Sport and Wellbeing Centre, Roseville College

I support the project, but have concerns around the proposed traffic management plan for the development. My concern is that the large trucks proposed for the demolition and excavation phases of the project are unsafe to use in the narrow residential streets around the development site and pose a danger to the residents, especially young children living in the neighbourhood. Please find the details of my concerns in the attached letter.

Roseville College is situated in a heritage conservation area with Bancroft Avenue exhibiting the historic charm that the conservation status is looking to preserve. The destruction of a heritage home to make way for a 2-3 storey building is completely counter to that objective. The College already creates significant congestion in what is otherwise a residential area. This congestion has already been exacerbated by the recent building of apartment blocks along the western end of Victoria St. Further building works at the college would worsen this situation and diminish what is otherwise a very minimal impact to the Bancroft Avenue streetscape. I am very much opposed to the current building suggestions at the College. If they need to build further they should do so within the interior of the College and not impact the Bancroft streetscape.

The Department of Primary Industries has reviewed this proposal and has no comment.

I strongly object to the proposed development on the following grounds:

1) The proposal includes demolition of the dwelling 37 Bancroft Ave which is in a Heritage Conservation Area and zoned R2. The demolition of this property would see an unequal and unfair application of zoning and development laws as many residents immediately adjacent to the school have had severe restrictions placed on their own modest renovations and alterations to their properties.

2) The scale and bulk of the proposed development is in severe conflict in with the current character of the Heritage Conservation Area. The intent of the Heritage Conservation Area will adversely diminished with a detrimental affect to the character of the Roseville Heritage conservation area as a currently cohesive precinct of cultural significance.

3) The increase in noise, traffic volume and disruption arising from the major scale of the work deprives the local residents their right to enjoyment of the suburb especially as Heritage Conservation Area. The proposal will see an increase in traffic that is already approaching gridlock daily and is at a dangerous volume with no systematic traffic management in place and the school having no accountability for the problems associated with the volume. The Heritage Conservation Area is not designed as a high traffic area and the proposal will only make this situation worse.

In summary the proposal is a clear abuse of the spirit and the intent of the Heritage Conservation Area which should be equally applied to all residents of Roseville including local Business.

This project will result in the demolition of a house in a Heritage Conservation Area area zoned R2 which is completely unacceptable. Furthermore, this development is of great disadvantage to the residents of Roseville and only seeks to benefit those who attend the school. For example, the increased noise to the area will be of great disadvantage to the residents and will also increase traffic in the area. The size of the project is also uncharacteristic of the local Roseville area and thus adversely impact the character of Roseville. This project also seems not to consider the effect on the residents immediately adjacent to the centre, such as lack of privacy, sunlight and the impact of construction on local wildlife.

I wish to object to this project on the basis of its size and that there will be an additional heritage area building demolished for it to be built.
The eastern wall of the proposed project will tower above the residence at 39 Bancroft Avenue and be totally out of character with this area.
Also the additional traffic that will use Victoria Avenue and Recreation Avenue will severely impact on the traffic using Hill Street. During the morning peak (8am to 9:30am) it takes several minutes for the parents to access Chatswood CBD due to the turning restriction at Wandella Avenue and all along Boundary Street. At present,during that time, it can take up to 15 minutes to make a left hand turn from Hill Street to Boundary Street and then right into Archer Street.

I object to the development application, with particular regard to:
1. Demolition of a dwelling in a Heritage Conservation area zoned R2 and subsequent change in zoning to Education
2. The scale of the bulk of the proposed development is (completely) out of area with the local area and will adversely affect the character of Roseville and in particular the Roseville Conservation Area
3. The increased noise and volume of traffic during and after construction.
The area around Roseville College, and specifically Bancroft, Glencroft and Wandella Avenues comprises narrow residential streets. Construction of a multi-level building will detrimentally affect traffic flow, noise level and importantly the safety of residents. The residential area is not equipped to cope with the size of such a project nor support its ongoing maintenance.

There will be a significantly increased noise and volume of traffic in my local area during and after the project. The scale of bulk of the proposed development is out of character with my local area and will adversely affect the character of Roseville and in particular the Roseville conservation area. Moreover, a dwelling in a Heritage Conservation area Zoned R2 and subsequent change in zoning to education will occur.

The proposed changes are unnecessary and will lead to unforeseen chaos around the area for local residents, parents, staff and the community as a whole. The current facilities are more than adequate. I object to the plans for this centre as they far too drastic and do not consider the consequences of such a development.

I object this submission

I object to this development on the following grounds:
1. Demolition of a building in a Heritage Conservation area zoned R2 and subsequent change in zoning to Education
2. The scale of bulk of the proposed development is out of character with the local area and will adversely affect the character of Roseville and in particular the Roseville Conservation Area
3. The increased noise and volume of traffic during and after the construction

I think it would be reckless to approve rezoning of a Heritage Conservation area. With our ever increasing hot days and climate change we need more of these zones not less. It would be a dangerous precedent and not acceptable.

I am also a user of the existing Roseville College swimming pool and its is a lovely outdoor pool with natural light and airflow which is quite unique in the area. It should be preserved.

I object strongly to this development proposal.

Due to the proximity of this project to many houses, especially the house directly adjacent, this project not only impedes vision and privacy but will make living in their home a living nightmare. The windows of the next door house will be directly in line with windows of girls and teachers looking in.

I object to:
1. Demolition of a dwelling in a Heritage Conservation area Zoned R2 and subsequent change in zoning to
Education
2. The scale of bulk of the proposed development is out of character with the local area and will adversely
affect the character of Roseville and in particular the Roseville Conservation Area
3. The increased noise and volume of traffic during and after construction

While I don’t live in the area, I live nearby and visit Roseville. I am concerned about the impact of private schools in residential areas. The schools have the resources to buy up properties and yet they are very poor contributors to the communities in which they reside. The schools are empty for nearly half the year, allowing for weekends and holidays. They are enclaves which are disconnected from the community in which they reside. Increasingly they bring in traffic. At a time when public schools need so much more, we seem to allow these schools to become increasingly dominant in our communities while they contribute little or even detract.

I object in principle to this project on the grounds of:
- Roseville College encroachment further into the suburb, detracting from the community
- removal of dwellings which are part of the heritage and character of the community, particularly the Roseville Conservation Area
- increasing traffic relating to the school.

The proposal will have a negative impact on a significant conservation area, affecting the present character of the Roseville neighbourhood.
It necessitates the demolition of a home in the Heritage Conservation area Zoned R2, and a rezoning to Education.
It will lead to increased noise disruption caused by a larger number of vehicles accessing the area during construction, disturbing neighbours.

I object to the following:
- this development is in the Roseville Conservation Area and I believe the scale of it will impact the character of the area.
- the demolition of a dwelling in a Heritage Conservation area Zoned R2 and subsequent change in the zoning to Education. As a resident in the same Heritage Conservation Area I understand and respect those restrictions and regulations placed on homes. It's makes this a beautiful area to live in. And with the demolition of 37 Bancroft Ave what might happen to other residences in the immediate vicinity in the future?
- the increased noise and volume of traffic during and after construction. My children attend RPS and between the Roseville College, RPS and local traffic that road is small and congested as it is.

I have visited the site and observed that Bancroft Avenue has a consistent residential landscape. The site is part of the Roseville Conservation zone. The proposal by Roseville College will disturb the harmony of the heritage precinct and landscape. The school should undertakes its redevelopment and erect institutional buildings towards Victoria Street. Such a review should assist to maintain good relations with its community.

I Object to the demolition of a dwelling in a Heritage Conservation area Zoned R2 and subsequent change in zoning to Education.
I Object to the scale of bulk of the proposed development which is out of character with the local area and will adversely affect the character of Roseville and in particular the Roseville Conservation Area
I Object to the likely increase in noise and traffic during and after construction
Some time ago I wrote to Ku-ring-gai Council questioning an earlier development at Roseville College. I requested information relating to long term, approved plans for the site and surrounding area. This information was not provided. It would appear that there are no long term, approved plans. The developments and approvals given are on the basis of 'expansion by stealth'. One residence at a time. If the site is not adequate for Roseville College, they should relocate to another area. They should not be permitted to gradually take over a whole residential area.

1. Demolition of a dwelling in a Heritage Conservation area Zoned R2 and subsequent change in zoning to
Education
2. The scale of bulk of the proposed development is out of character with the local area and will adversely
affect the character of Roseville and in particular the Roseville Conservation Area
3. The increased noise and volume of traffic during and after construction
4. Development is out of character.
5. The change of zoning is not in character of the area.
6. The shadowing impact of the new building.

Dear Sir / Madam,
My wife and I have lived in Roseville for over 20 years, and moved into our Federation Listed house at 32 Roseville Avenue on the basis of it's heritage style and heritage landscape identity of the street, and indeed surrounding streets of Roseville in the local area of the station in particular. In renovating our own house and garden we were very pleased to be restrained by the heritage listing, and are proud to be living in a very beautiful neighbourhood rich with tradition and a striking landscape setting.
The erosion of the heritage qualities of Roseville has already been significant with demolition and redevelopment of many houses to construct apartments, changing the heritage identity and fabric of the area.
We strongly object to the proposed demolition of the residence and gardens at 37 Bancroft Avenue, including removal of many of the trees on the site, which together make a strong contribution to the streetscape and local identity. The proposed bulk and scale of the proposed new buildings is considered entirely unacceptable, being inconsistent with the existing heritage streetscape character. The impact will also be considerable in views from the park behind the site, where I have played tennis for over 10 years.
We strongly object to the development proposed, and consider retention of the house the most important option, and if not then certainly a smaller scale development that allows protection of trees and creation of a strong landscape setting that is sympathetic with the streetscape, neighbours, and park behind.
I welcome enquiry and am willing to attend and speak at any site visit, or provide further written submission if this is suitable.
Regards
Ross and Kate Shepherd
32 Roseville Avenue Roseville