Campbell's Stores Reuse

It would appear that a private organisation is attempting to obtain access to a Publicly-owned site in an ultra-prime position at a bargain-basement price with complete disregard for the existing ambience of the surrounding structures in an area of significant Heritage value to the voting public at large.
No government purporting to have any appreciation for the Historical significance of Circular Quay could possibly give any credence to the submission for development of this site, particularly in light of the recent evidence of corrupt behaviour by its predecessors.

I strongly object to the four-storey building included as part of the Campbell's Stores Development Application. It is good to see some plans for the Stores' renewal but NOT if
the cost is the long-term loss of the heritage setting for this important heritage-listed building. The grounds for my objection are:

* Campbell's Stores should be visible from all four sides and not partly obscured. This is a unique opportunity to achieve this.

* Having a building or any other structure between Campbell's Stores and the Park Hyatt Hotel is entirely inappropriate. It is publicly-owned land and should only be used for landscaping and foreshore access.

* The design of the proposed building undermines and devalues The Rocks' heritage character.

* The proposed building interrupts the historic streetscape along this section of Hickson Rd and also the heritage of Harbour foreshore

* The proposed building contravenes the 2014 Campbell's Stores Conservation Management Plan which the Heritage Council endorsed (esp. 7.5.5). The plan clearly outlines the area that needs to be retained around Campbell's Stores. This includes the area now proposed for this completely unsympathetic glass building. Approving it would destroy Campbell's Stores historic setting.

* The Conservation Management Plan states that the one-storey structure that exists on this land now should be removed (see 7.6.1). This was intended to free up the land NOT to create space for a building four times as high.

* A building like this is contrary to everything that people value about the 1960s and 70s campaign to save The Rocks.

* We need to properly address the problems created by past poor decision-making in The Rocks, NOT compound them by allowing the construction of this unsympathetic glass building right next to one of The Rocks' most significant heritage buildings.

This initial objection is to PROCESS on the following grounds:

* The Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority (SHFA) should not have been able to provide landowner's consent to any State Significant Development once the Government had decided to transfer SHFA's powers to other entities.
* There should be no decisions made about development of Campbell's Cove until after Premier Baird's proposed review of control and ownership of government-owned lands around Sydney Harbour announced on 28 September 2015: `the Government is currently examining the most appropriate land use planning, heritage, and management framework for The Rocks precinct in consultation with the Commonwealth Government'.
* I also understand that the new Greater Sydney Commission will have oversight of the entire harbour foreshore. Given both these developments, Tallawoladah's proposals are premature and should be incorporated into a holistic review process. This requested delay is particularly important given the heritage significance of the Campbell's Stores building itself.
* A SSD should not be able to be exhibited until all landowners have provided consent to the leaseholder's proposals. The City of Sydney has yet to provide landowner's consent and it isn't clear whether or not the Police Association is also a landowner which has to grant its consent. Equally, it's unclear just who exactly among various (government or perhaps other) entities do constitute the landowners. This is something the Department needs to ascertain.
* The one month exhibition time is inadequate for assessment of a State Significant Development for which there are about forty-five separate documents to read. It should be two months at least and preferably three. Members of the public, especially those who are working and/or who are not fully au fait with related documentation or legislation, just don't have the time otherwise and so are denied a proper voice in the process.
* The pre-Christmas season is a very busy time for many people. Lodging an application for exhibition in this period seems to be a cynical attempt to sneak under the public radar and so deny people a proper voice in the process. A SSD application on exhibition at this time should require a minimum 2 month exhibition period.
* The application appears to have been put together hastily/cynically and without adequate information in order to make the last possible exhibition period for 2015. It doesn't comply with the Secretary's Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) related to providing information on:
 the cumulative impacts of noise,
 the specifics of proposed landuses and their locations within either Campbell's Stores or the proposed new glass box,
 the details of patron capacity and hours of operation related to specific uses,
 the proposed new building's compatibility (or otherwise) with adjoining buildings,
 a plan of the proposed divisions and usage of the strata lots proposed
These omissions make it impossible for the Department to assess the application properly. Stakeholders, and the public at large, can only submit responses based on a partial knowledge of what's proposed. At the same time, these omissions seem to represent further evidence of the applicant's attempt to camouflage the real nature of its proposals.
* An application should not go on exhibition unless it has included all the relevant documentation required for its assessment. In this case, the failure to provide the information listed above, means that the application cannot be fully assessed in relation to its impact on the amenity of local residents/workers or on that of guests at the adjacent Park Hyatt Hotel or on the appropriateness of its proposed usage of one of the most important heritage sites in Sydney.
* There are a considerable number of inconsistencies between recommendations/ requirements provided in Consultants' reports and the architects' design proposals. Equally, design proposals fail to resolve inconsistencies between Consultants' recommendations. For example:
- designs fail to make allowance for the wind barriers needed to address noise level requirements in the proposed outdoor eating areas
- the ventilation report recommends that windows on Hickson Rd need to be open for most of the year yet the noise assessment report fails to address the impact of this.
Again, this seems to point to the haste with which the applicant wanted the application to be put on exhibition.
* The title of the application - `Remediation, Renewal and Adaptive Re-Use of Campbell's Stores' (SSD 7056) is misleading. It makes no mention of one of its most significant and highly controversial aspects - the applicant's desire to erect a four-storey high contemporary building (effectively a glass box) right next door to the very building whose heritage it's claiming to want to protect. There don't seem to be any remediation works proposed despite this being the first word of the project title.

This would appear to be another cynical attempt to have the application sneak under the public radar. Applications should only be allowed on exhibition if they have a title that reflects all of their key aspects.
* If any further development is to be considered on this section of the Harbour foreshore - right next door to one of the most significant buildings in The Rocks and right opposite the World Heritage-listed Opera House - the public needs to be fully informed of it. The fact that the application is on exhibition does not achieve this, especially as the title is so misleading.
* I don't believe there should be any building obscuring the northern side of Campbell's Stores. If there was to be one, its design should be decided by competition and the development of the site should be open to public tender.
* The Stakeholder consultation process was flawed. Information provided at the two Stakeholders' meetings that I attended was not true - i.e. it was a lie - and as such, a deliberate attempt to mislead Stakeholders. We were told that the intended use of the proposed new building was `up market retail'. The application does not mention this as an intended use but instead talks (but fails to provide details) of the `use of existing and proposed building and reconfigured outdoor dining area for restaurant, cafes and bars ...'. Stakeholders were told that there would be no trading beyond midnight but the applicant asks for trade to 2 am.
* The consultation process was selective with regard to the information it included in the EIS. The EIS ignores two issues raised in the Stakeholders' meeting I attended:
1. The request that the application include photomontages showing views of the proposed new building from the east without the existing fig tree. While the fig tree is very attractive, its roots have already caused considerable damage to the Park Hyatt Hotel and for that reason alone, its long term existence is uncertain. The applicant implies that the fig tree softens the impact of the glass box. Decisions makers should be shown pictures indicating the reality of the proposed new building - as the `stand- alone' building it would be. If the applicant thinks it needs to be hidden, it shows that the building is clearly one at odds with its setting, as well as unattractive in itself.
2. The request for the specifics of building and development consents for the one-storey pavilion currently attached to Bay 11 of Campbell's Stores. The Campbell's Stores'
Conservation Management Plan (CMP) describes this structure as `intrusive' and states that it should be removed.
Stakeholders, including the Heritage Council, were told that the structure was erected prior to the current tenancy (i.e. that of Dockside Group, one of the applicants within the newly formed Tallawoladah Pty Ltd). This is not true. There has been significant reconstruction work done since 2002 to enclose what was a pergola and to raise its roof, yet the applicant cannot provide any approvals for this work. I trust the Department will investigate this further so as to prevent the applicant using this existing, and apparently unapproved, structure as justification for erecting a new and even less appropriate building in its place.
* In 2014 SHFA engaged Godden Mackay Logan to prepare the Campbell's Stores Conservation Management Plan (CMP). The Heritage Council of NSW subsequently endorsed this plan on 15 July 2014. It is currently the principal guiding document for Campbell's Stores' conservation and development. Despite this, the applicant seems to be relying on a document called Campbell's Stores Architectural and Public Domain Study (2012). This document has no statutory weight, has never been formally exhibited or adopted and so should not inform any planning for this State Significant site.
* For reasons of consistency, this application needs to be considered in conjunction with SHFA's separate SSD application (7246) for public domain and foreshore works and not in isolation from it.
* There was a period of time over the weekend of 5-6 November when people couldn't submit their objections online, the Department's preferred means for this. I know of two people who experienced this and spent quite some time in the process. There could have been many more and some may have just given up and not been in the position to lodge their submissions by other means.

I strongly object to the four-storey high building included as part of the Campbell's Stores Development Application. It is good to see some plans for the Stores' renewal but NOT if
the cost is the long-term loss of the heritage setting for this important heritage-listed building. The grounds for my objection are:

* Campbell's Stores should be visible from all four sides and not partly obscured. This is a unique opportunity to achieve this.

* Having a building or any other structure between Campbell's Stores and the Park Hyatt Hotel is entirely inappropriate. It is publicly-owned land and should only be used for landscaping and foreshore access.

* The design of the proposed building undermines and devalues The Rocks' heritage character.

* The proposed building interrupts the historic streetscape along this section of Hickson Rd and also the heritage of the Campbell's Cove foreshore

* The proposed building contravenes the 2014 Campbell's Stores Conservation Management Plan which the Heritage Council endorsed (esp. 7.5.5). The plan clearly outlines the area that needs to be retained around Campbell's Stores. This includes the area now proposed for this completely unsympathetic glass building. Approving it would destroy Campbell's Stores historic setting.

* The Conservation Management Plan states that the one-storey structure that exists on this land now should be removed (see 7.6.1). This was intended to free up the land NOT to create space for a building four times as high.

* A building like this is contrary to everything that people value about the 1960s and 70s campaign to save The Rocks.

* We need to correct address the problems created by past poor decision-making in The Rocks, NOT compound them by allowing the construction of this unsympathetic glass building right next to one of The Rocks' most significant heritage buildings.

The RAG objects to of number of specific aspects of the proposed redevelopment of the Campbell's Stores. While we support the necessary upgrade of the structure of the Stores and the harbour-side frontage of the Stores we make the following comments:
* The completely inappropriate glass box on the western end of the building should be restored to open space to complement the building and the adjacent hotel. The area could be used for alfresco entertainment on an occasional basis (definitely not permanent) but would be primarily a landscaped space.
* The al fresco dining arrangements on the harbour side land should be al fresco ie in the open air and not covered by any permanent structure. Even if this is of a transparent material such as glass or glass like material it inevitably removes space from what should be a public domain. Again, active uses should be encouraged but not to the point of having permanent fixed structures.
* The servicing arrangements are supported.

Sydney has so few convict and colonial-era buildings remaining and the Rocks area is such a precious example of this heritage that to impose such an intrusively modern building on Campbell's Stores will diminish both the tourist appeal and Sydney's unique colonial heritage. All the acknowledged "major" cities of the world have retained precincts that are living records of each city's history. Leave the modern buildings for areas like Darling Square, and maintain what is left of the Rocks.

On the the 28th of September 2015, Premier Hon Mike Baird announced the formation of a comprehensive study to determine "the most appropriate land use . . for The Rocks precinct". Then comes this piecemeal, non-conforming Development Application SSD 7056 with little consultation, under the public radar and with the inclusion of building a multi-story Glass Box commercial building on public land and directly adjacent to one of Sydney's most precious heritage landmarks in The Rocks - Campbell's Stores.
Without Sydney Council approval, and with SHFA's consent on it's last breadth of life, we the public have just until 18th of December to voice our opinion before a final decision- right in the middle of the busy holiday season. Sydney - we need to do better than this - especially when the heritage value of The Rocks is at stake. The 14 million visitors to The Rocks annually who insert 400 million dollars into the NSW economy come the birthplace of contemporary Australia expect to see heritage buildings, narrow lane ways and historical structures not a big modern Glass Box.
Please reject this development application and lets wait for a comprehensive and holistic Master Plan as promised by the Government not just a self serving private developer.

This submission is written from a visitor's viewpoint.

My background & career is in design & as such my involvement in the development of a building incorporates consideration of its historical context, its function & the aesthetic appeal of a buildings design. I live in Bath, England, a World Heritage City.

Sydney is rightly proud of its fabulous city, one that boasts world famous iconic contemporary architecture - the images of Sydney Opera House are beamed around the world & it is a magnet to this city for visitors such as myself. The fact that it is situated within an area of protected architectural & historical heritage contributes to the unique aspect of this area. The existing historical architecture contributes its own intrinsic value & it is the visible layers of history situated within such a beautiful setting that makes this particular area such a draw to a visitor such as myself.

An environment such as this does not happen by chance, architects & designers have created buildings of beauty & function for its residents & visitors to enjoy. New development anywhere has to be considered with the context of its environment & in an area such as The Rocks this is crucial to its maintenance & development.

Having spent time in Sydney it is apparent that its historical assets are in danger of being depleted & degraded by unsympathetic new development. Sydney possesses an enviable skyline, the walk along Sydney Harbour Bridge is enjoyed by thousands & the roofscapes of a city are increasingly becoming another area of vital consideration within a city's architectural framework.

The consideration of the addition of a glass cube in Bay 12 is precisely the type of building that detracts from rather than enhances its environment. The fact that it is even being considered within this World Heritage area is alarming. The Cube's flat grey roof would be devoid of any aesthetic appeal or interest to the thousands of residents & visitors looking out over this rare & special skyline & will sit in stark contrast to the soaring sails of Sydney Opera House. Its undercroft will create a dark, dead space that will inevitably become a magnet to vagrants looking for shelter for the night. I am at a loss to believe that this is the intention of this city's planners to allow such a scheme to go ahead.

The proposed construction of a new building to the north of the Campbell's Stores (referred to as Bay 12) is clearly not adaptive re-use, but a visually damaging with respect to heritage, new street-scape structure where architectural presentation and height are not defined in the substance of the DA and are currently outside the applicable Sydney Cove Authority planning instruments.
I note the loss of emergency access and egress to the Harbour front during major Events such as New Years Eve. While the body of the DA for Campbell's Stores is worthwhile , a new Bay 12 building simply should not be built.
Also a DA being submitted subversively at the end of the working year with the supporting approval of a de-constructed Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority smacks of times past where this Authority was found to be so incompetent that it needed to be resumed back into NSW Planning.

This application is objectionable not only because it is non compliant as to height restrictions, hours of operation and insufficient noise, wind and air quality assessments but also and mainly because it proposes to build a 4 story Glass Box commercial building right next to one of the most precious heritage landmarks in The Rocks - Campbell's Stores. Campbell's Stores is heritage listed, is a rare and prime example of 19th century historical architecture and is located within the buffer zone of the World Heritage Listed Sydney Opera House. The design, size and function of this proposed Glass Box building is not only incompatible to this historical and heritage setting, it downright insults it -and it does it by using publicly owned land. You must reject this totally inappropriate Development Application SSD 7056.

In objecting to this development application SSD 7056, I take note that this proposal does not have Sydney Council prior approval as is required, was approved by SHFA in its last breadth of life and is totally premature given that the Premier Hon Mike Baird has recently announced the formation of a comprehensive study to "examine the most appropriate land use for planning, heritage and management framework for The Rocks precinct". It also appears obvious that this proposal is trying to sneak under the public radar as it is not "appropriate" or compatible with the historic nature of The Rocks. The proposal includes the erection of a 4 story commercial building on public land whose design, size and location is totally incongruous to heritage listed Campbell's Store and to the historic Rocks precinct. In addition it will severely impact an area which already has maximum traffic and human congestion. Please reject this now and wait for an holistic, master plan for The Rocks which the Government is committed to deliver.

I OBJECT STRONGLY to the proposal to erect a glass building in The Rocks as planned. I live in the area and regularly walk about this place. In addition, I have frequent visitors from interstate and overseas, who are always interested and usually delighted to see the old areas of our city. Why spoil it for us and them, and discourage other visitors?

I lived in this area now for 25 years. I also have a financial interest in a tourist accommodation establishment. Atmosphere is all important in tourism and a piece a very modern architecture such a the proposed is certainly unhelpful. I meet a lot of visitors around here and they all admire the area. The passengers from cruise ships are particularly impressed with the Rocks the absence of tourist traps and the old atmosphere.. Let us not destroy this please Where is Jack Monday when we need him!

The proposed building would conflict in character with the closely adjacent Campbell's Stores, and would obscure both the view of one of that building's aspects and that of the harbour and the Opera House. It would constitute yet another devaluing of Sydney's scant remaining architectural heritage. The milieu of The Rocks attracts local and foreign visitors by its attractive reminders of our history: please don't let an unsympathetic development such as that proposed further damage what has, against the odds, survived so far.

Re: Remediation, Renewal and Adaptive Re-Use of Campbell's Stores, The Rocks. SSD 7056

I object to the four-storey high building included as part of the Campbell's Stores Development Application. It is good to see some plans for the Stores' renewal but NOT if
the cost is the long-term loss of the heritage setting for this important heritage-listed building. The grounds for my objection are:

* Campbell's Stores should be visible from all four sides and not partly obscured. This is a unique opportunity to achieve this.

* It's not appropriate to have a building or any other structure between Campbell's Stores and the Park Hyatt Hotel because It is publicly-owned land and should only be used for landscaping and foreshore access.

* The design of the proposed building undermines and devalues The Rocks' heritage character.

* The proposed building interrupts the historic streetscape along this section of Hickson Rd and also the heritage of the Campbell's Cove foreshore

* A building like this is contrary to everything that people value about the 1960s and 70s campaign to save The Rocks.

* We need to correct address the problems created by past poor decision-making in The Rocks, NOT compound them by allowing the construction of this unsympathetic glass building right next to one of The Rocks' most significant heritage buildings.

I object to the glass brick multi-storey commercial building at Campbell's Cove in The Rocks.
Due to the heritage significance of Australia's birthplace and the efforts to protect heritage from development in this precinct I find this modern structure totally out of place and incongruous to the current visual impact of this historic precinct.
I also question why such an atrocious development which will have so much impact on Sydney Harbour's appearance has been rushed through at the Christmas holiday time.
I also question why The Sydney harbour Foreshore Authority, which has been disbanded by the State Government should have any authority to approve such a monstrosity knowing their incompetence of the past which has contributed to the reason for their demise.

I strongly object to the four-storey high building included as part of the Campbell's Stores Development Application. The grounds for my objection are:

* Campbell's Stores should be visible from all four sides and not partly obscured. This is a unique opportunity to achieve this.

* Having a building or any other structure between Campbell's Stores and the Park Hyatt Hotel is entirely inappropriate. It is publicly-owned land and should only be used for landscaping and foreshore access.

* The design of the proposed building undermines and devalues The Rocks' heritage character.

* The proposed building interrupts the historic streetscape along this section of Hickson Rd and also the heritage of the Campbell's Cove foreshore

* The proposed building contravenes the 2014 Campbell's Stores Conservation Management Plan which the Heritage Council endorsed (esp. 7.5.5). The plan clearly outlines the area that needs to be retained around Campbell's Stores. This includes the area now proposed for this completely unsympathetic glass building. Approving it would destroy Campbell's Stores historic setting.

* The Conservation Management Plan states that the one-storey structure that exists on this land now should be removed (see 7.6.1). This was intended to free up the land NOT to create space for a building four times as high.

* A building like this is contrary to everything that people value about the 1960s and 70s campaign to save The Rocks.

I believe the land between Campbell's Stores and the Park Hyatt Hotel should be open space. This would

* protect the Stores by providing the heritage setting needed for people to fully appreciate this building and making sure that its northern side is visible
* honour the legacy of the many Sydneysiders who, in the 1970s, saved The Rocks from inappropriate development and preserved the 19th century buildings the then Government wanted to demolish
* improve public access to the foreshore and also public safety in accessing and exiting the foreshore (especially on New Year's Eve) via an area that is currently a real bottleneck.
- This proposed development is totally inappropriate in this area and should not go ahead.

I object to it on historical, cultural, aesthical and environmental reasons. It is destroying the unique preservation of the Rocks are as an original Victorian suburb, document the history of early Sydney, this building will impair this and will set a bad beach mark for future development in the area. Also there is a lack of tress in the era, we do need fresh area, these trees are years old.

This looks ridiculous.