Fort Street Public School Modification 2 - Design changes

1.Approval for Modification 2 would set precedent for height creep in the future
2.Harbour Bridge views would be compromised from this historic site and increase in height does not comply with the Conservation Management Plan
3 roof height does not meet Australian standards
4. Height creep caused by failures in the design

Due to mistakes made by Lendlease in their designs and non-compliance with Australian building standards, Lendlease are proposing to increase the building height again.

Please get back to the modified plan.

• The public exhibition period is recommended to be extended to 31 January 2023.
• It is inexplicable that the Director, Social Infrastructure Assessments as a delegate for the Minister for Planning wrote on 1 December 2022 to landowners/occupiers regarding the Fort Street Public School (FSPS) modification and has created ambiguity as there are errors contained within the letter. It advises that the public exhibition period is from 2 December 2022 to 15 January 2022, juxtaposed to the Major Projects Portal advising that the advertised exhibition period is Friday, 2 December 2022 until Thursday, 15 December 2022.
• The proposed modifications to Fort Street Public School are not in the public interest as the project is not in line with the Millers Point area referring to other adjacent unrelated projects and their impact on the community. Further, there are no evidenced-based heritage outcomes for Observatory Hill included in the proposed modifications and nor how any current, planned, and potential future modifications to Fort Street Public School are in concord to deliver those outcomes.
• Heritage NSW within the Department of Premier and Cabinet and as a delegate of the Heritage Council of NSW has previously advised the NSW Department of Planning, Industry & Environment that the proposed modification to the school does not comply with the Conservation Management Plan. The proposal will make Building J the dominant building at the FSPS site and Observatory Hill which is a sub-optimal heritage outcome. This has an additional visual impact on the views and vistas of Observatory Hill as well as impacting the visual and historical relationship between the National Trust Centre (former school building) and the 1940s school building at the site.
• School Infrastructure NSW has publicly stated that they want to rush this through, despite it being a major modification and going through the State Significant Development Process. They intend to only put this on display for public comment for 14 days, even though a NSW State Design Review Panel requirement is 28 days.
• School Infrastructure NSW fails to reveal the current cost, the cost to complete, or the cost of the proposed redesign.
• School Infrastructure NSW has publicly stated that the project remains on budget, despite numerous delays, design changes, and increases to both material and labor costs since the original budget, which would have been formulated around 2019.

I object to any increase in building height as it will obstruct the view from my property. I also object to modifications where a government building in the process of construction is not being upheld to its commitment to the Conservation Management Plan. The original plan consulted and agreed on should be upheld!

The original plan for improvements to Fort St Public School adhered to the Conservation Management Plan and acknowledged and properly considered the historical values of Observatory Hill, restricting the heights to no higher than the existing heritage Meteorology Building. This proposal does not do that.
An exhibition period of just 2 weeks does not provide sufficient time for comments on this proposal. It seems that this proposed project modification, with its flaws, is being progressed with undue haste.
Inappropriate Modifications:
Mod-1 did not adhere to Heritage restrictions and blatantly ignored iconic view-lines and was resoundingly criticised, mainly due to its height creep. It was subsequently scaled back.
Mod-2, this latest proposed modification again aims to increase building J height and fails to meet the Heritage restrictions related to the Met building and sightlines to the Harbour Bridge. When this was proposed in Modification 1, there was significant community objections. The same objections apply to this modification.
Design failures that do not meet Australian building standards, together with accessibility issues, are stated as the reasons for this proposed modification. Failures on behalf of a developer or proponent aiming to rush this project through to completion is not a valid reason for seeking a rushed approval for a non-compliant and unsuitable plan that includes aspects that were resoundingly criticised and refused when proposed in Mod-1.
Mod-2 Visual Impact Assessment by Ethos Urban failed to acknowledge the Kent St residential and commercial buildings that have harbour bridge views. There is a height overrun by 310 and 610mm, by increasing the stair lobby and lift overrun. An independent review is needed.
An increase in height means non-compliance to the Conservation Management Plan
There is an issue with meeting Australian Fire Standards, despite no change in standards.
Buildings construction is well underway despite not meeting Australian building standards.
Surely construction work must be halted pending an independent review.
Height creep via additional modifications with little or no consultation with stakeholders, in the knowledge that such height increases have already been properly rejected, must not be able to occur. To not refuse such a proposal points to significant failures in the planning process and/or improper decision-making.
Were non-compliance to be ignored and modifications such as this be approved, it would open the door to further non-compliance and further deterioration in the NSW planning process.
Our iconic sightlines and prized Heritage are at risk. Building standards are at risk.
I ask that this modification NOT be approved.

Proposal is re submitting changes that have been rejected before. They should be rejected again for the same reasons.

1 This is height creep due to design failures
2 Modification 2 failed to consider impaired harbour bridge views from residential and commercial properties nearby .
3The objections made against Modification 1 also apply to Modification 2
4the increase in height is non compliant with the Conservation Management Plan
5The proposed roof height does not meet Australian standards.
6 Approval of Modification 2 would set a precedent for further height creep.

An increase in height means non-compliance to the Conservation Management Plan.
Increasing height will obstruct residents views and ruin the historical nature of Millers Point.

I strongly object to the modification. This is an attempt to incrementally increase the height of the building through modification creep. There is nothing being achieved in this modification that cannot be achieved in the original approved plan.
I disagree with the throwaway statement made Visual Impact Assessment Ethos "View impacts on the Observatory Apartments are therefore considered to be negligible.".

Here we are again!
The original plan was for a low-line building that adhered to the Conservation Management Plan. The proposed height of Building J was already opposed to and yet we have cycled back to a second proposal and second modification presenting the exact same issue. An increase in height means non-compliance to the Conservation Management plan. Proceeding with this proposal will set a precedent for further height creep.
Further - this is a ridiculous mismanagement of public funds - where is the transparency on the $62 million budget for a school of 200 students?