Sandstone Precinct - Stage 2

Having worked in the Education Department building for around 20 years I object most strongly to any major alterations to this and the next door Lands Department building. While I acknowledge that the Department of Education buildings have undergone some significant modification, this does not justify the construction of additional floors above either building, They must remain freestanding as part of our heritage. New is not progress.

I am in favour of the external/roof top look of the Lands Department building but find the extension to the Education Building to be well outside of the character and heritage significance of the building.
The problem with at least the Lands Dept building is the history of what is inside, no plans showing exactly what they are going to do internally.
Both these buildings belong to the people of Sydney & NSW, transform them with care and with what you have to work with otherwise leave them alone.

You're systematically destroying the History of Sydney. To much of our historical buildings are being gutted and torn apart... What next high rise units in a gutted out opera house

The preservation of highly significant heritage architecture in Sydney is paramount. Please do NOT put any glass upper floors on the Education Department building OR the Lands Department building. These are buildings which have great prominence in the CBD and Bridge Street and should retain their original external form, not be bastardised by alteration. By all means allow very sensitive commercial development inside, but please preserve the historical form of the original buildings on the outside. If allowed to be altered, this will be forever and can never return to what they were. I might also add that the lease for $35 million dollars for 99 years is a give away as this amounts to only $353,500 per year for prime Sydney real estate! Shame Mike Baird!

I am an owner in the building on the corner of Bridge and Young Streets - 44 Bridge Street (registered strata plan No 17759). Throughout the documents submitted in support of this DA the few mentions of Bridge Street neighbours makes it clear the developers, architects and planners are under the mistaken belief that we are part of the Bridgeport building at 38 Bridge Street - we are not. [See for example Figure 28 included in Item 2.4 Surrounding Development in the EIS - that is 44 Bridge Street pictured on the corner at the forefront.]
It is therefore imperative that any communication, consultation and plans are amended to reflect this fact and in the future we are contacted through our current strata managers - Whelan Property Group. I would also ask to be contacted directly via my email address as I live elsewhere at present and mail to the property address or through the managing agent is spasmodic at best.

The DA is overall very much welcomed by myself however there a few matters I would like to draw the attention of the council to and would ask for further information and clarification.

1. Visual Impact.
As the architects and planners for this DA seem to be unaware of our existence it is not surprising that there is no consideration in the DA of the visual impact of the development on our building, its closest residential neighbour along with Bridgeport [see 5.7 Visual Impacts of the EIS].
The additional stories to be added to the Education building have the potential to block out some of my view and this has not been addressed, the DA focusing on the allowable setback and views from other surrounding buildings and street level. I am fortunate in that there are many wonderful views from my property but my favourite is looking south-west out to the Lands Department and its amazing rooftop with the cupola and clocktower. I also have a good view of 1 Bligh Street.
I would therefore ask the council to request some visual projection of the change to the view from 44 Bridge Street. I would suggest from our midlevel, my eighth floor and the building's rooftop terrace. I suspect it will only be our top few floors and the rooftop which will be affected due to the setback of the additions.

The rooftop garden and removal of the mish-mash of huts and equipment on top of the Education and Lands buildings are excellent news.

2. Glare
One concern for me is the possible reflective glare from the glass-fronted additions to the Education Building as I am high enough to be directly affected. I would like some assurance that there will not be blinding light reflected into my property from the sun.
The DA only seems to concern itself with the street-level impact and this is not sufficient [See 5.15 of the EIS.]

3. Construction and noise
It is vital that the DA is amended to acknowledge the separate existence of our building and the need to include it in any consultation regarding the construction phase of this development. We are a mix of commercial and residential properties and there are bedrooms on the Bridge Street side of our building. Any noise and dust will have a direct impact on residents throughout the days and nights as well as commercial occupiers during business hours.
It is imperative the dilapidation survey includes our building too.

Generally this is a very welcome DA and I very much look forward to the final result.

The preservation of highly significant heritage architecture in Sydney is paramount. Please do NOT put any glass upper floors on the Education Department building OR the Lands Department building. These are buildings which have great prominence in the CBD and Bridge Street and should retain their original external form, not be COMPROMISED BY SUCH A VISUALLY INTRUSIVE ADDITION. By all means allow very sensitive commercial development inside, but please preserve the historical form of the original buildings EXTERNALLY. If allowed to be altered, this will be forever and can never return to what they were. I might also add that the lease for $35 million dollars for 99 years is an absolute give away as this amounts to only $353,500 per year for prime Sydney real estate! (Shame Mike Baird!) THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO TREAT OUR CITY'S HISTORIC AND ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE!

Please see document attached.

Please see attached letter.

Please se attachment.

Please se attachment.

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached.

See attached.

see attached.

See attached.