Victorian Transport Projects 30 Standing Advisory Committee Rosanna Request to be No - but please email me a copy of the heard?: Timetable and any Directions Full Name: Gerard and Jenny Hook Organisation: Affected property: Attachment 1: Attachment 2: Attachment 3: Comments: Hello, We are a family residing in Hillside Road, Rosanna. The planned development is located virtually at the end of Hillside road. My main concern for the proposed development is the height. 7 stories is an unacceptable addition to the current landscape of our local family orientated community. We are not an inner city suburb where by high rise developments dominate the landscape. The proposed height will become a eye sore for the community. It will cause overshadowing of the surrounding area, contribute to increase congestion in essentially a residential pocket. It will serve only to create a precedent for future development in the area if allowed to proceed with the current height request. A recent residential development proposed for Hillside Road was overwhelmingly rejected by the local Rosanna and wider community. As a result the development failed to proceed. The two properties have now been sold separately to two families. They will not be development sites. This support from the community reflects the need for our suburbs to remain places for families to live with open spaces, reduced congestion, with controlled development. My additional concern is the traffic flow that will impact on Hillside and surrounding residential streets. Hillside road will become a main access road to the development in addition to surrounding roads. These roads are full of family homes. It will create an additional level of concern for residents movements as traffic volume will increase. I hope you take seriously our concerns of such overdevelopment on a small parcel of land at the Rosanna station. It also will contribute to loss of carparking spaces and the removal of several trees. You are in a very privileged position to make decisions that have a significant impact on the local community and our surrounding environment. I hope our concerns are understood, considered and reflected in the final decision. Submission Cover Sheet Victorian Transport Projects 31 Standing Advisory Committee Rosanna Request to be No - but please email me a copy of the heard?: Timetable and any Directions Full Name: Sharon Maria Karasmanis Organisation: Affected property: Attachment 1: Attachment 2: Attachment 3: Comments: Concerns with this development: 1. The sheer magnitude and visual bulk of this development is not in keeping with the “Neighbourhood Activity Centre”, and would tower even Rosanna station with its unprecedented height. 2. This is already a very busy traffic area, another supermarket will increase the strain and density of traffic in this area, and dilute commercial activity which may eventually kill the existing shopping centre. 3. Rosanna shopping centre has already been severely affected since the station upgrade and beautification project, with significant and unacceptable reduction in parking, and businesses are struggling. A Woolworths would split the shopping centre trade, and ruin the entire shopping precinct. With reduction in parking for some of the apartments, cars will flood the side streets, leaving less parking again for existing cafes and library. 5. The impact on the entire shopping centre, visual bulk, parking, noise and surrounding residences will be significant, and detrimental to Rosanna. The project if approved will set a negative precedent for Rosanna, with clear over development of the area. Sharon Karasmanis Submission Cover Sheet Victorian Transport Projects 32 Standing Advisory Committee Rosanna Request to be No - but please email me a copy of the heard?: Timetable and any Directions Full Name: Paul Rizza Organisation: Affected property: Attachment 1: Attachment 2: Attachment 3: Comments: I object to the proposed development on the following grounds: The proposed development is not appropriate for the local area. A seven story building is far too tall and not in keeping with the streetscape and character of the local area. It will be a visual disaster that will destroy the the area's green credentials and undulating hilly vistas. In no way does this development enhance the "local" character of Rosanna. There are far too many apartments and not enough car spaces. Tenants will park in the station car park resulting in less spots for commuters, as is currently happening with the tenants of the nearby apartments on Betham Parade. This will have a knock on effect to the surrounding streets. The losers will be the current local residents of the nearby streets. They will most likely face parking restrictions and permits to park in their own street. Hillside Road will be badly affected by increased traffic and noise. The increased traffic is a safety issue for local residents. The site should not be developed. It should be used to provide additional car spaces for commuters. At a time when the Federal government is receiving criticism for its failure to deliver on its promise of more car parking at train stations; it would appear this site is a perfect candidate for the federal government to acquire and deliver on its promise. Inadequate consideration has been given to the impact on local birdlife. The local area is home to native birds which are often seen in the trees and gardens surrounding the proposed site. A building seven stories high must surely have a negative impact on the local birdlife. Submission Cover Sheet Victorian Transport Projects 33 Standing Advisory Committee Rosanna Request to be Yes heard?: Full Name: Alicia Curry Organisation: Affected property: Attachment 1: https://engage.vic.gov.au/download_file/49273 Attachment 2: Attachment 3: Comments: • Failure of Engage Victoria to do proper notifications on this planning amendment and development. • Intensity of development not in keeping with “Neighbourhood Activity Centre” or Plan Melbourne • The proposed development is inconsistent with the Banyule planning scheme. • The proposed development is inconsistent with the existing streetscape and Neighbourhood Character. • The development is inconsistent with Planning Practice Notes • The development is inconsistent with policies on Cooling and Greening Melbourne • Building being double the height of the Rosanna station. • Unprecedented and unwarranted building height. • Failure of proper planning for Rosanna. • Strategic location not nominated as growth or high density. • Failure of Banyule Council to implement a “Structure Plan” (possibly due to commercial influence) • Overbearing bulk of building • Building aesthetics compromising local village feel. • Not in keeping with Banyule council planning work such as Rosanna Urban Design Guidelines and Landscape. • Rosanna Urban Designs state preferred height of 3-4 storeys. • Lack of integration with existing buildings and residential • Topography of location not considered. • Unacceptable reduction of parking • Parking waiver is discriminatory • Bicycle preference not validated. • Detrimental impact of traffic • Road network concerns. • Impact of other planned buildings in area incl across the railway (including overshadowing, overlooking, visual bulk, light availability other traffic and reduction in parking etc but not limited to these) • Station carparking will be utilised (as it is for the other apartments) • Increased Traffic concerns • Amenity Impact & Concerns (incl Noise, Health etc) • Living standards for future residents. • Health concerns for future residents. • Flooding potential and drainage / sewerage concerns • Apartment design flaws. • Egress / Ingress problems • Waste management plan insufficient • Overshadowing / Light availability • Wind factor / impact • Loss of Ridgeline sight. • Certain retail uses should be prevented • Impact on Banyule Council resources • Infrastructure not forward planned • Setback of building insufficient • Step back of levels insufficient • Not in line with the hierarchy of Activity Centres • Reference to other Activity Centres of a higher order • Not in line with Banyule other Activity Centres plans • Safety Concerns • Possible soil contamination / impact? • No reference to habitat links – Wildlife Corridor. • Development is discriminatory against certain populations. • Economic impact on other neighbourhood centres such as Macleod & Lower Plenty not considered. Submission Cover Sheet ROSANNA VILLAGE (INCLUDING LEVEL CROSSING REMOVAL) URBAN DESIGN AND LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES Banyule City Council December 2016 Date Version Issue For 12.09.2016 P1 Council review VicRoads/Client Review 20.10.2016 - Council Approval Client Issue 27.10.2016 A Council Approval Client Issue 14.11.2016 B Council Approval Client Issue 08.12.2016 C Final Council Adoption 21.12.2016 D Final Council Adoption BANYULE CITY COUNCIL CONTENTS Existing Conditions Plan 4 The Vision 5 Urban Design Framework Directions 6 Urban Design Framework Plan (Corridor) 7 Urban Design Framework Plan (Rosanna Village) 8 Urban Design Guidelines 9 1. Identity 10 2. Vibrancy 12 3. Connectivity and Wayfinding 14 4. Urban Integration 16 5. Resilience and Sustainability 18 6. Amenity 20 7. Safety 22 8. Accessibility 24 Appendices Appendix A - Landscape Guidelines 3 ROSANNA VILLAGE LEVEL CROSSING REMOVAL | URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES 4 BANYULE CITY COUNCIL THE VISION The vision for Rosanna Village is: KEY CHARACTER ELEMENTS OF ROSANNA VILLAGE Place: The key neighborhood characteristics most significant to