International Convention Centre Hotel

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

See attached

See attached

see attached

The hotel is too large in all aspects to be that close to the water's edge in Darling Harbour, it will go a long way to destroy the human scale of the area by dominating the scene, thus hiding the heritage building 'Goldsbrough Mort' that currently enhances that side of Darling Harbour.

The Park Hyatt Sydney hotel in Circular Quay (picture attached) is a sensitive development, which does not obstruct the historic Harbour Bridge. I cannot imagine a developer wishing to build only a four story hotel like the Park Hyatt, I like to think that, at the time, the planning officers in power would have had the courage to reject any large scale hotel in favour of the low rise hotel. Generations that follow continue to benefit from this attractive alternative.

In this proposal, the developer refers to loss of view to others as 'view sharing' I object to this inaccurate euphemism. As the tallest building in front of all the lower buildings, it will not be sharing any views, simply taking most of them.

The view from my unit in the Goldsbrough Mort building will be obstructed greatly if this enormous building is allowed. When I submitted a response to the Exhibition Centre's proposal, your own department decreed that the view from my level would have a medium level impact on the views. If that's the case, then you must agree that this hotel would have an extreme impact on the view. As you believe that loss of views must be balanced against the benefit for the wider community by allowing a new Exhibition Centre, what balance is to be reached by residents of the Goldsbrough, and other lower buildings losing views, and experiencing more shadow against that of another hotel? There are many more hotels in the Sydney area than Exhibition Centres, and a private enterprise like a hotel cannot be seen as a benefit for the area as a new Exhibtion Centre can.

If this project goes ahead, it will change Darling Harbour for the worse, for ever.

I attach a picture of the closest example what my unit's view will look like if the hotel is allowed , but all of the view impacts in Part P - Visual and View Impact Analysis (17, 18, 19, 20 & 21) of Environment Impact Statement (132) clearly show a significantly detrimental appearance.

I can't imagine any reasonable minded person would look at these images and in any way think it's a fair balance of loss of view vs need for new hotel.

As planners, you have a duty of care to ALL residents, owners of units that have faithfully invested in the area, other hotel owners and guests, and those who enjoy Darling Harbour as a pleasant environment, not just to your masters in the NSW govt, SICEP or Lend Lease.

I urge you to reject this proposal in it's entirety, recommending that the planners re-design in keeping with the Park Hyatt at Circular Quay, or abandon the hotel altogether. The Rocks exists today as does the QVB as some had the vision and courage not to lose them as was proposed some years ago. I hope that you will take this unique opportunity to allow Darling Harbour to maintain it's breathable, open, garden-like city oasis that it was originally intended to be.

To Whom is may concern.

I object to the development of the 38 level hotel on the Darling Harbour foreshore because it is too large for the waterfront area and will have many negative impacts on the area, i.e.;

Loss of character of historic Pyrmont buildings visable from Darling Harbour, overshadowing in the afternoon on the eastern side of the harbour, loss of view from lower level buildings in Pyrmont, overshadowing of for residents of Pyrmont & changing the character of Darling Harbour by being out of scale with the existing size of nearby buildings.

Loss of character of historic Pyrmont buildings:

in Darling Harbour one can enjoy the low level skyline of the existing (award winning) exhibition centre and 'Harbourside' which allow the Woolstore builings on Pyrmont Rd to bee seen. These 19th century buildings are of significant historical interest and relevance to the area, and it is not tenable to conceive that the benefits of another hotel will outweigh benefits of preserving the historical view, (it's unlikely that visitors to Darling Harbour are going to make a complicated walk to Pyrmont St to see the history, especially if the overhead walkway of Darling St is removed).

I have attached pictures of the Historical Rocks area, another area that Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority is happy to recognise as significant and important. Also I have attached the current view, and the 1960's view and impression of what it may have looked like if the area was to be redeveloped and hidden. I don't think many people would wish for that to happen now.

Overshadowing of Eastern Darling Harbour/Cockle Bay Wharf;

People currently enjoy the foreshore area here and many businesses would not benefit from being overshadowed, by this tower, they are mainly cafes and restaruants that have their own shades for summer sun, but would be adversely affected by shadow in cooler seasons.

Loss of view from lower level Pyrmont buildings:

There are other hotels and residential buildings in the historic Pyrmont area, that have the benefit of the Darling Harbour view currently without dominating the area like the ICC hotel would. The Novotel was obviously built at the height it is to respect this and the character of the area. The recent Lend-Lease development in Southern Darling Harbour respected the surrounding buildings 2 or 3 years ago, this ICC goes against this principle.

Overshadowing of for residents of Pyrmont;

Due to the style and shape of the 19th century buildings in Pymont, some of the apartments have only one window to the east. Having their only aspect to light severly affected by shadow is unacceptable. Apparently the ICC tower will have a 'lighthouse' glow during the night which is detrimental to residents and hotel guests alike of nearby buildings.

Changing the character of Darling Harbour;

Even though Darling Harbour is of mixed-character there is a relative cohesive character in terms of the nautical theme and the exhibition centre currently blends in with that. The questionable desire to demolish the award winning building and replace it with another characterless glass block with it's associated ICC hotel glass block is against the original priciples of the bicentennial design. It's a mere 25 years since the bicentennial and whereas the 1980's development of Darling Harbour had an overview to provide a liveable enjoyable space for people to enjoy, balanced with commercial development, working with the historical dockyard & nautical theme. This new proposal is the largest threat to that yet. Since 1988 Darling Harbour has managed to grow sensitively with Cockle Bay Wharf, Kings St Wharf and the recent Darling Quarter/Southern Darling Harbour. I urge you to reject this development thus asking the developers to re think the design, respect the scale of the existing buildings and themes and disallow the removal of the Darling St walkover bridge.

Developers have no interest in the legacy they leave behind, and we have to accept that their priority is profit. However, you the planners are the moderating factor and are the only ones that stand in the way of this terrible change that could occur to Darling Harbour. I notice that on the application for the Exhibition Centre (SSD 5752) that out of all the public feedback 93 out of 101 object to it, 6 out of 101 support it and 2 out of 101 make comment. With this overwhelming objection, it's staggering that the proposal is allowed with virtually no changes that address the concerns (i.e. the height is unchanged). This ICC hotel is in no way comparable to the 'benefits' of a public exhibition centre.

I hope that the planners will agree that the 'benefits' of yet another hotel do not balance with the countless negative aspects that come with this particular one.

see attached