/Users/michaeldcochran/Desktop/Formal Planning Objection 2-6 Conway Ave, 15-15A Fernleigh Ave, 38-40 Carlisle Steet Rose Bay SSD101842729 2.pages

Proposed development exceeds maxmum building height & scale resulting in a building inconsistent with the village character of the Rose Bay Centre. There will be unacceptable impacts on residential amenity. Would adversely affect local road network traffic access (already at capacity due to narrow streets, schools, shops). Emergency vehicle access, street safety, would be compromised. Local infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater systems, groundwater and acquifer risks affected. Rose Bay basin is within a sensitive hydrogeological and geotechnical environment with a high groundwater table & underlying compressible soils. Excavation works & dewatering for basement construction can cause groundwater drawdown, settlement, land movement. This is all in contravention of public interest and planning precedent and is strongly objected by local residents.

The proposed 8-storey apartment block is far too large for a small residential cul-de-sac and would significantly change the character of the neighbourhood. It would bring increased traffic, parking pressure, noise and heavy construction vehicles into narrow local streets that are not designed for this level of activity. There are also serious concerns about deep excavation in a groundwater-sensitive area and the potential impact on surrounding homes. For these reasons, the development does not appear suitable for the site or in the best interests of the local community.

I object to the project in its current form and propose that it is delayed for two years and rethought. The primary reason is congestion in an overcrowded precinct. The project is located on the corner of Conway Ave and Carlisle St, Rose Bay. There is also a major water pipe project being conducted on Carlisle St. The water project has been going for two years and will go for two years more. The trucks, diggers and staff of the water company are many and clog the streets when they are working. There is absolutely no parking on Carlisle St, Conway Ave and Fernleigh Ave. Half of Carlisle St have been closed off at the northern end and in addition, the southern end has been converted to one-way traffic. Both elements are inconveniences to the residents of Conway Ave and Carlisle St. If the housing development SS_101842729 is allowed to begin before the water project is completed it will be utter chaos in Conway Ave and Carlisle St during the construction period. The housing development has to wait until the water project is completed. One final point to make is the affect of the traffic of two major projects on the primary school located in Carlisle St (Macauley Primary). The school children are dropped off / picked up on Carlisle St. There is a major safety issue if the volume of vehicles doubles if the housing project is allowed to begin construction before the water project is completed.

Carlisle Street is a cul-de-sac and Fernleigh ave is an extremely narrow, one way road. The proposed development will bring an additional 130 cars onto those 2 streets which can barely cope with exisiting traffic. In addition, there is a school at the end of the street which already creates a deadlock at school pick up and drop off times. An additional 130 cars will only exacerbate this problem and create a safety issue for the children trying to enter/ leave the school. It is my understanding that no cumulative traffic modelling has been done. The area is unable to handle additional cars.

Dear Sir - this site is completely unsuitable for a project of this size, with water problems still not completely understood. It will also be a complete eye-sore from a visual perspective given that location is on a ridge. And the parking and traffic especially given the proximity to schools (McCauley, Rose Bay Public, Scots ELC) will make Rose Bay even hard to transit through. For these reasons, I request that SSD-101842729 be refused, as the consent authority cannot be satisfied as to site suitability, likely impacts or the public interest under s4.15 of the EP&A Act.

Objection emailed to Planning Officer

The process of consultation of all local residents was not done. We received short notice which made it impossible to assess the impact on us. Given this, the project must be exhibited with widespread publicity.
The deep excavation is of considerable concern. Previous nearby excavations caused vibrations in nour house. This proposal has greater implications.
The drainage infrastructure is already under stress. with present storm water pipes unable to handle heavy downpours. What are the implications of the sewarage works in Carlisle Street. An independent review is required.
The impact on traffic and parking during construction has not been assessed. Dead-end streets and narrow curving roads add to difficulties. What assessment of the school pedestrian and car movement has been undertaken?
What assessment will the finished project have on resident parking. The 130 car spaces will be inadeqate. We already have problems with cars parking across our garage in upper Fernleigh Avenue.
The classication of Rose Bay as a major traffic hub only highlights the present congestion in the area.
We are not opposed to development and understand the need to increase housing buit this development does nothing to
fix the problem.
For these reasons we believe SSD-101842729 should be refused .
Rethinking is necessary to create a safer and more appropriate development.
Rose and John Temple