PYMBLE
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to the modification of the Early Learning Centre (ELC) development application for the following reasons:
1. Location Concerns
- The school has chosen to position the ELC playground adjacent to residential properties despite having 20 hectares of available space
- The placement appears deliberately distant from classroom facilities, suggesting acknowledgement of noise impacts
- As neighbours to the high school part of PLC, we accepted when moving in that we would get typical high school noise patterns, not continuous pre-school noise
2. Existing Impact
- We already experience significant noise & light from the gymnasium and sports activities up to seven days a week, often into evening hours
- Adding all-day pre-school noise would create an unreasonable cumulative impact
3. Alternative Solutions
The school has several viable options:
a) Relocate the ELC and playground within the school grounds, away from residential boundaries
b) Reposition the playground to the centre of the school-facing side of the building
c) Maintain the currently approved ELC playground operating hours
d) Repurpose the facility if the restricted hours are unsuitable
4. Concerns About Proposed Mitigation
- The effectiveness of the proposed 1.8m wall is unproven
- Assessment of noise impact is theoretical and actual impact cannot be assessed as construction is incomplete
- Neighbours bear all risk if noise mitigation proves inadequate
5. Impact on Residents
- Property values may be affected by proximity to a childcare centre, especially one which can have noise impacts for the whole day
- The school proceeded with construction under the original DA conditions, suggesting they were viable and didn't need extending
- In community consultation ahead the original DA approval, the school used the limited hours for the playground as a way to get neighbours to accept the proposal. They are now trying back-track that
- Neighbours have no recourse if the modification proves detrimental
The school has multiple options to achieve their objectives while respecting neighbour amenity. Their chosen solution prioritises their convenience over community impact. I request that the original DA operating hours be maintained, and that the proposed 1.8m solid wall be required as additional noise mitigation regardless of operating hours.
