SCEGGS Darlinghurst Concept and Stage 1

Ms Prity Cleary
Assessment Officer
NSW Department of Planning & Environment
via email: [email protected]


Dear Ms Cleary

re: Name: SCEGGS Darlinghurst Concept and Stage 1 DA
Application No.: SSD 17_8993

As a local resident, I object to the proposed development on the
SCEGGS Darlinghurst campus due to the following:
1. Loss of heritage buildings:

The 1920's building on the corner of Forbes St and St Peter's St is
slated for destruction, to be replaced by a building that has no
engagement with the surrounding streets. The proposed replacement on
this site is essentially an internal-facing structure that creates a
boundary on the corner of Forbes and St Peter's streets. The proposed
structure replaces a human-scale façade that relates to the
streetscape with a monolithic form with no entranceways or
relationship to the street.

Additionally, on the SCEGGS Darlinghurst campus is one of the few
remaining Villas of Darlinghurst, dating back to the early colonial
expansion of the settlement of Sydney. The 1830's villa, Barham, will
be completely cut off from Forbes St by the proposed new building,
refusing any viewing access to the public.

2. Overshadowing and privacy concerns

As proposed, the 7-storey structure planned for the southern perimeter
of the SCEGGS site will result in the terrace houses on the northern
end of Thomson St, Darlinghurst, being completely overshadowed, with
loss of all northern light, and some loss of western light. The
northernmost terrace houses will be rendered permanently in shadow by
the proposed development.

Additionally, the excessive height of the proposed 7-storey building
will impinge on the privacy of residents in the terraces houses at the
northern end of Thomson St. Students and other users of the proposed
building will be able to look into what are currently private
courtyards and terraces.

3. Loss of views:

The proposed 7-storey building on the southern perimeter of the SCEGGS
site is 2.8 metres taller than the existing height of the current
building. (It is noted that the released height diagrams incorrectly
implied that the height increase was only 1.1 metres taller than the
existing structure, which actually misleads residents and other
interested parties.)

Whilst my own property will not be directly affected, the new
development will lead to a loss of views by residents. This impact has
not been properly assessed prior to the design of the SCEGGS
redevelopment - during the community consultation meeting conducted by
SCEGGS, the potential for local residents to lose our views was not
even raised as a possibility. The loss of an iconic view is not in
accordance with the Land and Environment Court's principles on "view
sharing". Furthermore, the proposed 7-storey building does not comply
with current height restrictions on the site. As such, what SCEGGS is
proposing is to overdevelop the southernmost part of their site, above
current height restrictions, for maximum negative impact on
neighbouring properties, resulting in loss of iconic views (as well as
overshadowing and impacting on privacy).

4. Excessive bulk of the proposed 7-storey southern SCEGGS campus
building

The proposed 7-storey structure is not in keeping with the 19th
century character of Thomson, Forbes and Bourke streets, both in terms
of proposed design, but also in height and other dimensions. The
positioning of this over-sized building on the southern perimeter of
the SCEGGS campus is such that it causes maximum negative impact on
neighbouring properties, in terms of overshadowing, visual impact and
privacy.

As the elevation drawings show, the proposed 7-storey building will
form a giant multi-storey wall that transects the block bounded by
Forbes, St Peters, Bourke and Liverpool streets. As noted above, the
new barrier-like structure will doubly impact on the closest residents
in terms of light, shadow and privacy.

5. Rationale for the proposed SCEGGS development

I have concerns around the lack of rationale for the proposed
development. During the consultation meeting held at SCEGGS in late
2018, no rationale was provided for the size, bulk and height of the
proposed development. The actual intended function of this oversized
building was not clarified. Attendees at the meeting were advised that
it could be used for classrooms, or a swimming pool, or possibly other
uses. Given that the proposed structure does not meet current height
restrictions, and will cause permanent damage to the 19th century
neighbourhood in which sits, the lack of a rationale is deeply
concerning.

Attendees at the meeting asked if SCEGGS was planning to increase the
number of students, given the lack of clarity of purpose communicated
by the school at this meeting. They were advised that this was not the
case, however, I am very concerned that the proposed increase in
floorspace on the SCEGGS campus will be later used as a justification
to exceed the current cap on students.

Should you wish to contact me to verify my details, I can be contacted
as follows:

I do not wish my details to be released to SCEGGS or parties acting on
behalf of SCEGGS.
Thank You

I object to SSD 17_8993 for the following reasons: 1. The proposed
Masterplan does not make the case that the significant development is
necessary, with all the inherent constructions risks, demolition of
heritage properties and loss of amenity to the neighbourhood.
2. The demolition of a number of significant heritage buildings
including Wilkinson House. The significant and unjustified heritage
impacts of this proposal mean that the project is inconsistent with
the objectives of the heritage provisions in clause 5.10 of the Sydney
Local Environmental Plan 2012. 3. Impact on the already significant
school traffic and parking congestion on the local streets surrounding
the site as young children are dropped off and collected from the
site. 4. The bulk and scale of the building is inappropriate for
context of the surrounding heritage conservation zone. The
non-compliance with the LEP is not justified in the circumstances. I
would like to reserve the right to supplement these submissions in
writing or orally on another occasion

My reasons for objecting to the construction of the seven storey
Multi-purpose building ("MPB") are:

1. the scale of the MPB will have a detrimental effect on the amenity
of the residents of Thomson St through:

a) increased shadowing on the houses resulting in less sun, less light
and increased damp

b) reduction of light entering Thomson Street from the northern end

c) reduction of visual corridor from Thomson Street towards the city

2. the design and scale of the proposed MPB is inappropriate to this
heritage area and will destroy Thomson Street's historic streetscape.
Thomson Street is one of the most outstanding examples of heritage
listed houses in Darlinghurst. University architecture students and
historic walking tours are regularly brought to Thomson Street to
study and admire it's unique state.

3. The rooftop level of the MPB includes an outdoor area which could
be used for after hour school functions. This would impact on the
amenity of the residents of this quiet family oriented street and
should not be approved.

4. Given the narrowness of Thomson Street, any conditions of approval
should include a condition that no construction trucks, other heavy
vehicles, management or workforce vehicles should be allowed access
to/parking in Thomson Street during the demolition of the existing Gym
building or construction of the proposed MPB.

As Wilkinson House is feritage listed, demolition of such a significant
historical and socal asset shoult not be allowed. Refurbishment of
this building is the only option that should be considered by Council.
Traffic Management Plan appears incomplete and does not detail the
impacts of any redevelopment of the site to residents of the Horizon.

I object to destruction of Heritage. Loss of views . The proposed
building is too high. Overshadowing on some residents property.

After several years of disruption to traffic flow subject to SKEGGS major
build which too place several years ago, then following a respite,
there almost two years of further disruption to Forbes Street for
major underground works for Refresh Wooloomooloo project, I feel the
neighbourhood needs a break from another major demolition and
construction which would come with extreme noise, dust and major
traffic disruption , it should be noted that this project is still
incomplete at this date as the Northern end of Forbes Street still
needs to be made good.

In particular with the SKEGGS proposal it will have an enourmoused
impact on the Hozon building in general and in particular the Forbes
terraces located opposite Wilkinson House.


The demolition of Wilkinson House alone is a criminal act to be
condemned being a Heritage listed building designed by an award
winning architect and is an enhancement to Forbes Street.

I object to this proposal and in particular to the use of the proposed
facility that will replaceWilkinson House

With respect

Garry Wapshott 03-04-2018

My home will be overshadowed. I will have people looking into my bedroom
which is near the boundary with SCEGGS.
There are many other very significant reasons why I , and all of my
neighbours, are objecting to this massive development. We have
recently renovated our home to include a deck in the sun. This would
be lost if this development goes ahead. Had we known SCEGGS had this
plan we would have requested the architect assist to maintain privacy.
We renovated with full consideration and maintenance of heritage
features to find now that a heritage building in our block will be
destroyed. It is unacceptable for the reasons of lack of privacy and
sunlight and the destruction of a heritage building in a heritage
zone.

I object to the proposed works.
The major concerns include:
* Demolition of Wilkinson House - loss of a significant local heritage
item, impact on the Heritage Conservation Area and impact on the
streetscape;
* Failure of Master Plan and address current significant traffic
management issues;
* Inadequacy of the Traffic Report included in the submission;
* Query in relation to the stated Capital Investment Value, which is
just under the level at which a Design Competition is required;
* Ambiguity in the application regarding the Early Education and Care
Facility for 90 children and the impacts arising;
* Impact of staging and construction.
* No construction management plan is provided. How will the works
impact on the current operation of the external access to the school
which currently has unapproved hours of operation and is unregulated.

I strongly oppose the massive development of SCEGGS. It will overshadow
and take all privacy and sunlight from my home. It will have a
damaging effect on home, value of the home and through that have a
negative effect on my health.

I strongly object to the proposed development as it will overshadow my
home, rob me of privacy in my bedroom and destroy a heritage area.

I strongly object to this development as it will take my privacy and
overshadow my home.The destruction of a heritage building in this
special inner city area so close to Hyde Park and the Royal Botanic
Gardens is not to be permitted.

This proposal must not be approved, and I strongly object to it as a
neighbour of the SCEGGS campus. Our houses are heritage listed and
this proposal puts our homes at risk, as well as generally devaluing
them.

This proposal will take further privacy from us, and block our
sunlight due to its size and height.

It will increase traffic to the area which already cannot handle the
school's capacity at peak times.

The heritage of the buildings within the school campus must be saved
and a private business must not be allowed to destroy one of the
oldest buildings in Sydney.

This proposal will devalue our property and push families out of this
section of Darlinghurst.

Overall this is a private business infringing on a heritage listed
neighbourhood

This will cause major overshadowing to the homes below in Bourke St
Darlinghurst.
They will not only loose their sunlight but their privacy as well.
The destruction of heritage buildings in the City of Sydney is not
acceptably.
Basement excavation will cause damage to the surrounding homes as
dynamite will need to be used to get through the rock it is built on.
The Cross city tunnel runs close to this site and damage could be
caused from this excavation.

I am a local resident of the area surrounding the school at 251 Forbes
Street Darlinghurst, a property which i own jointly with my wife
Michelle Hall.

We are extremely concerned about the hieght and view blocking effects
of the proposed new seven storey multi purpose building and an
incorrect plan of the south elevation-section which is currently on
public exhibition and should be removed immediately.

I object to the proposal on a number of grounds, including heritage
concerns, overdevelopment of the site, exceeding height limits, and
overshadowing of neighbouring properties.

I attach a signed PDF letter outlining my concerns in detail.

See attached PDF

See attached letter

I am concerned about the development as proposed and specifically object
to the demolition of Wilkinson House and have serious concerns about
traffic management.
Wilkinson House is heritage listed and is of significant historical
value to Forbes Street and the broader Darlinghurst suburb. It is
almost 100 years old and such an aesthetically pleasing building in
such a prominent location should not be destroyed. At the very least
any redevelopment of the building should retain the principal facades
so as not to diminish the historic street scape.
Existing traffic management is an on-going problem at SCEGGS which
they have failed to address. Forbes Street is already unsafe at
drop-off and pick-up times. Any masterplan for SCEGGS should be
addressing directly the current shortcomings in traffic management.
Instead this plan anticipates an additional facility for child care
which will only add to the pre-existing traffic dangers on Forbes
Street.
For these reasons I object to this proposal in its current form.

My submission has been uploaded. 



Please see attached letter (pdf)