Berrima Hotel

Summary of Objection
I wish to formally object to the proposed hotel development adjacent to Berrima Gaol on the grounds of environmental risk, public safety, and insufficient assessment under NSW planning guidelines. Independent expert reviews commissioned by the Berrima Residents’ Association have revealed multiple deficiencies in the project’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and serious threats to the Wingecarribee River environment.

1. Absence of a Biodiversity Report
The Department of Planning and Environment inexplicably granted the developer (Blue Sox) a waiver from preparing a Biodiversity Report (Appendix 21). This omission means the EIS fails to adequately assess the ecological consequences of the proposed works on the river corridor, riparian vegetation, and adjacent habitats. Such an exemption undermines the transparency and integrity of the assessment process for a State Significant Development.

2. Flooding, Water Runoff and Public Safety Risks
The project’s Flood Impact and Risk Assessment (Martens & Associates, Sept 2025) acknowledges that, during “extreme flood events,” the basement car park entrance would be cut off by hazardous floodwaters. Under Australian and Council flood standards, 0.5 metres of water could enter the carpark, posing direct safety risks to occupants and emergency personnel. Given increasing rainfall intensity under climate change, this design represents an unacceptable risk of both human harm and flood-related pollution entering the Wingecarribee River.

3. Inadequate Consideration of Wildlife and Habitat Impacts
* Microbats: Expert ecologist Dr Stephen Douglas (Jan 2025) found that the sandstone escarpment below the site “may still support one or more threatened microbat species”, yet no targeted survey was conducted to confirm their presence. With 19 NSW microbat species listed as Endangered or Vulnerable, this omission breaches best-practice environmental assessment principles.
* Platypus Habitat: The Wingecarribee River at Berrima is recognised through community monitoring and university research as a platypus hotspot. Disturbance, sedimentation and pollution from the proposed development threaten this important habitat.
* Rakali (Native Water Rat): The same river reach supports Rakali populations, which are highly sensitive to hydrological and habitat changes (McKenna & Lovett, 2025).

4. Degradation of Riparian and Aquatic Ecology
The Aquatic Ecology Assessment (EcoLogical, 2025) identifies several construction activities with potential for “moderate to high impact” on aquatic systems, yet offers limited evidence that mitigation measures are practical or enforceable. Independent expert Professor Ian Wright (Western Sydney University) confirmed in 2025 that the Wingecarribee River is already “very sick”, with excessive turbidity and unsafe nutrient concentrations. Any further disturbance will worsen existing degradation, threatening local wildlife and water quality.

5. Conclusion
This development presents clear ecological, hydrological, and public safety risks and does not meet NSW environmental protection standards for State Significant Developments. For these reasons, I strongly oppose the proposed Berrima Hotel development.

I object to the proposed construction of hotel rooms outside the walls of Berrima Goal in the village of Berrima.
Berrima is one of the few remaining examples of a Georgian village in NSW.
The proposal to build outside the walls of the goal by the developers will severely detract from the goals historic visual appeal in the streetscape and the river frontage of the village. The outer perimeter walls and front gatehouse are from the original 1830’s construction built by convicts using locally quarried sandstone blocks.
I agree that the goal would be a benefit to this historic village if the interior was sympathetically used for tourism or accommodation. The current plans to build outside the walls show no respect to the heritage or environment of this significant building in a significant village. I conclude the current proposal would detract from the great heritage value of Berrima.

Yours sincerely

Joanne Edgar

I object to the proposed development in its current form.
I believe the developer just needs to work harder to create better and more respectful architecture.
I object to the piercings in the eastern wall and the hotel built in front of the western wall.
I would say to the developer that both are a mistake for the developer. A glazed west facing box on a hill will not be an energy efficient or comfortable hotel – it will be a horrible place to stay. Piercing the eastern wall will take away exactly the heritage qualities entering through the existing main gate offers, diluting the embodied heritage experience and reducing the hotel to just another venue. But my objection is not based on the mistakes the developer is making for himself.

My objection is based on the impact on this premier heritage item and the future of Berrima as a whole.

The primary heritage feature of the gaol is the view of the walls from outside the gaol. The walls were built to be seen – the walls were the message: do the wrong thing and you will be detained behind these walls. The courthouse has the elegance of justice and the walls the brooding power of punishment.
A development which allows the public inside the walls will be welcome.
But to not protect and retain the visibility of the walls from the outside in all their awesome bulk is to fail to understand the heritage value of the site.

As to the impact on Berrima, the developer in the EIS, on page 34, suggests, that there are no other projects of such significance existing or proposed and it is unlike there will be given the desire to conserve the town and local Council planning. I laughed out loud.
If this project is got wrong, it will still be the best of the large-scale development gold rush it triggers. If bad adaptation and reuse is allowed, worse will follow. Among the sites the developer can’t imagine with heritage items on them are 1. the Anglican church, Holy Trinity; 2. the Rectory at the end of Wingecarribee Street, 3. the White Horse Inn (which previously has had a proposal for townhouses behind it); 4. the Surveyor General hotel (beside the gaol), 5. Eschalot restaurant, Breens Inn (in front of the gaol); and 6. even eventually Berrima Public School. All of these historic sites have empty space for adaptive exploitation. Among the sites which have no heritage items on them but determine the rural settling of the town are all the properties on the southern moving around to western bank of the river.
Most of these sites can sustain a development scale and value to lift them out of local government constraints.

I say to the developer: just do better; get a better design from your architect or a better architect, understand heritage values more fully, care about the impact on the town after you have made your money and gone.

Attention; Fadi Shakir
state significant development- Berrima Hotel
applicant number SSD-66876472
from Ruth Maddigan
12 Jellore Street Berrima NSW 2577
7th November 2025
I object to the Berrima Hotel development due to the increase in traffic from greater numbers of patrons and workers cars in an already very busy tourist village
i also object to the inapproriate scale of the development outside the gaol walls with no regards to the history of one the few remaining heritage protected Georgian villages in Australia

Yours Sincerely
Ruth Maddigan

Attention: Fadi Shakir
RE: State Significant Development - Berrima Hotel Reference: Applicant Number SSD 66876472.
From Bob Dwyer
12 Jellore Street.
Berrima NSW 2577.
7th November 2025.

I object to the development of the Berrima Hotel being built outside the walls of Berrima Gaol as this is an inappropriate large -scale development in a small, historically significant Georgian village. I also object to the noise from the extended construction process of a large development in a confined residential area.

Yours sincerely

Robert (Bob) Dwyer, AM.

BERRIMA GAOL
I am very concerned about a number of factors about the Heritage and environment matters that will be negatively affected by this quite radical proposal. In no particular order I am very concerned about the ongoing access to and care and water quality of LAMBIE’S WELL:
Recently a grant of $2730 was given to Berrima Residents’ Association by the
Wingecarribee Shire Council. Restoring Berrima’s Walking Trails
This project "targets the most degraded sections of the Lambie’s Well path and
Installing a way finding sign. The grant will be used by volunteers to clear undergrowth, repair stone steps and mitigate risks to walkers from broken ground." This shows that this access path, which is immediately behind the gaol walls and where the proposed hotel units are planned for, is known by local people and in use, and will definitely be affected by any construction outside the great Western walls of the gaol. Thhe walk to Lambie's Well is also a pretty, easy and interesting thing for tourists and day trippers to do while in Berrima
The water in Lambie's Well, which was once an important and accessible collection point used by the earlier residents of the building, trickles down from beneath the sandstone under the gaol buildings, and I am concerned that it will be polluted and also that the hydrology will be affected by construction and this heritage water source will dry up.
I am concerned about anything that affects the structural integrity of the stone wall that surround the gaol, dating from 1839 for walls the sides and back, while the main front wall and gatehouse date from 1866. These sandstone walls are an essential part of the historic architecture. No aspect of these walls should be changed, and particularly, the view of the massive back walls from the wingecarribee River must not change. Therefore the proposal to build any structure outside the western wall, let alone unsympathetically designed hotel units, must be refused.
The proposal to alter the 1866 front wall to provide an alternative entrance is strongly opposed. As well as failing to preserve the heritage value and appearance of the front of the building, this will also damage the rose garden in that area, an historic garden which also has unique heritage value.

Key facts: Original 1839 wall and entry gate built 1839, have State Heritage significance. The main front wall and the gatehouse were
built in 1866. The walls are constructed from sandstone blocks.
Furthermore, I am concerned that work to change the walls will not be possible to rehabilitate to original condition in future should this business fails or be felt to be inappropriate development in such a well-preserved heritage village

I object to the proposal for the redevelopment of Berrima Gaol, in its current form.
The architectural style proposed by the developer Blue Sox is unchanged from that of the blocks of flats it builds in Sydney. It is totally out of place in Berrima.
For fifty years Berrima has been carefully balancing heritage significance and development, evolved and developing with low key respectful moderation.
The town is not hostile to development – it is hostile to overdevelopment and discordant disrespectful architectural proposals that don’t enhance the work done by so many, over so many years.
I don’t object to modernist architecture and the interior redevelopment of the gaol – a compromise which will allow for adaptive reuse and developer profit. But I think the redevelopment needs to respect the exterior integrity and the visual significance of this most important heritage item.

I’ve been coming to Berrima for 20 years because I enjoy its history and unique village atmosphere. I
also come to enjoy the heritage buildings.
The proposed development will not welcome people like me.
When I visit I often stay in the motel and support local businesses.
I’m not anti development, but the gaol needs to be re-developed to honour and preserve its history of nearly 2
centuries of criminal justice.
I believe the current re-development proposal will exclude the majority of Berrima’s typical visitors,
people like me, who are on limited incomes.
Berrima hits a sweet spot where all visitors are welcome and there’s something here for everyone.

I am in complete opposition of SSD-66876472.
The Berrima Gaol is an iconic building with significant historical value and appeal. Converting it into a massive venue will not only destroy the unique and flawlessly preserved structure but will also ruin the nature of the Berrima village. It is a quiet, peaceful, friendly and caring place with a community who are like-minded and deeply proud of the village's importance as an historical place.

I wish to lodge an objection to the proposed development of the Berrima jail. Berrima is one of the oldest Georgian villages in Australia. The proposed development does not fit into the old village landscape. It is tacked on to the rear of the old jail which in its own right has a very significant historic interest, this proposal should as has the whole village has been made to comply and conform to the same planning rules and regulations that we have been made to comply with, which have stood the village in good stead for generations.

Any development of the jail in my view should be within the confines of the jail walls. It is a beautiful building and does not need to be ruined by this very inappropriate development by simply tacking an unsuitable building on to the rear of the jail to say nothing of the noise and congestion to the inhabitants of Berrima as well as the surrounding district

I fail to see that the building as important as the old Jail should be allowed to be denigrated in this proposed way, in my view this is very shortsighted as it will destroy a significant historic village and unfair as the rest of us have willingly had to abide by the stringent rules and regulations regarding development

No

The proposed hotel building outside the Gaol wall is totally inappropriate for being located on the curtilage of an important heritage listing.
It's sheer bulk will totally block views of the Gaol from the popular walking track alongside the Wingecarribee River. Furthermore, its design style is out of keeping within he rarely preserved context of a Colonial Georgian village.
The same comment applies to the proposal to destroy a part of the street facing intact sandstone to create a large additional entry way.

Submission Objection to Blue Sox Pty Ltd Berrima Hotel Proposal
I have not made a political donation.
I allow my name to be published.


Trish Levett
Gundungurra Community Group
Wingecarribee Shire
SSD-66876472
25th November 2025
I am Aunty Trish Levett [Kalawatawarra] a Gundungurra Aboriginal Custodian and Elder.
Berrima Correctional Centre operated as a women’s prison during two separate periods: from 2001 to 2011 as a medium-security facility, and again from 2018 to 2020.
During the earlier period, I worked as an Aboriginal Health Worker with the Wingecarribee Community Centre. In that role, I visited the gaol every fortnight to deliver cultural programs, including traditional dance, to First Nations women inmates. I also acted as an advocate for the women, raising their concerns and issues directly with the Governor-General.
Aboriginal people, particularly the Gundungurra, have maintained an enduring spiritual and cultural association with the lands and waters of Berrima, including the former Berrima Correctional Centre and its surrounds, which lie along the sacred Wingecarribee River, known traditionally as Woonjeegaribay. The tributaries, wetlands, floodplains and riparian zones of the Woonjeegaribay are the place that holds our Gundungurra Law; these waterscapes are sacred to our people and remain central to Gundungurra law, ceremony, and identity.
I acknowledge the decision of the High Court of Australia in New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council v Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act [2016] HCA 50, which finally determined that the site was not claimable Crown land under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) at the time the claim was lodged in 2012.
That decision, however, does not extinguish continuing Gundungurra connection to Country, nor does it preclude the recognition or determination of Mortimer v Auswide Services Ltd T/as Caloola Farm (In Liquidation) [2016] ACTSC 282.
Berrima Gaol is listed on the State Heritage Register and forms an integral part of the nationally significant Berrima Conservation Area; it is situated on the banks of the Woonjeegaribay (Wingecarribee) River. The imposing sandstone walls of Berrima Gaol were always intended to be read in direct and dramatic contrast with the natural sandstone escarpment and the living, sacred Woonjeegaribay River below, Country walked, fished, camped, and cared for by Gundungurra people for countless generations. That relationship between the built colonial form and the enduring Gundungurra landscape is the very essence of Berrima’s nationally recognised heritage significance. It must not be compromised.
Regrettably, the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR) prepared by Austral Archaeology for Blue Sox Pty Ltd relies on desktop review and visual inspection only. The assessment falls short of the rigorous methodology expected for a site of such sacred and cultural sensitivity and scientific potential. The decision not to conduct archaeology, citing potential asbestos contamination, appears difficult to justify as asbestos risks are routinely and safely managed on contaminated sites in NSW. A desktop study and walkover is not considered adequate for a site where Traditional Owners know of burial risk.
I have reasonable cause to believe Aboriginal human remains and significant relics are present in or around the grounds of Berrima Correctional Centre. Gundungurra knowledge-holders know the area, especially above and below the riverside sandstone shelters and the gaol grounds, is highly likely to contain burial sites and other cultural material, there are natural sandstone shallow rock shelters along the river walk all the way to Lambie’s Well. Their undisturbed protection or proper investigation and management is not only a legal requirement but a fundamental ethical and cultural obligation.
Section 86 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (as it currently stands after the 2023–2025 reforms) makes it an offence to knowingly disturb or excavate land that contains (or is reasonably likely to contain) an Aboriginal object or an Aboriginal place. The 2020–2025 Due Diligence Code of Practice and the new AHIP guidelines explicitly state that where there is “reasonable likelihood” of subsurface objects, test excavation is normally required. The Code of Practice for the Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in NSW (Heritage NSW, 2023) also mandates Gundungurra custodian participation in surveys, inspections, and digs.
As a Gundungurra Elder, before any ground disturbing development can lawfully proceed, and because there is reasonable cause to believe the site contains Aboriginal objects including human remains, I require properly controlled subsurface testing with a Gundungurra custodian of my choosing present as cultural advisor/officer. There is an ethical and cultural imperative that Aboriginal Gundungurra custodians be present during any archaeological dig on these sensitive cultural lands. Presence ensures respect for cultural protocols, incorporates Traditional Knowledge, and fulfils obligations to protect our heritage.
Gundungurra people assert our inherent right to self-determination in relation to our traditional Country, including the lands and waters of the former Berrima Correctional Centre and our sacred Woonjeegaribay River. In the spirit of self-determination and in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Australia has endorsed, Gundungurra knowledge-holders must participate in good-faith mediation in relation to current ownership, any future resale, or ongoing redevelopment of the site. True self-determination means far more than token consultation, it requires that Gundungurra voices, knowledge, and authority are placed at the center of every decision that affects our cultural heritage and continuing connection to this sacred place.
I strongly encourage Blue Sox Group Pty Ltd and its successors in title to actively seek Gundungurra partnership and consent at every stage of the development process. Meaningful, early, and respectful engagement with Gundungurra knowledge-holders is not only a legal and ethical obligation under NSW heritage and planning laws; it is a practical and powerful way to ensure the project proceeds with cultural legitimacy, community support, and lasting reconciliation outcomes.

The current redevelopment proposals, particularly the multi-storey apartment buildings planned outside the gaol walls, represent a profound intrusion. They would permanently fracture the protected, uninterrupted Georgian vistas from the village down to the river, vistas deliberately preserved for almost two centuries, and threaten the habitat of the endangered platypus and the ecological and spiritual integrity of Woonjeegaribay itself. The sandstone landscape below the gaol connects to the Berrima Wildlife Reserve, supporting a diverse array of native fauna and acting as a key corridor for aquatic and semi-aquatic species. During my care for Country over the years I have seen blue-tongue and water dragons, echidna, wallaby, wombat (including a large burrow about 500 meters from the gaol), platypus, and many birds such as galahs, gang-gangs, black cockatoos, kookaburras, magpies, blue wrens, honeyeaters, and my totem, the dragonfly.
Along the riverwalk are scar tree evidence of my people’s occupation, these places also form my lived experience as I honour my Ancestors. Our Gundungurra custodians hold irreplaceable knowledge of Country, including songlines, ceremonial sites, and spiritual connections and the journey of Gurangatch and Mirrigan. Excluding my people from decision making in regards to this development risks desecration and erodes trust.
Recent projects, like the Dargan Shelter excavation in Gundungurra/Dharug Country, 2025 study, were found in a cave known as Dargan Shelter, believed to be the oldest known site of human activity at high elevation on the Australian continent, demonstrate how custodians' input has uncovered 20,000-year-old artifacts while ensuring repatriation and reburial of remains.
The Gundungurra Elders are willing to work collaboratively with adaptive reuse developers of the former Berrima Gaol, the Wingecarribee Shire Council, and the NSW Government toward outcomes that respect and protect both the Colonial and Gundungurra layers of this landscape. However, any plan that sacrifices the natural sandstone backdrop, the sacred river, the riparian zone, its endangered platypus population, and the historic view corridors for private profit development cannot be supported and is fundamentally incompatible with Gundungurra self-determination and the long-term heritage values of Berrima.

I respectfully urge the Minister Paul Scully MP to require a more thorough and respectful investigation, including carefully controlled subsurface testing, to ensure both Aboriginal and colonial heritage values are fully understood and appropriately safeguarded before any further decisions are made.

The heritage significance should inform any future use of this location, not development inform the valuable rich and irreplaceable heritage and significance. This is a state significant precinct, in a state significant village of NSW. Once it is tampered with , the decay of the significant aspects of the whole village grows and we become the same as every other town. Let's preserve this rich historical precinct with a sympathetic and sustainable all of community solution that preserves what will one day be lost should this project proceed.

Having lived in the Southern Highlands for the past 15 years what I find unique and extremely special is how the villages have their own community and each villages character shines in their own very special way.
Berrima is a Heritage village and I ask first up how many HERITAGE villages are their in Australia? In 2021 Berrima won the gold medal in the inaugural NSW and then Australian Tourism Town Award - such an award indicates that Berrima is a well visited destination for tourists both from Australia and overseas. It is loved by many like myself and when I see it 'packed' on weekends and holiday times I am so pleased that this village and it's businesses are thriving. Yes it has weekday activity too especially school and group tours as well as locals.

So why am I opposed - It is my understanding that at least 4 other Expressions of Interest re the Berrima Goal were submitted by a few local businesses that had visions to retain the gaol as a statement of it's Australian history. What I don't understand is why non of these parties were ever asked to submit a tender? From my understanding the parties that submitted EOI's next communication was to inform them that Blue Sox had been successful in the tender process. How - When and -Why? If this was an inside sale it yet again shows that lack of trust and transparency is indeed woven within our NSW State Government. The current Repoly (Plasrefine) proposal recommended for approval by DPHI is indeed another example of why should we as a community have trust!

I completely agree that the goal needs repair and it's disappointing that over the years since 2020 it has been left to deteriorate. Since purchased by Blue Sox in 2022 the neglect continued until this time of their master plan.

I have viewed the Fremantle Prison website and the paragraph that states "After it's closure the WA state government embarked on a long-term conservation plan to ensure the Prison's preservation for future generations" Built between 1852 - 1859. It states it is one of the largest surviving convict prisons in the WORLD today.
Berrima goal was established in 1839 - WOW NSW State Government imagine if you valued our History. Having travelled to Europe I am always in awe of the beauty of these grand old buildings and their history. Then I think in Sydney it's really the Rocks that has that same history and colonial heritage.

It is my opinion that the development is not appropriate for Berrima in size and scale. In particular the proposed 49 hotel units planned for outside the western wall of the goal. I do not believe there is anything that will really embrace local visitation except a restaurant & a large reception venue - let's face it the Southern Highlands is high on the list for weddings so it will likely become booked out just for that purpose. There is no vineyard such as Bendooley Estate that offers to locals & tourists and it works well even when their is a wedding event at the same time.

I was at a community engagement session earlier this year in Berrima with the consultants when the question was asked of the landscape architect "what about Lambie's well?" - the reply what's that? This is completely negligent reply.
This historic well is located under the rock ledge that would have the 49 hotel units above - it served as the first water supply for the village and is a feature of the Berrima River Walk.

Last but by NO means least is the FUTURE of the Wingecarribee River - this river leads to Warragamba Dam (Sydney's Drinking water catchment). Why should we as community have to try over and over to express how vital & critical the protection of the rivers health is?
We are currently protecting the river from the proposed RePoly and I ask HOW and will your contractors care about the river? Recently I attended an event and heard Dr Ian Wright a world renowned expert speak about the Wingercarribee River and in his words "He is very concerned & we must step up NOW before it's too late". Simply put When It's Gone It's Gone!

In August 2025 Water NSW cut approximately 300 jobs - many of these employees worked in regional NSW so who will keep a developer such as Blue Sox accountable re the protection of the river?

At what cost do we threaten environment and heritage? The proposed Blue Sox Berrima Hotel is not the right project for this site - a 5 star exclusive entertainment precinct.

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission.
Anna Phillips

This project has the potential to be an outstanding example of adaptive reuse and to quite literally unlock and open the doors of a significant site. As a resident of the Southern Highlands for over 20 years I appreciate and enjoy the many heritage buildings that are part of our streetscape. However, so few are genuinely accessible- this project gives locals and visitors the chance to immerse themselves in local history while contributing to the economy. An empty building, no matter how impressive, without purpose without people is just a building. I hope this becomes a thriving precinct.

Although I no longer live in the Highlands, I grew up there and lived for a time in Berrima and am very familiar with the village, which I regularly visit, and the area around the gaol.
I am concerned about the impact of the proposed hotel development on the heritage significance of both the gaol and the broader streetscape and the impact of the works on the natural environment, particularly the adjacent creek and bushland.
Importantly the proposal does not appear to address any significance of the site and the adjacent rock overhanging the river to the Gundungarra people. There does not appear to have been any consideration of any songlines, stories and other intangible cultural heritage including dark sky, which such a dense development will dramatically impact.
On my most recent visit in April I was fortunate to witness abundant wildlife on the river including a platypus, several rakali, dozens of water dragons, an azure kingfisher and diverse other bird species which will all be adversely impacted by the proposed hotel.
Whilst I don't believe there is any heritage impediment to utilising the existing gaol building for a hotel and the adjacent ground to a modest degree,using the land behind the gaol for a hotel that exceeds the gaol wall height, obscures views between the river and the gaol, is visible from Wiltshire Street and potentially Argyle Street and does not appropriately respond to the predominant heritage fabric and character of the streetscape is not an appropriate response to this important development opportunity for the town.
I understand there is an existing building at the rear of the gaol of a modest scale that is articulated from the heritage fabric and does not encroach on the amenity of the river and development of this space at a similar scale/height with a quality contemporary design that discretely and appropriately integrates with the natural environment and provides a transition between the spaces could be an appropriate response to the site.
I am also concerned about the potential damage to any below ground cultural heritage and the river overhang that may be of First Nations significance and could be destroyed by substantial works.
I urge the NSW State Government to consider the development proposal as a legacy project that will be embedded within the Berrima community and significant heritage landscape for decades. The impact of this work is not only immediate and therefore the works should be carefully considered and their rationale rigorously interrogated to ensure there has been;
* sufficient and sincere consultation with the local community and particularly the local First Nations community
* a thorough assessment of the environmental impacts of the works, including lighting, glazing, material and waste on the wildlife habitat
* consideration of the local village amenity and how the development may affect existing local business and visitor experiences
* consideration of how the developent can add to and integrate with the Berrima community
* a substantial heritage impact assessment undertaken that is transparent and publicly available and addresses both the local significance of the site to all people as well as the state heritage significance.
thank you for the opportunity to contribute a submission to this process.

I am writing to lodge my formal objection to the proposed redevelopment of the former Berrima Gaol site into the Berrima Hotel (SSD-66876472). I am an aquatic ecologist and the lead of the Hawkesbury–Nepean Platypus Project at Western Sydney University. Through this project, my team and I conduct long-term, on-ground research to understand, monitor and protect platypus populations the Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment area, including the Southern Highlands.
Since 2023, we have undertaken dedicated platypus research in Berrima and the surrounding stretch of the Wingecarribee River. During this work we have captured, microchipped and safely released eight individual platypuses, all in healthy condition. This repeated success makes Berrima one of the most reliable platypus locations across our study region, a genuine hotspot, where platypuses are consistently detected. This population is well known and deeply valued by the local community, who regularly organise platypus-spotting events and actively contribute sightings and observations as citizen scientists. Between 2020 and 2024, they have recorded over 60 platypus sightings in the Berrima area (see Ryan et al. 2025 attached). Their involvement reflects not only community pride but a strong commitment to safeguarding the species and its habitat.
Given my direct experience with the Berrima platypus population and the ecological significance of the Wingecarribee River, I have serious concerns about the impacts of this development, particularly its location within such close proximity to Wingecarribee River.
The proposed works fall within 50 metres of the Wingecarribee River, an area that functions as critical riparian habitat and forms an essential buffer protecting water quality, bank stability and ecological integrity. Any development within this zone poses heightened risk to platypus habitat, including:
• Increased sedimentation, particularly during high-rainfall periods. Even well-maintained sediment controls cannot guarantee prevention of runoff entering the waterway, especially in steep or sensitive areas. Sediment accumulation in deep pools, important for foraging, resting and predator avoidance, can degrade habitat quality and alter temperature regimes essential to platypus survival.
• Disturbance and potential removal of riparian vegetation. Mature riparian trees regulate shading, maintain cooler water temperatures, stabilise banks and support the integrity of platypus burrow systems. Once removed, these ecological functions cannot be easily or quickly replaced.
• Erosion of essential buffer functions. Riparian zones reduce pollution entering waterways, protect aquatic fauna, and provide refuge during environmental stress. Development inside the 50-metre buffer significantly weakens these natural protections.
The Wingecarribee River is already under pressure from cumulative development, land-use intensification and climate-driven events. A high-impact commercial development so close to the creek will almost certainly compound these existing stressors. For a species as sensitive as the platypus, already declining in many parts of its range, further habitat degradation could have long-lasting and potentially irreversible consequences.
The Berrima platypus population is not incidental or sparse. Across multiple years of research, we have found platypuses here with exceptional consistency. The absence of recaptures among the eight animals we have tagged indicates a broader, active population rather than a few isolated individuals. This aligns strongly with local community observations and long-standing knowledge of the site as a reliable platypus viewing location. This population is therefore of both ecological and community significance.
Given the ecological importance of the Wingecarribee River, the demonstrated presence of a thriving platypus population, and the high risk posed by construction within 50 metres of the creek, I strongly oppose this development in its current form. I urge the Department to reject the proposal or require substantial redesign to ensure full protection of the riparian corridor and the species that depend on it.
Thank you for considering my submission. I would welcome the opportunity to provide further information or clarification if required.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Michelle Ryan
Senior Lecturer – Ecology and Environmental Science, School of Science
Hawkesbury–Nepean Platypus Project, Western Sydney University
[email protected]

Decisions about the redevelopment of State Heritage listed places should not be subordinated to short‑term commercial considerations, and failure to safeguard them raises serious concerns about intergenerational equity.
If Berrima Gaol is allowed to be developed according to the submitted plans, the integrity and long‑term survival of the village as a whole is in jeopardy.

The application does not adequately address the impacts of the works on the significance of the gaol, its curtilage or its broader setting. The proposal does not provide a genuinely sympathetic interpretation of the place.

My objections to the development in its current form are as follows:
• A large, block of 49 hotel rooms on the western side that would conceal the important 1838 gaol wall and visually dominate the river landscape.
• The destruction of the façade to “activate” the gaol, would destroy the heritage fabric of the site.
• Demolition of the 1949 cell block to accommodate a function centre for 300 guests, a restaurant for 140 patrons and parking for 195 vehicles, an approach that is inherently destructive and cannot reasonably be described as adaptive reuse.

The scale and intensity of the proposal are inconsistent with the character of Berrima and with the Berrima Conservation Area in which the gaol is located. The additional traffic, noise and frequent event activity generated by a large function centre and associated uses would fundamentally erode the quiet, historic character of the village.
Berrima is widely recognised as the most remarkably well‑preserved town in NSW. Unlike Victoria, NSW has lost most of its small historic towns due to inappropriate development. The impact of this cannot be underestimated. If allowed to proceed in its current form, this development will not only adversely affect residents but the future tourism potential of Berrima as a whole due to the diminished heritage value.

Berrima is a shared heritage asset belonging to the people of New South Wales and Australia, and should not be effectively alienated through over‑commercialisation. The proposed Berrima Gaol redevelopment would convert a major public heritage site into exclusive luxury accommodation accessible primarily to a wealthy clientele, in a region that already has a surplus of high‑end, high‑priced accommodation. The accommodation will cost around $1000 per night which puts it at the highest price level of accommodation in the Southern Highlands. Such a development may be financially attractive for the proponent, it does not constitute an equitable or sustainable model of heritage‑based tourism and does not advance the broader public interest. Of concern is the architect trying to emulate the Mint redevelopment which has been plagued by problems since its redevelopment and has suffered irreparable damage as a result.

Overall I support the project with a couple of comments regarding the future fine tuning of the basic design where I would like to see the southern end of the hotel units visible from the eastern elevation across the carpark stepped down one floor beyond the viewing platform to the south as to reduce the visible impact of the structure and apart from the normal environmental and ecological security there should be some consideration given to the neighbor's across the river regarding noise and light generated from the operation. I am in favour of the repurposing of the gaol to provide access and employment and careers to our community especially our youth and to see a successful operation that can maintain the structure for future generations to enjoy.