St Vincent's Private Hospital - Upgrade

Once again the Department of Planning is being asked by the Applicant and its agents to take a "salami" approach to the approval of another development on the St Vincent's Hospital Campus. A similar approach was taken in relation to the Garvan Institute, the Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, the O'Brien Building and the Kinghorn Cancer Centre. All these developments are in themselves significant. However, the Applicant and its agents argued at the DA stage that these developments would make insignificant contributions to traffic flows and volume, quality of life of surrounding residents, and the general order and good governance of the City of Sydney. The difficulty is that the Hospital says it has no Master Plan even though the Director-General's environmental assessment requirements (DGRS) originally required in 2011 a Master Plan for the entire St Vincent's Campus with a revised DGRS requiring a Master Plan in 2013.

According to the Development Application (DA) specifically the attachment from JBA 1 Urban Planning Consultants P/L, subsequent to 2013, the original Master Plan is no longer endorsed as a result of the staging of future works and changes of Hospital management structure. However, it states that the Stage 1 DA has been modified to that proposed as part of the State Significant Development Application (SSDA). We would suggest that the Director-General should insist on a Master Plan, and a comprehensive explanation for why the proposed Master Plan is no longer endorsed. We would also suggest that it is not sufficient or appropriate for the Applicant to say it has walked away from a Master Plan due to the "staging of future works (whatever that may mean) and changes to the Hospital management structure", because if that is the case they will never have a written or known Master Plan. We believe that the stated changes to the Hospital's "management structure" may have come about through St Vincent's Health Australia now having a divisional reporting structure somewhat along the following lines. There is a public health division, a private hospital division and a third division which may be known as a geriatric division. We understand these divisions report to a Melbourne headquarters. If so, that is still no reason for the St Vincent's Campus Sydney not to have a Master Plan.

However, if they don't have a Master Plan they must have future need projections, intentions, aspirations and hopes regarding possible building construction in say the next five years. If so, they should be brought to the attention of the Director-General, the City of Sydney, Roads and Maritime Services, and their neighbours - the residents of Darlinghurst.

Transport and Access

We are particularly perturbed that the DA Transport and Access Report is based on intersection traffic volume counts carried out in 2008 and 2011 by TEF Consulting as input to the St Vincent's Master Plan (a Plan that has now been walked away from). TEF states that its report consists of traffic, parking, staff and visitor surveys carried out by it at the Darlinghurst campus in November 2011, and also incorporates the results of various services carried out previously by TEF at other hospitals. We don't know why the services were commissioned or the unique nature of the hospital location, size and transport hubs adjacent to those hospitals. Thus, there may be no significance in the results/conclusions in those services to this DA. We also note that the surveys did not include residents and this would have to be important if offstreet parking was being considered, as the Report does.

The modelled peak car parking demand, one assumes in 2011, though it could have been in 2008, was stated to be in the order of 1,340 vehicles including some 380 vehicles (28% in the nearby streets) and some 960 vehicles (72% in the internal car parking areas). This modelling is defective, not only because it is not current but also because it doesn't say how the figure of 380 vehicle spaces was determined and the extent from and the names of the nearby streets adjacent to the St Vincents Hospital Campus in which the 380 vehicle spaces were located. In addition, one would assume from the TEF report that these 380 vehicle parking spaces are available for staff and visitors to the Hospital. Patently this is incorrect because a significant number of the parking spaces will be taken up by residents. If you follow this assumption through then the St Vincent's Hospital Campus does not have sufficient parking spaces for staff and visitors to the Hospital. The DA makes no adjustments (or minimal) to the number of car parking spaces and is for an additional 48 beds plus nursing staff, doctors, ancillary staff and patient visitors.

To support this viewpoint, we carried out some traffic surveys in a number of streets adjacent to the Campus on 7 and 8 May 2015. The details are as follows:

7 May 2015

Darlinghurst Road south from Burton to Oxford Street 12.50pm
Parking Meter Area

Mobility impaired 12 vehicles Doctors 4 vehicles (notification in the car)
Carshare 2 vehicles Parking meter docket 8 vehicles
Resident 1 vehicle Vacant 1 vehicle

Barcom Avenue, south from Liverpool Street to Leichhardt Street 1.05pm
Not a parking meter area

Resident 6 vehicles Non resident 8 vehicles
Mobility Impaired 2 vehicles Builder 1 vehicle
Vacant 1 vehicle

Leichhardt Street 1.10-1.15pm
Not a parking meter area

Carshare 1 vehicle Resident 6 vehicles
Non Resident 4 vehicles Mobility Impaired 6 vehicles
Vacant 1 vehicle

Boundary Street, north from Leichhardt Street to Liverpool Street 1.15-1.20pm
Not a parking meter area

Carshare 1 vehicle Resident 2 vehicles
Non Resident 6 vehicles Builder 1 vehicle

West Lane 1.20pm

Resident 2 vehicles

8 May 2015

Darlinghurst Road to Hardie Street, west to east 8.40am

Mobility impaired 5 vehicles no other spaces

Darlinghurst Road south from Burton to Oxford Street 8.45 am
Parking Meter Area

Carshare 2 vehicles Meter parking 5 vehicles
Mobility Impaired 14 vehicles Vacant 5 spaces
Doctors 3 vehicles

Darlinghurst Road north from Oxford Street to Burton Street 1.20 pm
This side of the street is adjacent to the Darlinghurst Courts Complex and the National Art School. It is therefore possible that that side of the street could be used by staff and/or people attending the Court and/or students/staff at the National Art School

Parking Meter Area

Mobility Impaired 13 vehicles Meter parking 14 vehicles
Scooter 1 Vacant 1

Darlinghurst Road south from Burton to Oxford 1.25pm
Parking Meter Area

Mobility Impaired 13 vehicles
Carshare 2 vehicles Meter parking 7 vehicles
Doctors 2 vehicles Vacant 1

Boundary Street south to north from Burton to Leichhardt Streets 1.30pm
Not a parking meter area

Carshare 2 vehicles
Non resident 19 vehicles Mobility Impaired 3 vehicles
Builder 1 vehicle Unknown 1 (covered with tarpaulin)

Ice Street 1.35pm
Not a parking meter area

Non resident 9 vehicles Resident 2 vehicles
Mobility Impaired 3 vehicles Builder 1 vehicle

This survey indicates that a large number of parking spaces are taken up (and can be taken up all day) by mobility impaired driver vehicles. As for the vehicles in non-metered areas which are non-resident, these are not necessarily being used by visitors to the Campus, they could just as likely be used by Campus staff. This is another instance of where the TEF surveys of 2008 and 2011 are deficient as they didn't ask pertinent questions of those surveyed. In addition, the TEF document states that visitors to inpatients stay on average 3.3 hours. This may be possible if a person comes by public transport, they have parking in the hospital grounds, or they have a mobility impaired sticker. However, that length of stay is theoretically not possible for those who drive but don't fit the above categories and park near the hospital, as the parking restrictions around the Campus only allow 1 hour for non-resident parking.

The TEF report also states that the proposed development will have no noticeable impact on the operation of the following intersections: Victoria Street/Oxford Street/Barcom Avenue and Darlinghurst Road/Oxford Street, even though the network capacity is well utilised with little room for annual growth. We find it puzzling that no traffic volume count seems to have been conducted for the intersection of Burton and Victoria Streets. This is a particularly congested area as there are three lanes in north Victoria Street which flow into one lane of south Victoria Street (certainly some cars turn east into Burton and some right into Burton). In addition there are significant numbers of cars travelling east and west in Burton Street which turn into south Victoria Street.

Since the 2008/2011 traffic volume counts, the Kinghorn Cancer Centre opened in 2012 and the O'Brien Centre in 2010. Notre Dame University at its Darlinghurst Campus commenced in 2008 but there would have been an increase in students and academic staff since that time; one would assume that some of the academic staff would drive, so where do they park? These complexes are now fully functioning and it would seem to be an appropriate time to re-evaluate their effects on the surrounding streets and neighbourhood. Hundreds of new home units have opened at the old Dunlop Tyre Company site at Rushcutter's Bay, as has a new apartment building in Liverpool Street opposite the Victor Chang Institute, and Darlinghurst Public School which was to close because student numbers had dropped to 80, has had approximately 220 students for the last few years, and is turning away students.

In our small street, West Avenue, in 2010, there were two school children. There are now 10 with 8 of them being under the age of 10. Consequently, a lot of residents now have two cars. This statistic also continues into an adjacent avenue, Barcom Avenue, and we would suggest that this would be common throughout Area 17 Darlinghurst, that is the area adjacent to the Hospital. It follows therefore that there are fewer parking spaces for residents, visitors to the area (including the Hospital) and staff of the Campus. The Director-General may wish to test this hypothesis by asking the City of Sydney to provide statistics on Area 17 resident parking permit numbers from 2008 to date. Thus, Darlinghurst/Kings Cross and the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney have moved on and have grown since the TEF traffic volume counts. If the TEF figure of 380 vehicle parking spaces was meant to imply in whole or in part, that these spaces could be used by visitors to the Hospital or staff of the Campus, then those numbers are no longer applicable.

In a Core Logic report dated 2012, Darlinghurst was rated as the 6th most densely populated suburb of Sydney with Elizabeth Bay being the most densely populated. Similarly, a 2012 Bureau of Statistics Report, stated that Darlinghurst was one of 4 suburbs that ring the Sydney CBD with more than 13,000 residents per square kilometre (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/packedin-pyrmont-is-australias-most-densely-populated-suburb-20130501-2is5g.html).

Before any approval of this DA is considered, there should be new traffic intersection volume counts and perhaps current research on transport and access. If this were done, it would give the Director-General some confidence that the right decision was being made and the project would only be delayed for a short period of time.

One of the major issues confronting St Vincent's Hospital Campus is its location surrounded by major transport hubs (Oxford/Victoria/Boundary/Burton Streets and Darlinghurst Road), the restricted nature of the site and its desire to put everything it can within that site. However, historical decisions such as its request to the then South Sydney Council that Victoria Street be one way between Burton and Oxford Streets (this was acceded to), works against and intensifies the nature and the problem of its location. It is about time that the efficacy of that decision be reconsidered. We would suggest that in reconsidering this decision, traffic volume flows may be improved if Victoria Street was returned to two lanes, however, we suggest, both lanes should go south (historically one lane went north and one south). This would also require an adjustment to access to the Accident Emergency Centre. In making Victoria Street one way, parking space was provided for up to 21 cars, 15-20 motor bikes and one Carshare space with the cars being angle-parked. If Victoria Street was returned to two lanes, some if not all of these parking spaces would be lost, however, perhaps up to 10 spaces would be retained by parking parallel to the kerb.

We note that the proposal for a 65,000 seat stadium at Moore Park will more than likely have consequences for traffic flows in Victoria/Oxford Streets.

We also note that there appears to be an inconsistency between the vehicle flows in Victoria/Oxford Streets and Darlinghurst Road/Oxford Street in the TEF report and traffic flows in the Preliminary Construction Management Plan (PCMP). The TEF report refers to vehicles per hour for am and pm and in peak hours, whereas the PCMP refers to Victoria Street carrying 12,000 vehicles per day and Oxford Street carrying 30,000 vehicles per day

One major concern of residents, though this is a matter to be taken up with the City of Sydney, is that it appears to the residents of Area 17 that there is insufficient or scant regard to the regular and meticulous enforcement of the parking restrictions imposed on non-residents. In this regard, there are parking problems for residents, and for short-term visitors to the Hospital and its research precincts. If employees of the Hospital are parking in adjacent streets (which we suspect and know in many cases that they are), it disguises the fact that the Hospital does not have sufficient parking for its staff and visitors. This problem can only be exacerbated by this DA which will lead to an increase in the number of staff and visitors whilst there is no increase in on-site parking.


Building Height and Volume

We would submit that the height of the building of the proposed East Wing which consists of 13 levels including plant with an additional 10,700 m2 floor space, could be reduced by adjusting some of the floor heights and removing any unnecessary voids particularly in the operating levels on 5 and 6. We also note that there is no floor 7 in the new East Wing because if there were, the floor levels in the existing building would not line up with the floors in the proposed East Wing.

Another concern, however, is not one we would make any submissions on, other than to comment that the Public Hospital in this important population catchment area, has 326 beds (figure acquired from a Google search on the public hospital) while the Private Hospital with the addition of its new 50 beds, will have a total of 320 beds. (This figure was obtained from a discussion with project staff and includes 20 beds in the O'Brien building.) We realise that these are decisions of policy for the Sisters of Charity and Government to decide as to whether this is an appropriate mix. There is no doubt that land used by the Private Hospital today will not be available to the Public Hospital of the future.

Construction Period from July 2015 (commencement) to June 2018 (conclusion)

Road Restriction

We note that, according to the PCMP, work will take place from July 2015 to June 2018 and that a construction work zone will be established on Victoria Street in front of the site with the site entrance on Victoria Street. This seems clear, however, the Hospital is surrounded by narrow, constricted, one-way Victorian-era streets where many young children live. We would therefore wish to ensure that during demolition, excavation, construction, and fit-out, there be no vehicle access to that site along Barcom Avenue. If at some time, access is required by other than Victoria Street (residents should be notified), that access should only be by Boundary or Leichhardt Streets. This restriction should also apply with regards to delivery vehicles servicing the site after the building has been opened.

Construction Workers' Vehicles

We also bring to your attention that PCMP states that there will be no parking on site for construction workers' vehicles (the number is not known but it could be significant and it will vary in number depending on the stage of the project). Thus, for almost 3 years (2015-2018) the construction workers' vehicles will more than likely be parked in streets adjacent to the Campus and this will impact on spaces available to residents, visitors to the Darlinghurst area and the Campus. We would suggest that the Hospital give consideration to all or some of these vehicles parking in front of the De Lacy Building in Victoria Street. There is precedent for this happening, as it was done for emergency vehicles when access/egress to the Accident Emergency Centre, in Victoria Street, was being reconfigured. If this is considered inappropriate by the Hospital, then it behoves the Hospital to find a solution as the potential decrease in offstreet parking comes about as a result of the actions of St Vincent's Health Australia. We realise that the Private Hospital is within a different division of St Vincent's Health Australia and that land in front of the De Lacy Building is in the Public Hospital division, however, this is an issue for the Public and Private Hospital divisions to decide on.

In conclusion we support the work of St Vincent's and its general intent to be a christian, ethical and moral organisation. However, in supporting St Vincent's this should not be at any urban design cost or unnecessary detriment to the neighbours of the Campus or to its surrounding suburbs.

We do not object overall to this project, however, as you will have seen in our submission, we believe there are major issues of traffic flows, use of historical data rather than current data, etc.

Alan Dawson and Avril Ingram

Not only is the height increase to eleven stories above street level not in keeping with the area, it will result in overshadowing and a potential devaluation of property values for those in western Paddington. Residents will also lose access to light, views, privacy and our sense of place as the new building will dominate the western skyline. Television and mobile phone reception, which is currently far from ideal, may also be affected for the worse.

Such an increase in capacity, without a corresponding increase in parking spaces is also unacceptable. St Vincent's EIS admits that during peak times some 380 vehicles (28%) park in nearby streets. It states that the proposed development will generate demand for an additional 26 parking spaces, an optimistic estimate at best, and these additional cars are unlikely to be accommodated in the existing off-street parking areas. Parking for local residents is already extremely difficult so I expect the increased demand to have a detrimental effect on existing parking conditions. It will also result in increased traffic flow to the area as staff, patients and visitors search for parking.

As a local resident we have the following concerns regarding the St Vincent's Hospital building extension proposal and object on the basis that no additional parking is being provided.

1. Traffic disruption during building works - potential additional traffic flows in and around Boundary Street due to disruption and diversion from Victoria Street.

2. Parking during building works - As no parking is being provided on site for contractors vehicles during the construction phase this will require all contractors to park in the local on-street parking or any off-street parking that is currently available. As the current off-street and on-street parking is at near or full capacity each day this means the additional influx of contractor vehicles during the building phase will have a significant impact on the local residents ability to find on-street parking.

3. Parking on Boundary Street by Staff and Patients of the hospital - As residents of Boundary Street we have very little street parking available and all of which is limited to 1 Hour for non-resident parking. This restricted parking is on a daily basis used by staff and patients of the hospital, often illegally, to avoid paying the car parking fees levied by the hospital in the internal car parks. Many of the staff are quite open to this practice as they have informed us of how they monitor the Parking Warden activity on any given day through a phone application. This practice is only likely to become more widespread with worse impacts for residents with the increase in capacity of the hospital resulting from the extension.

3. Noise from the building works