Samuel Gilbert Public School Redevelopment

Social & Other Infrastructure Assessments
Planning & Environment

December 2018

Objection Submission: Samuel Gilbert Public School Redevelopment (SSD
9274)

I wish to make the following submission objecting to the proposal in
regards to the design, requirement to expand and construction process.

Requirement to Expand
This school is set in a stable, mature low density development
surrounding which is not changing. The need for expansion seems to
arise from the overdevelopment in other parts of Castle Hill. To this
end a new school should be built in the areas where apartments and
high rises are being developed. The influx of primary students from
areas along Showground Road (and further afield) will intensify
traffic issues around the school as no parents will walk along the
undulating Gilbert Road with their primary aged children.
Looking to the future the development of this school will not satisfy
the ever growing Castle Hill population and a new school should be
proactively pursued by the department along Showground Road, before
planning permission is given solely to retail and apartment
developments. I understand the government already owns land in this
area.
Parking and traffic. Parking issues occur daily around the school.
Accidents happen regularly and rangers are require to "police" the
area with parents risking both their children and others safety. This
will only get worse with an increase in students from areas further
away from the school.
Parking for staff. I am aware that not all employers supply parking
for employees, but by not creating further parking for staff you are
effectively clogging up local residential roads with cars parked
through the day and increasing issues at the start and end of the
school day.

Proposed Design and placement of buildings
The design of the three story building is not in keeping with the
surrounding low density suburb. With the school site being the highest
point in the area it will be oppressive and dominate the surrounding
area. This school is known for it's bushland setting and you have
designed an inner city building overlooking properties built at a
lower level than the school site.
The school site is large yet the proposal is situated on the boundary
of busy roads and overlooks properties. Why is the building not set in
another area of the school grounds?
This building is not suitable for its surroundings and could set a
president for surrounding properties to be rezoned into denser, higher
housing.

Construction process
I am unable to identify the site entrance for works and construction
compound. This is unacceptable when being asked to comment on
proposals and should be addressed. All construction traffic should be
limited to Gilbert Road.
Work site operating hours. Hours should be reduced to operate between
7-5 Monday to Friday and 8-12. Residents should not be subjected to
constant movement and noise for a process which could take a year or
longer. They have a right to enjoy their homes after work.
Traffic. Trucks and tradies should be restricted from entering
Ridgecrop Crescent and Galahad Crescent before 7am. Caste Hill has
many construction sites operating at the moment and it seems to be
standard practice for trucks to arrive and park up near work sites.
This effectively extends the time of disruption for residents.
Noise. It should not be advisory, but compulsory for all efforts and
systems to be put in place to reduce noise levels, which are predicted
to be well above .
Drilling. As well as the point above, clear and easy processes should
be put in place by you in the event that any damage occurs during
construction.
Environment. Netting to be employed around the construction site.
Regular wetting of surrounding areas/roads as well as on site should
occur daily to avoid disruption to residents.

We urge you to consider a new school in the appropriate areas being
developed, revisit the design and placement of the 3 story block and
think of residents who will have to endure the building process 24/7.

All meetings have been held within work hours so far. I suggest a
community consultation at 7 pm one evening, which would be advertised
widely.

We have never donated to any political party.

Information provided in attached PDF document

Please see attached submission.

The first draft I understand saw the new development being completed on
the school oval and the principal objected to this. Good on her. The
revised plan now sees the development on the street face where
currently we have say a 50 meter buffer of native bush in front of all
current buildings which is in line with the low density housing around
area and The Hills theme of a garden shire. I object to the main entry
being immediately at the road side right in front of an intersection.
This would see the proposal being 17.2 meters high or 5 storeys in
height from road level of 95.55m to top of roof 112.75m. Replacing the
natural bush that the school has enjoyed since it commenced with a
multi coloured eye sore may work in an inner city area where land is
at a premium but not on this site where there is lots of scope to
utilise the existing land. I would have no objection if the buffer was
reduced to say 30 meters from 50 meters. The proposed front of
building will not fit in with the current landscape and will just be a
statement of current design that will age as time goes on. There is
also lots of room to push the proposal back to a 30 meter buffer from
the road and would possibly reduce building/ earthwork costs.
Traffic data is making assumptions that the Green Travel Plan will
reduce car flows in area. My observations are that this area supports
a lot of single income families so mothers or fathers can pick up
their children from school, so it is not a matter of more buses to
take children home to reduce traffic but educating families that it
would be OK for the children to travel home via other means other than
a car and in this environment/demographics I doubt this would occur.
The numbers quoted in Sect 7 indicate the flows of traffic are on the
verge of F, extreme delays, unsatisfactory. Current calculations only
allow for 74 trips from the extra 220 students that will attend
primary school which appears inconsistent with current traffic flows.
Two of my friends over the past few months have experienced the
following. 1 Whilst trying to turn into Galahad Cres in school periods
it took them 8 minutes as 2 cars were blocking the intersection which
resulted in a stale mate until on of these cars saw they would have to
reverse to allow some movement of traffic. 2 The other was involved in
a head on whilst stationary trying to turn into our street as an on
coming car swerved to avoid another car pulling out from curb. Luck no
one was hurt.
Photo attached shows the view from the end of our street. The pamphlet
we received shows a huge 17.2 meter high building in the same spot
that is well out of character with the area and surrounds. Please
could you reassess where all these new buildings will be placed with a
view of not having a high unsightly building so close to the street
front right near low density housing and have another look into
traffic flows. Thanks

See attached.

See attached

See attached

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attachment

Endeavour Energy's submission is in an attachment.