The college is a well established school that residents might expect to evolve over time. Hence, I don't object to sensitively designed 2 storey facilities being erected on land being used for active school activity (not just admin). However, the surrounding residents are entitled to have the existing curtilage of the school maintained and not to encroach on any further surrounding land. People buy into and live in these neighbourhoods knowing there is a school nearby, but the Government shouldn't agree to additional areas being developed for active school uses.

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

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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

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.