the project the developer could choose to extend the height at the centre north building which is only 4 levels in height thus reducing the impost on the buildings opposite who have only 6 levels as dictated by the SLEP. The developer has chosen to go for profit of higher penthouses at the expense of neighbours rather than choose another way to achieve its footprint allowance.

Many of the multi-million dollar penthouses will be affected by this height extension of 4+ metres both in infringed privacy and reduced values along with the added cost to now pay for privacy to help with extremely large balconies which were never meant to be looked down into.

OTHER ISSUES
Currently there is no ruling that can insist that seniors and their carer are the only people who are allowed to buy and move into this type of development defeating the purpose. Furthermore there are a portion of larger 3 bedroom apartments in the development which on first look don’t seem the fit into the downsizing senior grouping but are seeking to pursue profit at the higher levels of the building.

THE NURSING HOME PORTION
The nursing home element to the development is only some 30+bed capacity. This low capacity for nursing home beds may not be profitable as it will not achieving a level of efficiency affordable to larger facilities. Just reviewing news sources notes the closure of smaller capacity higher care facilities like this one. I bring to your attention to Wesley Mission who recently closed all their small facilities putting many people in difficult positions. This may well happen to this development further down the track with difficult decisions on that future of that part of the development.

TREES
The development will be getting rid of 38 trees. Some of them not on even on the development site but on the side of the walkway to the south of the proposed development. Other developments like the ones opposite in Rosebery Avenue were forced to setback from the street to accommodate trees already on the developing block thus continuing the avenue of trees and foliage on the street. This should be continued on the development to maintain Rosebery as a greener suburb than other built up areas. One view of the street will show an avenue of green not seen in other parts of the City of Sydney high rise district. This will change the fabric of the area and change reason people are choosing that street and area to live.

ROAD TO THE SOUTH OF THE DEVELOPMENT
The plan to create a street to the south of the development does not show modeling around the area concerned. This road has the potential to create a ‘RAT RUN’ to bypass the lights on the corner of Dalmeny Ave and Epsom Rd.

Dalmeny Ave currently has no southerly exit so when the area is fully developed the street concerned could see vehicle daily volumes in the many thousands. A shared zone could help limit any potential excess use of this roadway. Council has not provided or approved a safety report on this or any potential shared zones abiding to the guidelines from Transport. I note that this road was not included in previous information or plans and appears to be a recent afterthought currently without adequate modeling.


John Keevers

Hi there

I object to another large multi story building in this area given how many other multi story buildings there are and have been built in the last couple of years . It feels like the concrete monster of Zetland is seeping out to Rosebery and is making the area feel soulless and high rise. Please can you consider making the buildings less imposing and not as many stories.

I realise there is likely a need to seniors living - which I do not object to. I object to 8 stories. Why does it have to be so tall? Rosebery is losing its character with multi stories and I feel a shorter building would be more appropriate.

In addition, the corner you are looking to build on - Rosebery Ave and Epsom Rd - is already very congested at several times through the day and this results in long queues of vehicles down Rosebery Ave. Will traffic lights be installed to help with this additional building and consequential road traffic?

Thank you.

The planned facility and its residents will be a great addition to the community. Though there is a concern that the main traffic access to the facility should be on Rosebery Ave, rather than the smaller Dalmeny Ave. One of the worries is that relevantly increasing the traffic volume on Dalmeny Ave--during the construction period and after--might create pressure to open up the cul-de-sac in Dalmeny Ave: this would have various negative impacts on the area. Utilizing Rosebery Ave as a main access point to the facility, or perhaps creating two equally viable access points, one on Rosebery and one on Dalmeny, would hence seem preferable.

On Behalf of the Owners Corporation, Kimberley estate Building 83-93 Dalmeny Avenue Rosebery NSW 2018

City of Sydney Council
456 Kent Street Sydney,
NSW 2000

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Development Proposal for Aged Care Facility on Dalmeny Ave and Rosebery Ave, Rosebery NSW

I am writing on behalf of the Owners Corporation of Genesis Building, located at 83-93 Dalmeny Ave, Rosebery, regarding the proposed development of an aged care facility on Dalmeny Ave and Rosebery Ave. We want to express our general support for the development, recognizing the valuable services and positive contribution it will bring to our community.
However, we have specific concerns about the potential impact on local traffic flow that we believe need to be addressed. Dalmeny Ave is a no-through road and quite narrow, already experiencing significant congestion during peak times. Adding additional traffic due to the aged care facility’s driveway could exacerbate these issues, leading to increased delays and safety concerns for residents and visitors alike. To alleviate this, we recommend positioning the driveway on Rosebery Ave instead. Rosebery Ave is a wider road, better suited to accommodate the expected increase in traffic flow. This adjustment would help ensure smoother traffic management and enhance safety for everyone in the area. We’d suggest this is the case for residential traffic as well as loading docks and garbage collection.

We trust that the City of Sydney will consider our suggestion and take the necessary steps to facilitate better traffic management and safety.

We appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to a development that benefits our community while addressing these concerns.

Thank you for your time and consideration.


Yours faithfully, F.R. On Behalf of, Owners Corporation, Kimberley estate Building 83-93 Dalmeny Ave Rosebery, NSW 2018

Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Development Proposal for Aged Care Facility on Dalmeny Ave and Rosebery Ave, Rosebery NSW
I am writing on behalf of the Owners Corporation of Genesis Building, located at xxxxxx Ave, Rosebery, regarding the proposed development of an aged care facility on Dalmeny Ave and Rosebery Ave.
We want to express our general support for the development, recognizing the valuable services and positive contribution it will bring to our community. However, we have specific concerns about the potential impact on local traffic flow that we believe need to be addressed.
Dalmeny Ave is a no-through road and quite narrow, already experiencing significant congestion during peak times. Adding additional traffic due to the aged care facility’s driveway could exacerbate these issues, leading to increased delays and safety concerns for residents and visitors alike.
To alleviate this, we recommend positioning the driveway on Rosebery Ave instead. Rosebery Ave is a wider road, better suited to accommodate the expected increase in traffic flow. This adjustment would help ensure smoother traffic management and enhance safety for everyone in the area. We’d suggest this is the case for residential traffic as well as loading docks and garbage collection.
We trust that the City of Sydney will consider our suggestion and take the necessary steps to facilitate better traffic management and safety. We appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to a development that benefits our community while addressing these concerns.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Yours faithfully,
F.R.
On Behalf of,
Owners Corporation, xxxxc Building
Xxxx Dalmeny Ave
Rosebery, NSW 2018

The driveway exit’s MUST moved be exits on Rosebery Avenue instead of Dalmeny ave as traffic is absolutely shocking as it is now ….having 4 large developments on this street using the same dalmeny ave exits

This is absolutely shocking decision!!!!!!!!!!!

I wish to correct a statement that I made in my submission yesterday (SUB-72093243).

In it I claimed that the application states that the buildings on the perimeter are seven storeys high. Upon checking again, I realised that this isn’t true – in the official application Corio clearly states that some buildings will be eight storeys high.

I made the mistake of relying on information that Corio Projects provided directly to residents in their coloured May 2024 newsletter (that came with the letter from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure) where they specifically state that "The proposed design... will include:.. Four buildings, each 7-stories buildings plus rooftop maintenance, on the perimeter of the site”.

Dear Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,

I object to the project in its current form.

There is a clear need for increased seniors housing in Sydney and the proposed development would be contributing greatly in that regard. However in its current form, the proposed development would be detrimental to the existing residents on Dalmeny Avenue Rosebery. I have two major concerns:

(1) The only planned vehicular access is via Dalmeny Avenue, which is a no-through road, and is currently the only point of exit for four existing large housing developments. It makes sense for the development to have the driveway on Rosebery Avenue, which has numerous cross streets that would allow for much more efficient traffic dispersion.

We are already experiencing traffic build up on Dalmeny Avenue approaching Epsom Road. With the development proposing that the main driveway be about 130 metres from Epsom road, my concern is that it will greatly adversely affect the ability of existing residents to exit Dalmeny Avenue.

I can also envisage it affecting the ability of people to enter Dalmeny Avenue as people will be needing to turn right into the driveway. At peak times the traffic build up for people exiting (i.e., I expect it will extend from the lights to beyond the developments driveway) will likely preclude senior residents and support staff from being able to turn into the development, and while they are waiting to turn in, traffic will build up on Epsom Road. This is going to be especially problematic in the near future given the very large Meriton housing development that is currently underway directly across from Dalmeny Avenue, which is also going to lead to greatly increased traffic at this particular intersection (both during construction and after).

I also consider this a safety issue as I'm not sure how ambulances will be able to exit Dalmeny Avenue when there is extensive traffic build up on both sides of the street.

As mentioned above, a more feasible solution is to have the driveway on Rosebery Avenue, and to consider making it a left-turn only so that people leaving the Estate don't have to deal with crossing heavy traffic.

(2) My second major concern is only planning on having 192 parking spaces for residents and support staff. This is grossly inadequate given there are 170 independent living units proposed, many of which are two or three bedrooms (so potentially we could be expecting upwards of 350 new residents). While not all of these residents will want to drive, many will own a car or will be entertaining visitors who need a place to park. In addition there will be many medical professionals and support staff who will need to access the site. The same goes for the extra facilities planned to be available on site which will need to employ people in order to be run.

I request that much greater provision be made for parking on site.

A less major concern, but still a concern, is the fact that the application states that the buildings on the perimeter are seven storeys high. Looking at the architect drawings (Appendix J) this is clearly not true. Buildings A, B, C and D are 8 storeys high (please refer to page 4 for the overview and later pages e.g., page 20 for detail) - there is a ground floor, then seven floors above that, and a rooftop. The developer is being misleading in writing that the development is seven storeys high.

As stated previously, I think this proposed project stands to add a lot of value to the community, but I object to it in its current form.

In principle the project is a great idea. My concern is about how to address the transportation needs of an ever increasing population in east Rosebery. East Rosebery is a region where the government is approving ever increasing density with no public transportation plan even for the long term future. Things are already at a point of stress right now, and this is before the massive development in the old car dealership zone gets finished, or the new Deicorp block going up on Rothschild Ave. Let alone the Engine Yards opening within the next 6 months drawing more people into the area.

As a result of a reduction in the number of buses servicing Rosebery a few years ago, the only remaining bus route between Rosebery and the CBD is the 343. Having one main bus route for an incredibly population dense area is terrible planning, and will only get worse as more high density is built. Green Square station is a 20min walk away, which puts off people of any fitness level. The 306 goes to Green Square and Redfern, but this just pushes people to the 343 because no one wants to hop between buses and trains for such a short trip into the city. Yet we increased the number of buses servicing Green Square which already has a heavy rail station, and we're putting in a metro station between Green Square and Central - an area already well serviced by public transportation. The seniors who move into this Rosebery development are going to want to be able to move around freely and easily, and the last thing we need is more cars choking the streets. Please come up with a plan to make this happen effectively rather than putting more stress into an already stressed system.

Re: Development Proposal for Aged Care Facility on Dalmeny Ave and Rosebery Ave, Rosebery NSW

Although I understand the need for Aged Care Facilities, I feel that this plan is greatly flawed in one particular area.

Specifically, I am concerned about the potential impact of traffic flow in Dalmeny Ave.
Dalmeny Ave is a no-through road with a very high volume of residential apartments. It already experiences significant congestion during peak times.
My family resides in my property at 83 Dalmeny Ave, Rosebery, and we are very aware of the build up of traffic at the traffic lights at all times, but in particular during peak hours, often with a wait of several rounds of traffic lights before getting the opportunity to exit Dalmeny into Epsom Road. The same traffic build up applies to entering Dalmeny Ave from Epsom Road. There is only one way in and one way out for literally thousands of residents.
Adding additional traffic due to the aged care facility’s driveway will only exacerbate these issues, leading to increased delays and safety concerns for residents and visitors alike.

To alleviate this, I believe positioning the driveway on Rosebery Ave instead. Rosebery Ave is a wider road, better suited to accommodate the expected increase in traffic flow. This adjustment would help ensure smoother traffic management and enhance safety for everyone in the area. This applies to residential traffic as well as loading docks and garbage collection.

I hope that the City of Sydney will consider this suggestion and take the necessary steps to facilitate better traffic management and safety. I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to a development that benefits our community while addressing these concerns.
Thank you,
Debbie Hausman

I’m chairperson at Kimberley estate (794 units) and the residents feel it will be a disaster . So I object to construction because it will cause traffic congestion and be unsafe at the end of Dalmeny ave at t intersection where there is traffic lights . There’s Not much public transport as the buses are already congested and green square is crowded . The streets already has too many complexes with 1500 units.
We can discuss further . Please contact me .

Hello,

I am concerned by the lack of sunlight that will be cause on my unit due to height of the building and proximity (closeness). Currently there is nothing causing shade, keeping it warm and well lit. I have reviewed all the plans and included the image where it shows the impact of shade onto my unit.

Additionally, please provide the anticipated construction dates.

I am writing as an individual owner of Unit 163/83-93 Dalmeny Ave, Rosebery 2018 (Kimberley Estate), regarding the proposed development of an aged care facility on Dalmeny Ave and Rosebery Ave.

I support the general concept of this development, as I have been searching for this type of accommodation in this area for myself in the near future.

However, I do have specific concerns about the potential impact on local traffic flow that could be addressed by minor changes to the proposed development.

Dalmeny Ave is a no-through road and quite narrow, already experiencing significant congestion during peak times. Adding additional traffic due to the aged care facility’s driveway could exacerbate these issues, leading to increased delays and safety concerns for residents and visitors alike.

To alleviate this, I would recommend positioning the facility’s driveway on Rosebery Ave. Rosebery Ave is a wider road, better suited to accommodate the significant increase in traffic flow which would include substantial residential traffic as well as garbage collections and heavy delivery vehicles.

I trust that the City of Sydney will consider this suggestion and will take the necessary steps to facilitate better traffic management and safety. I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to a development that benefits the local community while addressing these concerns.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Yours faithfully,
Susan Wright
Owner of Unit 163/83-93 Dalmeny Ave
Rosebery, NSW 2018

Can the entry/exit please be via rosebery ave. There’s already thousands of units down this end of cul de sac and cars travelling from dalmeny to epsom road. Lights are also so slow to changes and takes too long.