USYD Camperdown-Darlington Campus Improvement Program

Request Sydney University convene a residents meeting to explain the proposal. Extend submission deadline past the date of this meeting. Given the Government is proposing development of railway land out to Macdonaldtown we need a Government infrastructure/services plan dealing with Sydney University and the railway property developments.

I am the principal tenant of a property on the corner of Shepherd St and Calder Rd, directly opposite the 'carpark' adjacent to the Rose St Building in the University's Engineering Precinct. Though marked on the University's plans as merely a 'carpark', this area contains a large number of beautiful large eucalyptus trees that provide an important buffer, a nature strip between the University and its neighbours.

The University proposes to replace this 'carpark' with a new building that will be 13m to 17m high. Based on the University's own plans, there will no setback of this building from the street boundary.

I strongly object to this proposed building. It will increase overshadowing on Shepherd St and Calder Rd, and create additional noise through its use. Residents have already struggled for many years to get the University to take proper responsibility for night time noise in the Darlington campus.

It will also significantly reduce the visual amenity of Shepherd St. The adjacent building, marked RL 27.3 on the University's plans, already has a high sheer brick facade directly on Shepherd St, which is extremely ugly. This new development proposal will remove a large number of beautiful trees and replace them with another high facade right on the footpath. The proposed building height is much higher than the houses opposite. This will further reinforce the fortress like quality of the University, and make Shepherd St less pleasant for local residents and the many pedestrians who use it.

The University also proposes in its Access Strategy to reduce vehicular traffic inside the campus and push vehicle movements to the periphery. The net effect of this strategy will be to increase pressure on Darlington's local roads, which are already strained by University staff and students driving through or looking for free parking. On p3 of the Access Strategy, a diagram appears to show (the quality of the pdf is poor) a University gateway on Shepherd St at the Calder Rd intersection.

The increased use of Shepherd St for University traffic movements is totally inappropriate. This is a narrow suburban street on which two cars can barely pass when cars are parked on either side. To propose a drop off or pick up point here is quite ridiculous and insensitive to the local community. While I understand the University's desire to reduce vehicles on campus, residents should not pay the price for this.

The Eucalypt Grove is an important feature which gives Shepherd Street it's distinctive character in the Darlington area. If removed it would accentuate a tunnel effect and create a lane way rather than the current pleasant streetscape. The Eucalypt Grove was originally established to help soften the impacts of the surrounding built environment of brick concrete and asphalt.

To whom it may concern:

I wish to make comment on the University of Sydney CIP 2014-2020 SSD 6123 Application.

I am concerned that the University has submitted an application of some signifiance to the Department of Planning without undertaking communcity consultation prior to submitting the proposal.

The University has assured the local community that it will engage and inform to ensure transparency and accountability and to regain community trust. This has not occurred.

We have concerns and objections relating to several aspects of the proposal.

1. Removal of several large mature trees from the Darlington Campus adjacent to the Engineering sector and lining Shepherd St is proposed. This is inconsistent with advice in the supporting ecological assessment where is recommends maintaining mature trees. I note that the University's tree plan has little mature trees comparative to it's size. These trees currently form part of a corridor providing habitat and connectivity for a range of native species including ring tail possums as well as native birds. These trees also provide a carbon offset and reduce the liklihood of a heat sink occuring in the area.

2. Removal of the trees mentioned above and the current car park to develop a building will have a negative impact on the surrounding streets and residents. Car traffic in the local area surrounding is already breaching capacity several times a day, and removing car spaces will increase pressure on the local streets and have a negative impact on residents through the generation of noise and emissions. The University's access plan is misguided and as local residents we find that Uni students are quite willing to drive and illegaly park in the local street rather than use alternative methods of transport available to them.

3. Construction of a building in the current eucalypt grove and car park will increase ground temperatires on the surrounding streets and contribute to overshadowing on Shepherd Street Darlingon.

We appreciate that the University needs to develop to future proof their business however, they need to remember that they are part of the local community and behave accordingly. Railroading residents and destrying habitats is not the way to do it.

To Peter McManus,

We object to the University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123).

The University of Sydney has not complied with the Director General's Requirements which were requested from the Department of Planning in September 2013.

In the Director-General's Requirements documents there is a requirement which says "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with the relevant Commonwealth Government, State or local authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: ...RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

In the EIS itself at Section 10.2 it states ""The University has been engaging with the local community throughout 2013 on the Darlington Campus Abercrombie Redevelopment Project. This has resulted in meetings with key stakeholders and local community with the University providing regular communication regarding the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy. Details of these community stakeholders can be found at Appendix N."

Section 10.2 then goes on to state "Through this engagement the University has been able to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University". However, at no stage in this engagement was there any mention by the University representatives present that they were trying "to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University" nor was there any mention of the Campus Improvement Program (CIP). The engagement was specifically about the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy.

Section 10.2 of the EIS then goes on to say "These issues have all been considered and provided for in the development of the CIP through the following inclusions detailed in Table 11". Table 11 then has 2 columns: one headed "Issue Raised" which lists the things the University has identified as issues for the community (without having checked these with the community); and one headed "CIP Response" which is presumably how the University will address those issues, which it itself has identified, in the CIP.

This table is included to address another requirement laid down by the Director-General that "The EIS must describe the consultation process and the issues raised, and identify where the design of the development has been amended in response to these issues. Where amendments have not been made to address an issue, a short explanation should be provided."

Clearly, the intention of Section 10.2 is to convince the Department that the University has complied with the Director-General's Requirements and has consulted with RAIDD in regard to the preparation of the EIS. However, no such consultation has ever taken place.

When members of RAIDD wrote to the Vice-Chancellor to complain about their names being listed in the CIS as having been consulted when they had not, the Vice-Chancellor replied quoting the first paragraph of Section 10.2 and saying "There is no suggestion that these community stakeholders were being consulted about the CIP in this reference" (see attached).

Clearly, the Vice-Chancellor agrees with us that the local community has not been consulted in the preparation of the EIS and that the University has therefore not met the condition of the Director-General's Requirements which directed the University to consult with RAIDD (amongst others) in the preparation of the EIS.

Because of this we submit that this Development Application should not be considered by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. The University should be instructed to abide by the Director-General's Requirements and consult properly with the local community, taking into account any issues raised and showing the changes made to address each issue, before resubmitting a new State Significant Development Application to the Department.

Regards,
Colin Sharp and Mary Ellen McCue,
on behalf of RAIDD (Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence).

Dear Peter,

I am writing in regard to the Exhibition of the Development Application for this State Significant Development, notification of which we received on 24 January 2014.

I note that the SSD application, Environmental Impact Statement and accompanying documents, 146 documents in total, may be inspected until 28 February. I also note that I have until that same date to make a submission.

This means that I now have less than 4 weeks to absorb a wealth of information, understand the implications it may have on surrounding residents, and formulate a meaningful response. I do not feel that I am being given nearly enough time in which to do this. I have very little time left in my busy schedule in which to understand something of this magnitude.

Clearly, the University has been preparing all these documents over many months and even years. In all that time the University has not consulted with local residents, the people who will be directly affected by what they are proposing in this SSD application, in any way whatsoever. And now I am being given 4 weeks in which to comment. This is unfair and unacceptable.

I respectfully request at least another 3 months until 31 May 2014 in which to make my submission.

Regards,

Hamish Spencer

Dear sir,

I am writing this email in relation to the proposed development : SSD 13_6123 USYD Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 for Camperdown-DarlingtonCampus.

I am a long term resident of 140 Shepherd st Darlington and have enjoyed the ambience of the Eucalypt Grove for many years. I was horrified to learn today that the grove will be replaced by another ugly building. These trees are important for the birdlife and general ambience that has come to define Darlington.

I urge you to please reconsider this proposal and find a more environmentally friendly alternative

Yours sincerely

Daniel Wallace-Crabbe

Dear Mr McManus,

I am resident living in Calder Road Darlington. It has come to my attention having spoken to other residents in the area, that the University of Sydney has submitted its Campus Improvement Program to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. The submission is a complex set of more than 140 documents including a proposal for more student accommodation in the Darlington area that will mean the bulldozing and destruction of a eucalyptus grove that presently faces Shepherd Street.

Given the complexity of issues involved here, the seemingly lack of any initial consultation with residents by the University of Sydney, and the deadline of February 28th looming, I would like to request that an extension of time be given to residents in which to make their voices heard, and that the University of Sydney be required to provide a more robust consultation process (including meetings with planners and the Vice Chancellor) be implemented, not just as a courtesy but as an indication that the University is open to such discussions with its neighbours before the Department begins to process the documents. Residents need to absorb the implications of the proposed plan and the time being allocated to do this is, in a word, unacceptable.

Overdevelopment of the Darlington village is of a great concern to us as residents. Already the University of Sydney has encroached into the Darlington village not only through other massive developments but also through other intrusive means such as unwelcome building alarms going off in the early hours of the morning without being attended to. In this case presently under discussion the University of Sydney is proposing more student accommodation. This has significant implications for us as residents in terms of noise from such accommodation, the destruction of trees, privacy matters, the perpetuation of ugliness along Shepherd street and other potential and unforeseen consequences.

I would ask for an extension until at least the end of March 2014. The University may claim to be improving its campus but it appears that it's not really interested in improving the overall environment of Darlington village in which it is located.

Regards

William S Armour

Dear Peter McManus,
I request an extension of time for objections and complaints against these proposed developments. We are already under siege from the current developments. NO MORE enough. Why are these developments necessary?
This are will become nothing more than a student slum.
Residents are already stressed with noise and parking losses.
Kind Regards
Judex

Hello,

It has been brought to my attention by a neighbour that there are plans to build a university building and tear down the Darlington Eucalypt Grove.

I would like to add my voice to other members of the Darlington community, and ask that you reconsider this proposal. Tearing down the grove will have a negative impact on local residents, and the university can - and should - explore other options.

Kind Regards,

Cathy Topping

Hi Peter,

I am writing to say that I'm appalled I am to learn of Sydney University's plan to bulldoze the Eucalypt Grove in Darlington:

As a nearby (and long-term) resident in Edward Street, I know these trees well and see them every morning when I walk along Shepherd Street.

And can assure you they are an important part of our daily lives, as well as the urban landscape.

So please don't allow this to happen.

It might be designated as part of a (so-called) `Improvement Program'...

But it will actually spoil the area.

Our suburb, and our city, needs these trees!

Thank you,

Helen thomas

Hello,

I have recently been made aware of the proposal to bulldoze the Eucalypt Grove on the Shepherd Street campus car park in order for the university to develop a 3 storey building on the site. I wish to voice my objection to this plan in the strongest possible terms, as the trees in question, in my opinion, are of paramount importance to the area.
As a resident of Thomas street I experience the benefits, in terms of aesthetic appeal and natural beauty, that the Eucalypt Grove provides everyone in the area. I'm sure the university can find an alternative way to meet their needs and respect the wishes of the local community who already feel the effects of its ongoing expansion.

Yours sincerely

Matthew Price

Mr McManus,

I am reaching out to you in relation to the Exhibition of the Development Application for this State Significant Development, notification of which we received on 24 January 2014.

I understand that the SSD application, Environmental Impact Statement and accompanying documents, 146 documents in total, may be inspected until 28 February.
I understand that I have until that same date to make a submission.

This means that I now have less than 4 weeks to absorb massive amounts of data, understand the implications it may have on surrounding residents, and formulate a meaningful response. I do not feel that I am being given nearly enough time in which to do this. I have very little time left in my busy schedule in which to understand something of this magnitude.

Clearly, the University has been preparing all these documents over many months and even years. In all that time the University has not consulted with local residents, the people who will be directly affected by what they are proposing in this SSD application, in any way whatsoever. And now I am being given 4 weeks in which to comment. This is unfair and unacceptable.

I request at least another 3 months until 31 May 2014 in which to make my submission.

Regards,

Dominic de Beaujeu

Dear Peter

University of Sydney Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

I am concerned that my name appeared inappropriately in the Documentation's Appendix N entitled Consultation Outcomes of the above Staged Development Application. I would like my name to be removed from the list of community stakeholders in Appendix N.

I am indeed a community stakeholder in relation generally to Sydney University and particularly its Darlington Campus.

However I have NOT been consulted by the University individually or as a member of the local residents' group RAIDD regarding this particular Program/Plan (C.I.P. 2014-20).

I strongly think that the implications of the inclusion of my name as a community stakeholder in Appendix N are that :

1 the University has consulted with me and

2 I have had sufficient time to study the plan.

However neither is the case. I have not been given procedural fairness and I am asking you to grant me an appropriate extension of time for comment beyond the due date of 28 February 2014 - so that I can properly study the plan and respond.

I look forward to hearing from you with some urgency.

Yours sincerely

Rosie Wagstaff

Dear Mr McManus,

We are opposed to the threatened destruction of the Darlington Eucalyptus Grove on the campus Shepherd St car park facing houses in Shepherd St & Calder Rd.

This is a vital stretch of greenery not only providing a buffer for residents but also provides a refuge for native birds & other wildlife. There is insuffient amenity in Darlington & we cannot afford the loss of this vital stand of trees.

Yours sincerely

University of Sydney Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

Dear Mr McManus,

I am writing in regard to the Exhibition of the Development Application for this State Significant Development, notification of which we received on 24 January 2014.

I note that the SSD application, Environmental Impact Statement and accompanying documents, 146 documents in total, may be inspected until 28 February. I also note that I have until that same date to make a submission.

This means that I now have less than 4 weeks to absorb a wealth of information, understand the implications it may have on surrounding residents, and formulate a meaningful response. I do not feel that I am being given nearly enough time in which to do this. I have very little time left in my busy schedule in which to understand something of this magnitude.

Clearly, the University has been preparing all these documents over many months and even years. In all that time the University has not consulted with local residents, the people who will be directly affected by what they are proposing in this SSD application, in any way whatsoever.

And now I am being given 4 weeks in which to comment. This is unfair and unacceptable.

I request at least another 3 months until 31 May 2014 in which to make my submission.

Regards

Louisa Graham

University of Sydney Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

Dear Mr McManus,

I am writing in regard to the Exhibition of the Development Application for this State Significant Development, notification of which we received on 24 January 2014.

I note that the SSD application, Environmental Impact Statement and accompanying documents, 146 documents in total, may be inspected until 28 February. I also note that I have until that same date to make a submission.

This means that I now have less than 4 weeks to absorb a wealth of information, understand the implications it may have on surrounding residents, and formulate a meaningful response. I do not feel that I am being given nearly enough time in which to do this. I have very little time left in my busy schedule in which to understand something of this magnitude.

Clearly, the University has been preparing all these documents over many months and even years. In all that time the University has not consulted with local residents, the people who will be directly affected by what they are proposing in this SSD application, in any way whatsoever. And now I am being given 4 weeks in which to comment. This is unfair and unacceptable.

I request at least another 3 months until 31 May 2014 in which to make my submission.

Regards,

Chris Sidwell.

Mr Peter McManus

Dept Planning & Infrastructure

Dear Peter

I'm writing to express my anger and dismay over plans to demolish the wonderful stand of Eucalyptus on Shepherd St in Darlington.

I am a long term resident of Darlington, and whilst not living on Shepherd St itself, I pass by and appreciate the trees on a daily basis.

For the past 30 years these local grounds of the University have been our ' backyard', in a suburb intensely populated with students and families. Our terrace houses have little or no garden and park space, so we and our children walk, cycle, picnic, read and relax amongst these lovely mature trees. One of the attractions of Darlington is the remaining mature trees established by residents and the University during the 1970s when renovation and renewal of the suburb was underway. Birds and wildlife are a constant presence in the suburb due to these oases.

The University currently has extensive - in fact intrusive - building expansion underway at many locations close to my home. As a Sydney University graduate, I am supportive of the University continuing to thrive - but not at the expense of quiet residential areas and heritage precincts close by. Overdevelopment is already intruding on Darlington with bulky highrise development on Abercrombie St nearby.

Federal, State and local government are investing in the greening of cities around the nation, and the University similarly needs to respect the value of established village areas and the important established greenery associated with them. New developments must take place on other more appropriate commercial/industrial land. Any redevelopment of existing sites must preserve the character of the area, the amenity of residents, and the precious mature trees of this special locality.

I urge you to reject the proposal to destroy the eucalypt grove on Shepherd St Darlington.

Yours sincerely

Jill Finch

Hi Peter

We understand submissions for the University's Campus Improvement plan are closing.

Could this be extended to allow us to comment We note we currently have a significant number of other submissions which we are commenting on. As such, we have not had sufficient time to review the full set of plans for this project.

We also note that there has been no consultation to date with our local community, despite the significant increase in proposed GFA which is likely to impact Chippendale as well as Darlington and other adjoining suburbs.

From our initial reading of the plans, the proposed "notional" increase in GFA to 2020 (from 2013) is 222K which is nearly as much as the introduction of Central Park. As such, the increased usage will have a flow-on impact in terms of local infrastructure, open space, traffic and residential and business amenity. In response, we would greatly appreciate an extension in time to comment.

Further much of the detail in terms of the accompanying legends for key diagrams/maps cannot be clearly viewed (even when the documents are increased in size). Here, it would be helpful if urgent arrangements are made to address this - particularly in terms of the EIS as a stand alone document so that we and other parties have sufficient information to comment.

We can be contacted at this email address should you require any further information.

Regards

Jeanette Brokman

for Chippendale Residents Interest Group

Dear Peter McMannus,

I have a concern with the potential impact that this building will do to the area where I live.

There is NO NEED for Sydney University to destroy the Eucalypt Grove.

The Eucalypt Grove has very significant aesthetic values and provides a refuge for native birds and other wildlife.

I find it quite disturbing that this building works can be contemplated and considered to not have grave implications to residents of the Darlington Area.

- This building will bring - Noise

- This building will bring - Pollution

- This building will bring - crime

- This building will do nothing good to the Aesthetics of the area.

- This building will have - grave implications to Parking

- This building and removal of trees will do nothing but harm Flora and Fauna

I am all for growth and opportunity but this NON planning seems to have been submitted without any consultation or practical thinking on what best to do for the area.

ALSO

In reference to;

University of Sydney Campus Improvement Program 2014 - 2020

State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

OBJECTIONS

The University's ecological assessment of its campuses states - " The Large number of mature tree provides a canopy of relative importance. "

The University should not change its line of thought and listen to its own assessment and not destroy the Darlington Eucalypt Grove which is an important part of the tree canopy.

There is a likelihood of occurrence at the site for the Grey-headed Flying Fox, the Eastern Bentwing Bat, the Little Bentwing Bat and the Large-eared Pied Bat.

Potential impacts to these species would be as a result of the loss of foraging habitat.

Recommendations: Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites. Minimise loss of open
space."

The University should listen to its own assessment and recommendations and not destroy these mature trees and open space to preserve the habitats and bridges of fauna.

A Tree Management Plan has been developed by the University which aims to "maintain and increase the present canopy cover at the Camperdown and Darlington Campuses."

The University should implement its own Tree Plan and maintain the Darlington Eucalypt Grove canopy and not destroy it.

"The University has developed a list of planting principles within its Landscape Design Principles ..... which will contribute towards the enhancement of flora and fauna."

The University should implement its own planting principals and preserve and enhance the flora and fauna associated with the Darlington Eucalypt Grove.

The CITY of SYDNEY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2012 requires the following of the University-

Enhancement of the landscape campus setting by accommodating open spaces within precincts.

Retention and addition of vistas to open spaces or landmark buildings.

The University should implement the Council Plan by not destroying the Darlington Eucalypt Grove. If the grove were bulldozed and replaced by a 3 storey building the open vista to the Engineering lawn and the landmark PNR building beyond would be lost.

The University of Sydney should provide quiet green buffer zones.

The University should look at other sites.

Other sites are available.

Brad Taylor