I strongly object to the project as a resident of Roseville in Bancroft Ave. I have submitted a previous objection based on the volume and height of the development. It will dwarf all existing dwellings and create an even larger bottleneck on the surrounding road infrastructure. Bancroft Ave is already choked with Roseville College drop offs and pickups making near impossible to reverse out of driveways and a dangerous area for pedestrians and school children.

In addition, the height on the structure does not comply with the standard regulations and the shadows it will create will have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties and street vegetation.

Building separation does not comply with the Apartment Design Guide. Fails to include the additional 3m that is required when there is a change in zoning to lower-density residential. 19 Roseville Ave - exceedance of 7m for ground-L3; 4m exceedance for L5-L7. 14 Lord St - exceedance of 3m for ground to L3. There is no justification provided.

I have lived in Roseville for over 20 years and the development over that time between Boundary Rd and Victoria St has had a huge impact to safety on all the surrounding side streets clogged with parked cars on both sides leaving extremely narrow thoroughfares and huge government buses, cars, trucks trying to navigate through one lane going in both directions.

Regards
Bancroft Ave Resident.

Please see attached

The proposal should not be supported for reasons:

1. It undermines the whole planning system which its supposedly based upon strategic planning. Further it undermines community support for the planning system. It is analogous to "Blues Point Tower" with no relation to surrounding development. It will encourage chaotic planning which will waste the time of Dept Planning, Council and residents.

2. It is inconsistent with the TOD compromise scheme adopted by Ku-ring-gai Council. If the proposal is supported it is the same as throwing the TOD compromise is the bin as numerous other one off developments will be proposed. Investment in housing needs a clear regulatory environment which the revised TOD will provide.

3. The proposal itself is fake as the "In-fill affordable housing" component is very small. It is designed around selling expensive apartments to empty nesters. Most people are supportive of the provision of affordable housing but to suggest this is aa proposal for affordable housing is fundamentally misleading. Dept Planning support for such a fake proposal will undermine community support for "In-fill affordable housing".

4. This single proposal will overwhelm the whole Roseville Heritage Conservation Area which the TOD compromise seeks to maintain.

5. The cumulative impacts of this proposal and the TOD scheme in areas such as traffic and the environment have not been considered.

To; NSW Planning
RE; Development Application 16-24 Lord St & 21-27 Roseville Ave Roseville
Date; 31 January 2026
I take this opportunity to object to Development Application 16-24 Lord St & 21-27 Roseville Ave Roseville. This objection is in conjunction with my objection to the Developer’s previous proposal.
The reasons for my objection include;
• The proposed development will not satisfy the government's solution for affordable housing. The statistics on housing/unit prices in Roseville are beyond the government's definition of ‘affordable'.
• The proposal does not conform to the government's low-to-mid-rise housing objective for the area (as per the revised and accepted TOD program).
• The government was adamant that the developer adheres to the community engagement guidelines. There has been little to no community notification and awareness.
• The government promised to protect high-value heritage areas. This development will destroy 9 heritage homes, contradicting the government's promise.
• The development is out of character for the local area. (A 9-storey apartment block will be an eyesore and over development amongst an area of the suburb that consists of two-storey dwellings and relatively narrow local streets).
• Excessive traffic generated by the proposed development will add considerably to traffic levels on local narrow streets which particularly at certain times of the day would present considerable potential hazards for drivers and pedestrians.
• The Metro line goes underneath East-Side Roseville. Contrary to the proposal's pictures, this development will be a one-off in the area due to restrictions around the Metro line below.
• Changes made in Hyecorp's new proposal have done nothing to address any of the above issues.
Sincerely

Please see attached objection

I object in the terms of the attached.