New High School in Bungendore

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment advises that the Submitter's attached political disclosure is not a reportable political disclosure pursuant to Section 10.4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as the sum of the donations is less than $1000.

See attachment

See document attached

This is a formal objection to SSDA 14394209, the proposal to build a High School, on this extremely unsuitable site, in Bungendore.
I am fully in favour of a high school in Bungendore, but there are other more suitable sites that need to be considered.
Factors that require further attention for the current proposal include:
- More transparent traffic analysis that includes consultation with local transport providers (bus companies) and includes pedestrian traffic and car parking for students/staff/parents
- Potential lead contamination (Known lead contamination site along nearby railway - see EPA maps)
- Impacts of stormwater runoff from new development - more hard surfaces increased run off impacting Turallo Creek crossing and existing stormwater issues along Turallo Terrace. Current report only accounts for existing site where 50% of surfaces are impervious
- The design shows open stairways - I thought these were going out of fashion in newer developments as work health and safety requirements for potential falls and requirements for 'fire safe zones' became best practice
- Capacity: 450 is the initial intake assessment (I believe) this does not future proof the school for any new development or changes in age diversity in the community
- The other very valid concerns raised by other passionate community members, many of whom I've known my whole life, who have also raised objections regarding: current whole of community use of the site, traffic impacts and associated risks, environmental and social impacts and the potential burial site
Please provide comment or address the above issues before proceeding with development.
Kind regards,
Young person who grew up in Bungendore and was one of the people who caught the bus at 6:30am to get to high school in North Canberra.

Further to my earlier "UNFINISHED" submission I would like to add one other objection in regard to the Amendment re BHS use of the Common -- namely, that by turning an existing little parking chicane into the DRIVEWAY access into the rear of the Ag-plot, it means that QPRC will have to provide some new area of parking for Driver-owners bringing their dogs to the leftover area available for off-leash dog-walking. Thers cars certainly can't park on that part of the road - it's too narrow, and they can't park n the converted "driveway" either - because it's even narrower.
Talk about "unintended consequences" ! The more I look at the detail of this Amendment, the more there is to find wrong with the whole darn scheme. Objection is easy - rectification unlikely.

After having tried numerous times to lodge an 8pp PDF Objection, I am using this direct comment box to make sure that at least some of my thoughts can be included in regards to the Amendments as proposed for SSD 14394209 re Bungendore High School.. THIS IS UNFINISHED - NOTE THIS SITE DIGITAL DISASTER.
First, I object because the compulsorily-acquired Park/Majara site is now so much smaller than that of the original SSDA last year, yet it tries to cram-cram-cram the same size school into cram-cram-cram, with miniscule room for growth. The only reason this can be done is because all the community facilities as originally proposed have been removed - no health hub, no replacement community centre meeting rooms, no space for childcare services, no public library - nothing. It's been a swizz and I totally object to that - and even moreso to the way the new "Social Impact ADDENDUM (AP 11-a) tries to make out it's all QPRC's fault for not being able replace everything ASAP - despite the fact that it would stupid in the extreme for any council to do anything until such time as this whole SSD matter is resolved.
For SINSW to try and play the blame-game against council is snide and dishonest - because it's SINSW's own arbitrary site selection, then false information about benefits for the community (including to the Scouts, Music Muster Balladeers and Abbeyfield) capped by an arrogant move to acquire a crazy paving patchwork of a site by compulsion - a site which has so many inherent problems in terms of trying to squeeze a 450 student school in between a 185yo public park and the railway - and thereby obliterating an important traffic through-way to the town's booming residential development zone which is where so many BHS students will be coming from in the future. Of atj
While a few nitwits may be prepared to live with a disaster so long as it means a rushed delivery - I object to any such scheme.
The two years of timeline trauma trying to force through a stupid site selection now seems up with an Amendment SSD that suffers from an accumulation of errors - an under-size site, with over-size buildings tarted up with verbal cosmetics and colour-charts to simulate a media-spiel version of heritage. In structural format, the BHS school buildings as shown in this Amendment are industrial style neutral-to-nebulous - two storey is a bit too high and a bit too big - and with all those ground floor to ceiling windows they're a bit too glassy, sand a bit toa bit too bitsy with brickwork piers and pillars here and there, plus fake weatherboards for the first floor and flat roof to top it all off. It's hard to object to something so ho-hum - but in THIS heritage neighbourhood, I object vehemently. They might be fine for somewhere else - but squeezed in here, it's all wrong.
For a start - this is would be a school with fundamental failings. First, there's miniscule play-area - and most of the available open space on site is access and walkways, or broken up into such tiny areas there's scarcely room for a conversation group. Even the much-vaunted "School Common" is so bisected by a mish-mash of pathways it could be called Spaghetti Central. There about 550m2 next to the Block E, the school library - but it's already earmarked to expansion. And the adjoining 2 x basketball courts and 2 x cricket nets have concrete surfaces to play on - hard, impermeable, and surrounded by 2.4 high fencing - not easy access not soft-fall, not friendly, or flexible for playing other games. They're fine for what they are - but I object that THAT's all they are.
Like the building scenario, they'd be fine in another situation - where there's lots of room for other things as well - as they're doing at a new Jerra High School now under construction a 30 kms away.
For BHS, the Amendment solution is to rely on outside open space - ie Mick Sherd Oval, so long as SINSW can get QPRC as Crown Land Manager of Bungendore Park to ignore Crown Land legislation and rort the rules re secondary uses in favour of SINSW.. Problem here is that such a ploy involves some form of joint-use agreements with a non-SSD party - and that CAN'T be conditioned as part of the SSD. Vicious circle fail.
The same applies re parking problems. Sure - behind Block C (the old Palerang admin building) there are c there are 44 car-spaces - just enough for staff. And a triple-point turning so those garbage trucks can exit in a forward direction But tough luck to those senior students driving in from homes, farms and villages throughout the BHS catchment area - and it's large. Or parents who want to park. Kiss'n'ride is bad enough right now with just the 500+ primary kids and not enough kerbside parking. Double it with another 500 secondary students to handle and it'll be mayhem - because remember, that Park part of Majara is closed. I definitely object to that - and hope that when commonsense prevails SINSW finds another more appropriate site from the ones which Property NSW actually identified in its EOI process of Jan 2020 After having tried numerous times to lodge an 8pp PDF Objection, I am using this direct comment box to make sure that at least some of my thoughts can be included in regards to the Amendments as proposed for SSD 14394209 re Bungendore High School.

First, I object because the compulsorily-acquired Park/Majara site is now so much smaller than that of the original SSDA last year, yet it tries to cram-cram-cram the same size school into cram-cram-cram, with miniscule room for growth. The only reason this can be done is because all the community facilities as originally proposed have been removed - no health hub, no replacement community centre meeting rooms, no space for childcare services, no public library - nothing. It's been a swizz and I totally object to that - and even moreso to the way the new "Social Impact ADDENDUM (AP 11-a) tries to make out it's all QPRC's fault for not being able replace everything ASAP - despite the fact that it would stupid in the extreme for any council to do anything until such time as this whole SSD matter is resolved.
For SINSW to try and play the blame-game against council is snide and dishonest - because it's SINSW's own arbitrary site selection, then false information about benefits for the community (including to the Scouts, Music Muster Balladeers and Abbeyfield) capped by an arrogant move to acquire a crazy paving patchwork of a site by compulsion - a site which has so many inherent problems in terms of trying to squeeze a 450 student school in between a 185yo public park and the railway - and thereby obliterating an important traffic through-way to the town's booming residential development zone which is where so many BHS students will be coming from in the future.
While a few nitwits may be prepared to live with a disaster so long as it means a rushed delivery - I object to any such scheme.
The two years of timeline trauma trying to force through a stupid site selection now seems up with an Amendment SSD that suffers from an accumulation of errors - an under-size site, with over-size buildings tarted up with verbal cosmetics and colour-charts to simulate a media-spiel version of heritage. In structural format, the BHS school buildings as shown in this Amendment are industrial style neutral-to-nebulous - two storey is a bit too high and a bit too big - and with all those ground floor to ceiling windows they're a bit too glassy, sand a bit toa bit too bitsy with brickwork piers and pillars here and there, plus fake weatherboards for the first floor and flat roof to top it all off. It's hard to object to something so ho-hum - but in THIS heritage neighbourhood, I object vehemently. They might be fine for somewhere else - but squeezed in here, it's all wrong.
For a start - this is would be a school with fundamental failings. First, there's miniscule play-area - and most of the available open space on site is access and walkways, or broken up into such tiny areas there's scarcely room for a conversation group. Even the much-vaunted "School Common" is so bisected by a mish-mash of pathways it could be called Spaghetti Central. There about 550m2 next to the Block E, the school library - but it's already earmarked to expansion. And the adjoining 2 x basketball courts and 2 x cricket nets have concrete surfaces to play on - hard, impermeable, and surrounded by 2.4 high fencing - not easy access not soft-fall, not friendly, or flexible for playing other games. They're fine for what they are - but I object that THAT's all they are.
Like the building scenario, they'd be fine in another situation - where there's lots of room for other things as well - as they're doing at a new Jerra High School now under construction a 30 kms away.
For BHS, the Amendment solution is to rely on outside open space - ie Mick Sherd Oval, so long as SINSW can get QPRC as Crown Land Manager of Bungendore Park to ignore Crown Land legistation and rort the rules re secondary uses in favour of SINSW.. Problem here is that such a ploy involves some form of joint-use agreements with a non-SSD party - and that CAN'T be conditioned as part of the SSD. Vicious circle fail. The same applies re parking problems. Sure - behind Block C (the old Palerang admin building) there are c there are 44 car-spaces - just enough for staff. But tough luck to those senior students driving in from homes, farms and villages throughout the BHS catchment area - and it's large. Or parents who want to park. Kiss'n'ride is bad enough with just the 500+ primary kids. Double it with another 500 secondary and it'll be mayhem - because remember, that part of Majara is closed. I definitely object to that - and hope that when commonsense prevails SINSW finds it

As a resident who is planning on having children in Bungendore in the next few years, I am disappointed by the NSW government’s dismissal of community concerns around the location. I can see that the slapdash design and lack of community consultation surrounding this project will result in a high school that is not fit for purpose. It will cause traffic problems, ruin the heritage precinct, have a too small playground and be somewhere that I will not feel comfortable sending my children to.
Please find a better site on the edge of town so that our park will not lose it’s importance as the heart of our town and so that Bungendores kids can get the high school they deserve.
Yours truly,
Beatrice Borthwick

Bungendore has ONE Park, a centrally located Community hub in a historic precinct.
The park has been utilised by the community, their families and travellers for nearly 200 years and is designated Crown Land.
Generations have held picnics and family gatherings on the park, played football and tennis and swum in the pool which was built be the people of Bungendore to enhance the community facilities.
One hundred years ago the men who returned from the Great War chose the park as the location for the War Memorial.
To stand and reflect at a Memorial as it stands proud, unencumbered by fences and buildings, with space for everyone who would like to gather and pay their respects, is fairly unique, a legacy
gifted to the town and deserves to be protected.
Bungendore deserves to keep the Park and the children of Bungendore deserve fit for purpose schools with ample space to expand as the town develops with onsite playing fields for many different sports. Depriving the Primary School of their facilities and squashing a High School onto a Community Park with loss of the pool, tennis courts and Community Centre as well as the consequences for the War Memorial are the reasons I object to this project.
Jenny Wardrobe

I object to the amended plan for Bungendore High School because the site is inappropriate due to problems with traffic, parking, proximity to heritage listed buildings, lack of space for playground and lack of consultation with Bungendore and district community.

I urge the Department of Education to find a better, larger site on Bungendore’s outskirts, so that our park will be preserved for recreation purposes.
Yours truly,
Murray Watson

Attached is part only of my submission

Richard Miller
93 Wyoming Road
BYWONG NSW 2621
10 October 2022
Director-Social
and
Infrastructure Assessments,Planning and Assessment

Reference: New High School Bungendore SSD-14394209

The following is my submission against the approval of the above development.
The community of Bungendore wants a high school but it does not want to lose its Bungendore Park. The present proposal for the use of the Park rather than the greenfield site identified by the Department of Education (“DE”) and the purchase of which was terminated without public explanation reflects defective administration for political benefit. Contemporary community opposition to Application SSD 1439 4209 must not be characterised as between those for and those against a high school. It must be seen as it is, opposition to the outcomes of actions by the DE and Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council (“QPRC”) in disregard of statutory requirements for the process and planning principles, to attain other outcomes.
The proposal now to be reviewed for a high school is posited on actions by the QPRC and government of NSW that pursued political and financial benefits at the cost to the Bungendore community and in dereliction of the community’s interests and concerns for the retention of Bungendore Park.
Determination of the proposal, limited to the architectural and planning merits, will be a further failure of the objects of NSW planning law and in particular abuse of the State Significant Development process. Any determination so limited will result in a decision susceptible to successful legal challenge and the promoting of further division within the Bungedore community and additional loss of confidence in both local government and higher levels of public administration of NSW.
The selection of the Bungendore Park is the outcome of covert negotiations overlaid with political interference resulting in unnecessary division within the Bungendore community, the loss of a much loved public space granted to the Bungendore community for its pleasure and enjoyment by Crown Grant in 1886 and the dereliction of the village element of the town. Such an outcome in the face of the chosen and available superior alternative location will represent and substantiate mis-use if not abuse of authority by those perpetrating the process.

The public record evidences the following:
As a consequence of the terms of merger of Palerang Council with Queanbeyan Council, the resulting Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council is burdened with the continuing operation of the staff and premises in Bungendore and Braidwood of the former council. Consequently any arrangement that would see the end to this situation stands to benefit the QPRC economically.
The record of proceedings of QPRC shows that from the outset Council did not seek to ensure the preservation of Bungendore Park. Rather, Council while endorsing DE decision to provide a high school, resolved to not consult the community and to commission Council officers to negotiate with DE, without any publicly disclosed desired criteria for the best outcome for Council. By such course Council failed at the outset to determine community preferences or to ensure it pursued the interests of the Bungendore community for the well- being of the Park.
That DE was willing to participate in consultation in such circumstances was in clear contravention of the letter and spirit of the Aims of Policy set out in Part 1 of the SPP clause 3 pars. (d). That DE negotiated in the knowledge Council’s promoting the use of the Bungendore Park and the Council buildings and its unlawful attempted closure of Majara Street to provide additional land, showed the failure of DE to ensure bona fides of the process as required of public administration for the benefit of the community.
Bungendore has developed over the past 20 years, with major housing developments to the North and South of the original town; this has been with total neglect from State planners and Council to require the reservation of space for educational facilities in either locale. Supplementing such failure has been the disinterest or disregard by DE of such need, or to influence such bodies, to ensure the availability of a site, in anticipation of the obvious demographic changes expected. Only when faced with the readily anticipated decision of the ACT Government to cease accommodating students from outside the Territory has the need for a high school been acknowledged with the last-minute action now in train.
What cannot be ignored in considering the roles of DE and QPRC and the inappropriateness of the present site is the respective financial objectives, including DE avoiding the on- market cost of purchasing its selected site and the serendipitous outcomes, including funding, to be enjoyed by QPRC. Notably, the community has not been informed of the extent of the respective financial outcomes.
Fundamental to any assessment of the merits of the proposal is recognition that the Bungendore Park site was not DE’s preference, that it was not a candidate for consideration as a site and lacks merits appropriate to satisfying relevant policy and community considerations and is surpassed in all respects by the site preferred by DE and for which it was preparing contractual instruments for its purchase.
The proper assessment of the present proposal against the State Environmental Planning Policy ( Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017, requires due regard to the loss to the community of its sole public space within the original town area. The Policy’s Aim of facilitating effective delivery of educational establishments across the State does not imply or allow the utter disregard for the basic processes of attaining maximum community support for a particular proposal by seeking the most overall appropriate site. Nor does it require that the economic benefits aspect of a proposal be given primacy over community concerns and interests.
No part of Bungendore Park nor the existing swimming pool, nor the music centre are surplus government owned land, within clause 3(d) of the Aims of the Policy. Similarly, the Policy does not justify or support the action of Council in its statutory role of administering the Crown Grant that created Bungendore Park, to dispose of any of the Park. Such action, contrary to the terms of its role as administrator of the Grant, should not have been ignored by DE in proceeding with the site. That Council is not the owner but in a role of guardianship was obvious to DE but ignored.
It is fundamental to the fact that the selection of Bungendore Park was apparently the outcome of inappropriate public administration, such that to create a sufficient parcel of land for the school required the amalgamation of 3 elements – QPRC office parcel, the closure of part of Majara Street and the acquisition of part of Bungendore Park. Such a composition contrasts with the green-field site land selected then abandoned by DE, highlighting the political and financially based forces perceivably in play. It must not be forgotten that such has been the seemingly departure from integrity in the case for using Bungendore Park that when faced with a challenge to its intended road closure, on the basis of the lack of statutory authority in Council under the Roads Act, that the parties moved for its resumption by the State so as to facilitate their objective.
A proper application of the Policies does not see them as a vehicle for cost saving at the expense of community cohesion or loss of amenity. Proper application is to facilitate the effective delivery of educational establishments and as per 3(c ) “ to improve the quality of infrastructure delivered and to minimise the impacts on surrounding areas”.
Clearly, the BHS proposal fails this aim; why otherwise is the use of Bungendore Park so vigorously opposed by so many of the Bungendore community?
The community is aware that DE pursued a rational and comprehensive bona fide process for determining a suitable site and is also aware that DE selected a site and was proceeding to acquire the site and that this process was terminated without stated cause. It remains for the consent authority to be satisfied that DE has demonstrated that its decision and the premises thereof to acquire the QPRC property, close a significant road and agree to acquire part the Crown Land site of Bungendore Park, has not been the outcome of political interference and inappropriate if not improper actions by relevant agents.
The SEPP has little to address these failures. To the extent that it engages, it should be applied by the consent authority.
Any effective evaluation of the high school proposal must recognise the adverse fact that the Crown grant of the land comprising the greater park area, if ceded to DE for the high school it will effectively exclude community use, having regard to the intended use of the Park in school hours and the operation of statutory restrictions on entering school space and the inevitable installation of security fencing.
The review should reject the proposal for not meeting Schedule 4 –design quality principles; particularly Principle 1 since the proposal site cannot meet the requirement for the design to relevantly and substantially respond to the heritage of the Bungendore Park as enshrined in the terms of the Crown Grant. The act of substantially reducing the Park and the imposition of restrictions on the Parks use to supplement the school playing areas abrogates that Principle.
Further, DE vagueness as to the school’s immediate and longer term student and staff population numbers, means Principle 2 and Principle 6 cannot be satisfied. While DE has at one point represented a population of 400 students and 45 staff as the basis of design, its equivocal indication of a possible larger number in the near

I feel it is a short-sighted quick-fix. Bungendore has space, there's no need to cram it into a small site. I want a high school as I have three children that are potential students, however this location is wrong.

I have observed the pick up and drop off traffic for the primary school. Parents park where they can, legal or not, and it causes confusion and that makes it dangerous.

I have filmed local heritage buildings, including the convent on Turallo Terrace, opposite the park. Set up by Saint Mary Mackillop, this sacred building and others around it are precious and deserve to have breathing space around them preserved for future generations to enjoy.

Bungendore has grown quickly, and will continue to grow. Squeezing the school into this small site with limited room to expand, seems foolish and unjustifiable.

I am a resident in Bungendore for 46 years . I support the building of the High School . I am delighted that it is finally happening

10 October 2022

Director – Social and Infrastructure Assessments
Planning and Assessment
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
Locked Bag 5022
Parramatta NSW 2124

Dear Sir/Madam

FORMAL OBJECTION to State Significant Development Application 14394209
NEW HIGH SCHOOL IN BUNGENDORE

I refer to the above state-significant development application

We strongly object to the building of a High School in the Majara/Gibraltar Street Precinct, Bungendore

In response to item 12 of the Key Issues List attached to DPIE’s letter of 16 November 2021, I along with two colleagues attended a zoom meeting with the Department of Education on 14th March 2022.

During this meeting we explained in detail the history of the site, its design and its social and cultural importance, which extends far beyond Bungendore. We expressed our disappointment at DoE’s failure to undertake any consultation prior to announcing the Bungendore High School project and the proposed relocation of Balladeers’ Place.

We objected to the proposed relocation of the Balladeers’ Place to Frogs’ Hollow, noting that this was an obscure site, detached from the town centre, flood-prone, unpopular with visitors and teeming with snakes.

The Committee also asked who would be responsible for any move and how it (and any planning permission) would be procured. DoE was unable to give any information around this; we reiterated that this must be the responsibility of DoE and that the Committee was not in a position to undertake this itself.

According to the recent SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM - 5th September 2022:
‘The Submissions Report noted there were concerns that Frogs Hollow Reserve is unsuitable to house these facilities as the reserve is a floodway. Other submissions noted that the reserve is separated from the town and future performances at the rotunda would likely be disrupted by heavy vehicle traffic’

‘Representatives from SINSW also met with the Bungendore Country Music Muster in March 2022 to discuss their concerns with the relocation of the rotunda and potential alternatives. During this consultation, representatives of the Bungendore Country Music Muster expressed their view that the rotunda should not be relocated to Bungendore Park or the Showground. SINSW is currently liaising with the Bungendore Country Music Muster and Council to discuss potential relocation alternatives.’


And further to this it was recommended in the report that SINSW
‘continue to consult with the Bungendore Music Muster and Council to determine a suitable location for the Bush Balladeers Place and rotunda.’

‘At the time of this report, consultation is still ongoing with representatives from Council and the Bungendore Country Music Muster around potential relocation options for the rotunda. Assuming consultation continues and an appropriate location is agreed, it is expected the relocation will also have a low to neutral impact on rotunda users.’

The Bungendore country Music Muster Committee has not had any further communication with SINSW since our meeting of 14th March 2022 and therefore the comments ‘currently liaising with’ and ‘continue to consult with’ are deceptively misleading. During that call, we asked for the opportunity to review any report of the call prior to its submission to DPIE or circulation internally within the Department of Education. Stuart Bicknell, the community engagement manager from DoE, indicated that this should be possible but we have had no response from the department.

If the school had been proposed at a more appropriate site, there would be no relocation issues for Balladeers Place, and it would continue to occupy its preferred location on the park as it has done for many years.

I would urge you to reject any submission made by the Department of Education which does not accurately reflect the matters set out above.

I object to the High School being built on the proposed site and believe there are much better alternative sites around Bungendore with space for expansion, please consider these now rather than in 10 years when we have grown out of the proposed site.
I am a current parent of Bungendore primary children. Every morning and afternoon I witness parking and traffic chaos. The area is already very dangerous. Adding more school children, cars and buses into this space is only going to add pressure to the situation and it is only a matter of time before an accident occurs.
There is little to no room for expansion with the current proposed plan. The primary school is already at capacity and the loss of space the kids are experiencing with the demountables is unbelievable. This is a small indicator of what is to come when this education precinct has nowhere to expand, and the limited green space is overtaking by classrooms. It doesn’t make sense for the Department of Education to place a greenfield high school on a such a small site with no room for expansion.
I’m also concerned about the removal of community facilities and no clarity around their replacement. The local swimming pool, community centre and Mick Sherd Oval are such important parts of the culture of our small country town. The area has an extensive history and provides so much soul for the town. It is hugely concerning that this space will be lost and impacted by high school children and potential future construction once the proposed space reaches its capacity. Once the high school children start to use the oval, it will quickly become overused and rendered useless for sport. The magic of having all these spaces within easy walking distance of the primary school is a unique opportunity and to say the sports hub will replace is not adequate.
There are no conditions that can be added to improve the scenario re parking and traffic and school access to open space and to provide equivalent community facilities – if the proposed plan is allowed to proceed it will be a disaster for the Bungendore community.
I urge the Department of Education and the NSW Government to go back to their drawing board and find a site that is more appropriate for our area, the growth of the town and will offer the quality of education our children deserve.

I would prefer the high school to be built in a location with room for it to grow but above all, I would like a high school for my kids to go to so I support a high school. I do not support the use of the primary school as a temporary location for an extended period.

We acknowledge the attempts made to improve the the proposed Bungendore High School. BUT the location is wrong.
However our view remains the same that this site continues to fail the basic requirements for a high school. It seriously lacks open spaces, there is no demonstrated space for growth.
The fact that the Mick Sherd Oval will not be available to the community is unforgivable. In the past it has been stated that this will only happen during school operating hours, this is bad enough, but over time we believe the Mick Sherd Oval will be totally fenced and will totally exclude the community permanently.
The students, coming from rural settings, will need parking for their vehicles. Where will that be?
The parking on Turallo Terrace is a choke point and highly inappropriate and dangerous in the vicinity of the preschool.
The limited number of courts is disappointing and restricts the students and teachers from giving physical exercise, places to play and running high quality physical education programs.
This limited and concentrated design is now forcing families to take their children to private schools in the ACT causing financial hardship at a time that families are really struggling.
As a community, the town of Bungendore is surrounded by farmland with any number of greenfield sites to build a high school on that we could all be very proud of and would draw families to Bungendore for their children's education.
Please rethink the siting of the high school urgently before all the allocated money runs out leaving us with nothing to show for it apart from demountable classrooms on a very small part of the primary school and no green space for our primary school children to play on.

AMENDED BUNGENDORE HIGH SCHOOL PROPOSAL - OBJECTION

I wish to object to the Amended State Significant Development: New High School in Bungendore.

I stand by the comments I made in my first submission in October 2021.

Amendments made to the plan therefore do not address my earlier concerns in the least, because the proposed site is unsuitable and it is common knowledge that better sites were rejected for spurious reasons.


Here is a list of some of the reasons why I continue to object to the Bungendore High School SSDA:

* Loss of valued community facilities;  the amended plan makes this loss more significant, now that it has washed its hands of the responsibility for replacing the facilities such as community centre and library.
* Once our council chambers become part of a school it becomes more difficult to reverse the forced and unwanted amalgamation between Palerang Council and Queanbeyan City Council. Some de-amalgamations are being  approved in NSW and this is no longer a pipe dream for Palerang.

*The “agriculture plot” remains on the Common which is unsafe and unsuitable for stock or crops due to flooding threats; it’s also a hopelessly small area for meaningful agricultural education

*Replacement of green parkland and nature strips with concrete and bitumen is bad behaviour in a climate crisis and the QPRC Urban Forest Strategy discourages this practice.

* The site is too small for a high school, and much better sites could be acquired on Bungendore’s outskirts

* I am very worried about them turning the area around BPS, the Pre-school,  the park playground and the Scout Hall into a built-up area; traffic and parking congestion means more danger for kids.

* Reduced tree removal? One tree is saved from getting the chop? The message about climate change hasn’t got through to the Department of Education yet!

* Bungendore’s prime historic area is Bungendore Park and the surrounding heritage-listed buildings. A modern school is completely out of place there but the Department presses on with it.

* Proposed demolitions: in my previous submission I mentioned that leading architects are calling for a halt to demolitions in a climate crisis. According to the Sydney Morning Herald (July 30, 2022), winners of the most prestigious architectural prize, the Pritzker Prize, have stated: “Don’t destroy anything. Not even a tree.” Jean-Phillipe Vassal and Anne Lacatan say that they see demolition as an act of violence, and a waste of energy, history and materials. Bungendore people are happy with their 40-year-old Community Centre; it reflects the character of the time and was well-built. Demolition of the pool is also unnecessary; it can be repaired and expanded. It should not be demolished.

I hope the proponents of the current BHS plan will see sense and abandon this ill-considered project and return to looking at better sites. Everyone agrees that a high school is a good idea, but why waste so much taxpayer’s money on a development that won’t last the distance, and spoils the centre of a lovely old township?

David Watson
312 Millpost Lane 
Bungendore
10/10/22

I support this project and the current proposed site.
This school is desperately needed and will significantly enhance the education prospects for local children, and also provide other benefits for the local community.
This project has been promised for some time And cant happen fast enough. Unfortunately my son is now too old and will miss the year 8 cut off. But regardless I am a strong supporter, and consider this location as affording the best potential.

The Dept as done a very good job in updating the design at the request of agitators within the community, but please ignore the small but extremely vocal politically and special interest, agenda driven detractors. Further delays will only disadvantage our local children, both those who could attend the Highschool but also at the current Primary School.
Thanks