Alterations and Additions to Waverley College

UBMISSION - SSD-42425537
Waverley College Redevelopment
My name is Allan Hall. I live at 2a Henrietta Street, Waverley, which is across the road from the existing Waverley College. I am legally blind and do not drive. Pedestrian access to my apartment is via a gate on Henrietta Street and I make frequent use of Henrietta Street to access the bus stop on Birrell Street and to access Waverley Park.
I am concerned about the proposed development for the following reasons.
Construction Impacts
I am concerned about the impacts of construction including noise, vibration, dust, and construction traffic including large trucks. There is no Construction Management Plan that I am aware of. Henrietta Street is a narrow road that will lose most of the on-street parking now available. Access through Henrietta Street and parking in Henrietta Street and surrounding roads will be severely impacted over the duration of this proposed development.
Despite the best will in the world, dust from construction activity will affect adjacent properties.
Impact on Trees
It is proposed to remove several mature trees on the site including tree 68, which is a mature fig tree. The College’s tree report indicated that the significant fig tree #76, between the tennis courts and Henrietta Street, will be retained. However, I am doubtful of the ability of the tree to withstand adverse effects of the proposed excavation works (including stormwater works) in the root zone of this tree.
Long term noise impacts
There will be additional noise from the increased traffic movements of patrons from after-hours use of the expanded facilities, together with use of the proposed outdoor roof terrace to building 1.
Visual Impact of Building 1
This building is higher and more bulky than other buildings in Henrietta Street. Its size leads to limited ability for canopy trees to screen it from view. Visually, it will create an impression of turning Henrietta Street into a canyon. From early afternoon, the size of the building will cast shadows over Henrietta Street. What is already an often windy street has the potential to be turned into a wind tunnel.
Long term traffic and parking impacts
Additional students, staff and patrons of the after-hours activities will lead to additional traffic congestion and demand for parking in the precinct. This is particularly the case with the proposal to change the staff car park from entry only from Henrietta Street and exit via Birrell Street to entry and exit via Henrietta Street and close the Birrell Street exit. This car park is already used out of school hours by other patrons. Current use of the Henrietta Street entry extends from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM.
The proposal to decrease the number of parking spaces in later stages of the development will result in greater demand for on-street parking in neighbouring roads. Residents living along many of those roads have no off-street parking.

I live in Langlee Avenue, which is just off Henrietta St and close by Waverley College. I'm submitting my objection to the proposed expansion of the school, specifically the traffic implications of an expanded car park and change of the carpark entry/exit exclusively on Henrietta St. Our area is already an absolute nightmare to travel through during school beginning and ending times. The traffic gridlocks our streets at both ends so that no matter which way we drive, we are stuck waiting behind ferrying parents, at times taking 10 mins to exit our own street. It's an absolute pain. Plus the addition of heavy construction vehicles on Henriettea (as well as all the workers vying for the limited parking in our street) for upwards of 2 years during construction is also a a scenario that I do not support. There you have it.

See attached.

I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed State Significant Development at Waverley College Redevelopment SSD-42425537. As a regular visitor to the area and someone with a deep appreciation for the local environment, I am deeply concerned about the potential impacts of this development, not just on the immediate site but on the character and beauty of the entire area.

This area is home to some of the most iconic and beloved natural features, including the Moreton Bay Fig trees. These trees are a significant part of the landscape, contributing to the overall aesthetic and ecological health of the region. However, my concerns go beyond the potential risks to these trees alone. The scale and nature of the proposed development will irreparably change the visual and environmental fabric of the area, diminishing the very qualities that make it special to the community and visitors alike.

The development appears unnecessary, especially when weighed against the long-term loss of local character and the disruption to the natural environment. The proposed buildings and associated infrastructure will result in a marked reduction in the open space, greenery, and tranquil atmosphere that this area currently offers. For many, including myself, the beauty of this area is one of its most valued qualities, and I fear that any development of this magnitude will erode that beauty beyond repair.

Additionally, the impact on local wildlife are significant concerns. The development seems to cater to a growing demand that does not necessarily align with the needs or desires of the community. The area has long been valued for its peaceful surroundings, and this proposal, in my view, represents an unwarranted and overly ambitious intrusion.

In light of these factors, I strongly urge you to reconsider the proposed development. The area’s natural beauty, community character, and overall liveability should not be sacrificed in the name of development, especially when it seems unnecessary for the ongoing well-being of the local area.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my concerns.

My name is Roslyn Webber and I live at 40c Langlee Avenue Waverley and I object to this proposed developement:
I am concerned about the impacts of construction noise, dust & the traffic. Contruction trucks and there seems to be no Construction Management plans.
The building is higher and more bulky than any other building in Henrietta Street.
The removal of trees concerns me as well.
I am an ex Waverley mother and understand the need for development.
The long term traffic and parking impacts the area.
Birrell Street is a park lot around school times and can take me 30 mins to get from Birrell Street to Bronte Road.

I respectfully request that my concerns regarding the proposed alterations and additions to Waverley College be taken into account, particularly in relation to the proposal for additional parking and the design of the new school science building (Building 1). I believe these proposals will have a negative impact on the local residents of Henrietta Street. My concerns are as follows:
1.The significant Loss of Trees and Insufficient Landscaping. The removal of trees and inadequate landscaping throughout the school grounds, particularly along Henrietta Street and Birrell Street, is concerning.
2. The Design of Building 1. The design of Building 1, especially Phase 2, which is planned directly on Henrietta Street, is too tall. It does not provide adequate space for trees or landscaping, which are essential for softening the building's appearance and reducing the noise from students.
3. The Rooftop Terraces – The rooftop terraces on Building 1 will overlook The Langlee apartments, potentially leading to increased noise levels from the use of these decks, which could extend into evening hours, possibly beyond school hours.
4. The Parking Proposal – I strongly oppose the plan to add more parking, especially the proposal to place parking spaces over the significant fig tree at the Henrietta Street end of the tennis courts and to chop down the large fig tree to build Building 1.
5. The Closure of Birrell Street Exit . Closing the Birrell Street exit will force all school traffic to funnel through Langlee Avenue. As it stands, I already face difficulties accessing my driveway due to heavy traffic during school drop-off times, as well as on weekends when children's sports are held at Waverley Park.
6. The Construction Impacts. I am also concerned about the potential damage to mature trees during construction, as well as the dust that could harm the vertical and building gardens at The Langlee apartments, which are a significant investment.
I ask that these issues be carefully considered before any decisions are made regarding the approval of these proposals. I would hope that the government does not allow the project to have these very negative environmental impacts, and that the College is only allowed to do a smaller Building 1 with no roof to use, does not remove or harm the mature trees, does not increase local traffic, does not create dust and finally has to plant and look after the trees on the school grounds for future generations

I am very concerned about the impact of the Waverley College Development. I believe it should be considerably scaled down to lessen all effects of privacy, noise, traffic congestion, destruction of beautiful old trees, and spoiling the residential atmosphere currently enjoyed in the neighborhood.

Dear Waverley Council,
RE: Application Number: SSD-42425537, Alterations and Additions to Waverley College

I am writing to express my concerns about the traffic, parking, noise and waste management implications of the proposed development at Waverley College, outlined in the recent "Appendix II FT-213 Traffic Impact Assessment" report. While the project intends to enhance educational facilities, the current development plan raises several community challenges that I believe need further consideration:

1. Increased Traffic and Congestion: The expansion will bring additional students and staff, estimated to increase by 220 staff and 1,500 students by the Stage 3. The increased traffic on Birrell Street, Henrietta Street, and Carrington Road is anticipated to lead to significant congestion, especially during morning and afternoon school peaks. According to the assessment, some intersections, notably the Birrell Street/ Langlee avenue intersection and the Bronte road/Victoria street intersection, are already strained, operating close to or beyond acceptable capacity. Further development will exacerbate these issues, negatively impacting the daily commute for residents and other commuters in the area. Living in Campbell street, I note that the traffic is already very congested in the area at the time of school drop off, especially at the corner of Langlee avenue / Birrell street as well as the Bronte road / Victoria street intersection, which will be subjected to increasing traffic flow based on the proposed traffic management plan.

2. Limited On-Site Parking Availability: While the initial stages of development include a temporary increase in parking spaces, this is scheduled to reduce substantially in later stages, from 136 down to 73 spaces, which is even lower than the current number of parking spaces (87). This plan does not seem sufficient to accommodate the projected increase in the college’s population, which may push more vehicles to park on surrounding residential streets, affecting local residents’ access and increasing competition for parking spaces on an ongoing basis beyond the development work. Living myself in Campbell street, which is a 2P area, it is clear that there is already an increasing competition for parking, especially at the time of school drop off, sports activities and events. By reducing even further the number of school parking spaces and increasing the staff and student populations, there is no doubt that this development will only exacerbate this problem.

3. Waste Collection Challenges: The development proposes maintaining waste collection on Birrell Street and Salisbury Street with limited adjustments. Increased student and staff numbers and new facilities will lead to higher waste output, and current plans to manage these with kerbside collection will: (i) create more noise in the early mornings and (ii) impede traffic flow and access, particularly during school peak hours. While the waste management plan mentions no need to increase the number of bins, the frequency of waste collection will likely be increased. Living in Campbell street, near the bin collection area on Salisbury, I note that bins collection occurs almost every day already and very early (6am or before) and without any noise mitigation in place. The noise created by these early waste collections, already negatively affect 30 or more families living in the area. This could be mitigated by modifying the time of collection.

4. Noise increase: During and after the development, there will be substantial increases in noise from the construction, long-term student/staff numbers increase, long-term traffic increase, and increased waste collection. The noise from the staff/students and waste collection already substantially impacts local residents, particularly on Salisbury and Campbell streets from the pool, tennis courts and at student break times and pick up/drop off times as well as during an increasing number of events. Living in Campbell street, I would be happy to provide sound recordings to demonstrate the level of noise. The level of noise could definitively be reduced by mitigation methods such as the addition of Sound Proof Panels - Sound Barriers that are transparent and could easily be applied on the fences around the school, therefore helping to mitigate this negative impact on local residents.

In conclusion, while I appreciate the development goals, I object to the project as it currently stands and urge the council to reconsider aspects of traffic, parking, noise and waste management outlined in the current proposal. It is essential that the project incorporates more robust strategies to mitigate these negative impacts on our community quality of life. Suggested measures might include additional on-site parking, enhanced traffic management plans, a different schedule for waste collection and noise barriers on the fences around the school, especially by the pool and tennis courts.
Sincerely,
Concerned local resident

Dear Waverley Council,
RE: Application Number: SSD-42425537, Alterations and Additions to Waverley College

I am writing to express my concerns about the traffic, parking, noise and waste management implications of the proposed development at Waverley College, outlined in the recent "Appendix II FT-213 Traffic Impact Assessment" report. While the project intends to enhance educational facilities, the current development plan raises several community challenges that I believe need further consideration:

1. Increased Traffic and Congestion: The expansion will bring additional students and staff, estimated to increase by 220 staff and 1,500 students by the Stage 3. The increased traffic on Birrell Street, Henrietta Street, and Carrington Road is anticipated to lead to significant congestion, especially during morning and afternoon school peaks. According to the assessment, some intersections, notably the Birrell Street/ Langlee avenue intersection and the Bronte road/Victoria street intersection, are already strained, operating close to or beyond acceptable capacity. Further development will exacerbate these issues, negatively impacting the daily commute for residents and other commuters in the area. Living in Campbell street, I note that the traffic is already very congested in the area at the time of school drop off, especially at the corner of Langlee avenue / Birrell street as well as the Bronte road / Victoria street intersection, which will be subjected to increasing traffic flow based on the proposed traffic management plan.

2. Limited On-Site Parking Availability: While the initial stages of development include a temporary increase in parking spaces, this is scheduled to reduce substantially in later stages, from 136 down to 73 spaces, which is even lower than the current number of parking spaces (87). This plan does not seem sufficient to accommodate the projected increase in the college’s population, which may push more vehicles to park on surrounding residential streets, affecting local residents’ access and increasing competition for parking spaces on an ongoing basis beyond the development work. Living myself in Campbell street, which is a 2P area, it is clear that there is already an increasing competition for parking, especially at the time of school drop off, sports activities and events. By reducing even further the number of school parking spaces and increasing the staff and student populations, there is no doubt that this development will only exacerbate this problem.

3. Waste Collection Challenges: The development proposes maintaining waste collection on Birrell Street and Salisbury Street with limited adjustments. Increased student and staff numbers and new facilities will lead to higher waste output, and current plans to manage these with kerbside collection will: (i) create more noise in the early mornings and (ii) impede traffic flow and access, particularly during school peak hours. While the waste management plan mentions no need to increase the number of bins, the frequency of waste collection will likely be increased. Living in Campbell street, near the bin collection area on Salisbury, I note that bins collection occurs almost every day already and very early (6am or before) and without any noise mitigation in place. The noise created by these early waste collections, already negatively affect 30 or more families living in the area. This could be mitigated by modifying the time of collection.

4. Noise increase: During and after the development, there will be substantial increases in noise from the construction, long-term student/staff numbers increase, long-term traffic increase, and increased waste collection. The noise from the staff/students and waste collection already substantially impacts local residents, particularly on Salisbury and Campbell streets from the pool, tennis courts and at student break times and pick up/drop off times as well as during an increasing number of events. Living in Campbell street, I would be happy to provide sound recordings to demonstrate the level of noise. The level of noise could definitively be reduced by mitigation methods such as the addition of Sound Proof Panels - Sound Barriers that are transparent and could easily be applied on the fences around the school, therefore helping to mitigate this negative impact on local residents.

In conclusion, while I appreciate the development goals, I object to the project as it stands currently and urge the council to reconsider aspects of traffic, parking, noise and waste management outlined in the current proposal. It is essential that the project incorporates more robust strategies to mitigate these negative impacts on our community quality of life. Suggested measures might include additional on-site parking, enhanced traffic management plans, a different schedule for waste collection and noise barriers on the fences around the school, especially by the pool and tennis courts.
Sincerely,
Concerned local resident

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at Waverley College Redevelopment SSD-42425537, in particular due to the significant environmental and ecological concerns raised by the impact of the development on the two Moreton Bay Fig trees (Trees 40 and 41) as outlined in the arborist report.

With family in the area, I visit regularly and have a deep personal connection to the area and surrounding environment. My primary concern is the potential harm to the two Moreton Bay Fig trees, which are identified as the most significant on the property and may predate many of the other structures on the site. These trees are not only of considerable ecological value but also of historical importance, and I believe their preservation should be a priority.

The arborist report indicates that the proposed building and associated plumbing will result in significant encroachment into the tree protection zones of these two trees. Specifically, the report notes that the proximity of the new building to Tree 41 and the potential impact on its canopy and health is of particular concern. Despite the mention of "tree-sensitive design" and construction methods intended to minimize harm, I remain unconvinced that these measures will adequately protect the trees in the long term. The disruption to their root zones and the lack of adequate buffer zones to accommodate the future growth of the trees are likely to result in irreparable damage.

In particular, the report highlights that the future maintenance of Tree 41’s canopy, due to its proximity to the building, will be difficult and may require the use of heavy machinery such as a boom lift or elevating work platform, which could further jeopardize the tree’s health. The weight of the necessary equipment (around 2.5 tons) and the lack of clear access for this machinery only further underscores the challenges in ensuring the long-term survival of these trees.

I am also deeply concerned that the recommended "further consultation" regarding the protection of the tree canopies, particularly with respect to scaffold clearances, is insufficient to address the long-term risks posed to the trees’ health by the development.

Given these significant concerns, I respectfully request that this development proposal be reconsidered so that the trees are adequately protected and preserved. The encroachment into the tree protection zones is too great and will likely result in the death of these valuable trees, which would be an unacceptable loss to the local environment and community.

Thank you for your consideration of my concerns. I look forward to your response.

I do so hope you will excuse the rather direct nature of my words, but I find myself quite distressed over the current plans by Waverley College. You see, I am an elderly lady with degenerative MS, and I reside in a lovely one-bedroom apartment in a three storey building on Henrietta Street. My building is within a charming seniors living development called The Langlee, nestled above and around the Waverley Bowling Club. Now, I must confess that I do have a particular fondness for the sounds of schoolchildren at play. It is one of the things I cherished when I moved here from Woollahra, where I lived opposite a school for many years. I came here, in fact, for two reasons. The first was the glorious fig tree known as Tree 76, which graces the school grounds, and the second was the accessible design of my newly constructed apartment which allows me to age at home. That said, as much as I support schools expanding their learning facilities, I do find myself deeply troubled by some of the proposed changes at Waverley College. I have perused some of the Environmental Impact Statement and spoken to a few neighbours, and I must say, I am truly upset by what has been called the Eastern Precinct development plans.
You see, the school is blessed with an abundance of land, and yet they propose to excavate within the root zone of Tree 76, this is the most magnificent tree and to demonstrate why we should care about it, it is listed on the Waverley Council’s Significant Tree Register. It is nothing short of glorious, with its majestic canopy that offers shade and beauty, protecting us from the harsh westerly sun, while providing a sanctuary for countless birds and bats. It contributes immeasurably to the local amenity. I am not a good photographer, but I have taken a few pictures to show you. But, alas, the school’s plans suggest that Tree 76 will be retained but its roots will be disturbed by excavation for a large stormwater detention structure. Worse still, cars will be permitted to park directly on its roots and below its canopy for at least a decade. This is simply unacceptable and upsets me that the school does not cherish the trees as they should. The proposed excavation will damage the root systems and disrupt the groundwater that sustains not just the trees along the school’s fence boundary, but also those in the surrounding area. With the ever-increasing heat of our streets, it is vital we nurture our trees, not strip them away. You simply cannot allow these structures and cars to be anywhere near the root zone and to interrupt the trees access to essential ground water.
Moreover, the development plans include the removal of almost 20 trees, including the splendid fig near Henrietta Street called Tree 68, and the tree report notes that the Alterations and Additions at the school will encroach on the root systems and the canopy of many trees on the school grounds, including Tree 40 and Tree 41, which are older than the school itself. Surely you can ensure that even the Alterations that are proposed to take place across the school have conditions that require them to care for the trees? The new construction should not remove the mature and therefore important trees. I simply cannot fathom why the school is not leading on environmental protection – even our own development has cleverly designed a system to collect rainwater for irrigation. We use this water-saving system, and the school should be following suit by collecting rainwater from all their roofs and reusing it to reduce the demand for water. Even our community garden is drip fed by our rainwater system. The school should not be creating more hard surfaces that exacerbate runoff and stormwater problems, particularly when it impacts the health of our mature trees, and they should not be installing very expensive structures and pipes to take all the stormwater into street drains. We have all heard of the current and worsening impacts of climate change, the school should do what is possible to reduce the environmental impacts – the architectural plans do not even show solar panels on the roofs of all of its buildings.
I must also express my concern over the design to build Building 1. At six storeys, it is far too tall, and its position will stretch right down to Henrietta Street. To accommodate this monolith, many trees will be sacrificed. Surely, the building should be positioned away from the street and not disrupt the natural beauty of the area, which includes keeping Tree 68 intact. The plans for a rooftop terrace, complete with umbrellas, seem entirely misplaced, as it appears to be more about maximising ocean views for entertainment purposes rather than serving the learning needs of the students. This would invade our privacy and severely affect the peaceful environment we currently enjoy. The building simply cannot be approved as designed. The Department should not allow 22 months of construction activity for Building 1 and then when the school has more money, another round of construction to dominate the street scape with yet another building – right down onto little Henrietta Street. I could not see information on how the Alterations and Additions will not create dust. We have many vertical gardens on our building and these will not survive construction dust. Because I spend a lot of time in my lovely apartment and on my balcony, I am equally distressed by the noise and vibration that typically comes with development. I could not see how the school will manage these because there was no detail provided. This is very bad planning. I must also register my strong objection to the design of Building 1 on Henrietta Street. The proposed rooftop terraces must be scrapped, and Phase 2 of the building, planned for a decade hence, should not be approved as it will destroy yet another magnificent tree, Tree 68, to make way for the second set of student stairs that will lead into the car park. Everything about this design is wrong for both the adjacent residents and the students, and I do hope you will take these concerns seriously.
As for traffic, it is already a concern. Henrietta Street is a rather bustling street, and with the addition of more car parking and a new entrance and exit for the school, I fear there will be even more congestion and safety risks for pedestrians like me, with my walking stick and bad leg, and for the little children who walk to and from the primary school down the road, and also for the cyclists who often have children on their bikes travelling to and from their school, their home and their places of work. This area is already a challenge to navigate, even on weekends, due to the number of many fast e-bikes crossings at the corner of Henrietta and Birrell Streets. I have lived here for over a year now, and it seems the school’s development plans were lodged after my apartment was completed. Unfortunately, I was not given the opportunity to meet with the school to discuss how their proposal might affect me. It feels as though our quality of life and the local environment matters less than adding more to the school. I do so hope that these matters will be given the careful consideration they most certainly deserve.

My wife and I have lived in our new apartment in The Langlee for over a year. It seems that the construction was completed after the Alterations and Additions plans were submitted to the NSW Department Planning by Waverley College. Consequently, the plans have not considered the impact on The Langlee residents.
We support Waverley College increasing learning facilities but object to the ‘Eastern Precinct’ development proposal along the Henrietta Street boundary - which is directly opposite our apartment building.
Our objection concerns relate to:
1. Protection and preservation of magnificent mature trees
2. Adding more traffic onto Henrietta Street
3. Having roof top terraces on the new Science Building 1
The proposed “temporary” for 10 years carpark below the significant fig tree (tree 76) must not be approved, along with any stormwater or other infrastructure works in the root zone or under the canopy of that beautiful tree. The current carpark off Henrietta Street - including the proposed extension must remain as an entry only, with the exit to Birrell Street to remain. No exit should be approved onto Henrietta Street.
We are also concerned with the design of the new Science Building 1 on Henrietta Street. Phase 1 of the design should not have any outdoor rooftop terraces. Phase 2 of the building which is proposed to be constructed in 10 years’ time should not be approved in its current design – it also has proposed an entire open deck roof top terrace on its 6th floor. The roof top terraces will likely be used out of hours and will have significant impacts on the privacy of all the apartments across the street in our building that have bedrooms, living rooms and bathrooms along Henrietta Street.
We trust that our concerns will be taken into consideration when reviewing the Waverley College redevelopment proposal. Thank you.

Construction traffic and safety

Building machinery in a narrow already over crowded
Henrietta St
Young children and elderly adults using the Henrietta St footpaths and road

Staff car park change

The staff will enter and exit in Henrietta St adjacent to the entry carpark for the Bowling club and Langlee residence parking this is in close proximity to the first stage of development

Tree impact
Trees marked as T76 although stated to be healthy is likely to suffer damage during excavation and placement of an pre fad water retention drain
Once it shows damage an arborist will have no hesitation in classing it as dangerous and have it removed
This tree is listed on Waverley Council significant tree register

Landscaping replacement appears minimal following the removal of such significant trees

Noise impact acoustic report shows the former Waverley bowling club and not the current up market over 55’s development on the photo
As residents we live here 24/7 and spend the majority
of our time in our units and on our balconies
The noise issue may cause mental health issues

In conclusion I would like to say I’m a supporter of this development as I had 4 sons attend Waverley College over a period of 28 years
Next year my grandson will commence there
It is a wonderful school which needs to grow to support the growing number of children in the Eastern suburbs
Please consider some of the issues I have commented on and make the development save noise free and particularly respect the elderly residents in the Langlee

I object the Waverley College proposal to increase parking and therefore increase traffic into and out of Henrietta Street. This proposal will increase the pedestrian and cyclist safety risks because Henrietta Street is a rather narrow one-way street and the cyclists are travelling in two directions – often on e-bikes and the street is already a dangerous street for locals. The Waverley school proposal is to increase car parking and to put an entry and exit for the extra cars onto Henrietta Street and close the current exit for the cars onto Birrell Street. This entry/exit proposal will cause all traffic to feed into Langlee Avenue to get onto Birrell Street and any addition to the number of cars that already queue during the peak commuter periods and on weekends with the school sport should not be approved.

see attachment

As residents of The Langlee on Henrietta Street we are deeply concerned about the impacts of this development. These are far reaching, invasive and we believe no thorough due diligence or impact studies have been undertaken on the residents of the directly impacted areas, especially on Henrietta Street.

Our objection letter is attached herewith.

Waverley College has been an integral part of the community since 1903 and continues to grow
to meet the needs of an expanding student population, now exceeding 1,500 students. The
proposed changes reflect a thoughtful approach to this growth, respecting the local scale and
character of the area while enhancing open spaces and creating modern learning facilities.

The design addresses key accessibility improvements, significantly enhancing access and mobility
across the site. The proposed onsite parking improvements will also help mitigate traffic concerns
in the surrounding neighbourhood.

Furthermore, the updated plans create opportunities for intergenerational connections with
residents of Uniting Waverley Estate, fostering a unique and valuable community bond.

I am writing to formally object to the approval of the State Significant Development Application SSD-42425537 for the proposed development at Waverley College, NSW (Gadigal country). I believe that the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment (ACHA) submitted as part of this SSDA does not adequately address the cultural significance of the site, and I have significant concerns regarding both the lack of a proper "Connecting with Country" assessment and the proposed removal of a fig tree, which is culturally significant.

The ACHA fails to provide a comprehensive assessment of the cultural and spiritual connections to the land. The concept of "Connecting with Country" goes beyond physical and archaeological heritage, encompassing the ongoing spiritual, cultural, and social relationship that Aboriginal people, specifically the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, have with this land. The current report does not adequately consult with the relevant Aboriginal communities or stakeholders who possess this essential cultural knowledge.

Lack of Meaningful Consultation with Traditional Custodians:
The ACHA does not demonstrate sufficient consultation with the Gadigal people or other traditional custodians with ancestral ties to this land. Proper consultation with Aboriginal communities is a critical component of the assessment process, and the failure to properly engage these groups undermines the reliability of the report and its conclusions.

Failure to Address Intangible Cultural Heritage:
Aboriginal cultural heritage includes both tangible and intangible elements. While the ACHA focuses on physical aspects of the site such as artefacts and landforms, it fails to adequately consider the intangible cultural heritage, such as songlines, cultural practices, and stories associated with the land. This gap greatly reduces the completeness and cultural sensitivity of the assessment.

Inadequate Assessment Methodology:
The methodology employed in the ACHA does not appear to fully capture the scope of Aboriginal cultural heritage values at this site. A more culturally inclusive approach is required to ensure that traditional knowledge and spiritual connections to the land are properly incorporated into the assessment.

Cultural and Environmental Significance of the Fig Tree:
A particularly concerning aspect of this development proposal is the plan to potentially kill a fig tree located on the site. This tree is not only a significant natural feature but also holds cultural importance. In Aboriginal culture, fig trees are often considered important for their role in providing food, shelter, and cultural connections to the land. Removing such a tree without fully understanding its cultural significance to the Gadigal people is a serious oversight, and I strongly urge that this plan be reconsidered. The tree's removal could further disrupt the connection to country that this development would already threaten.

For these reasons, I strongly urge you to reject the SSDA until a more comprehensive and culturally sensitive assessment is conducted and the fig tree can be retained. This should include meaningful consultation with the Gadigal people and other relevant Aboriginal groups, a full exploration of the intangible cultural heritage associated with the site, and a review of the proposal to ensure that culturally significant trees, such as the fig tree, are protected.

It is vital that the development process respects the cultural heritage of the Gadigal people and ensures that the environmental and spiritual significance of the site is properly preserved.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and to seeing a development process that truly respects and honors the cultural values of this land.

The attachment contains the submission of objection to The Waverley college Major upgrade application.