Sydney Modern Gallery

I am so thrilled to know that Sydney will be the home to a glorious new building designed by such a prestigious architect. Also, that as a public art gallery , we will have free access into the building. Most amazing architecture is either private or has limited access like the opera House - but this is ours and free to enter and access.

Art makes a city great and attracts creative and clever minds - so does amazing architecture. this is wonderful for Sydney

It should be non-negotiable for public parkland to be used to build anything, let alone a series of glass boxes extending the AGNSW. Where is the art supposed to hang? It's just an excuse for a function centre and should be stopped.

Dear Sir/Madam

As nearby residents of the Botanic Gardens and Domain, we are concerned about the ambitious plans of the Art Gallery of NSW to encroach into the green space in the Domain. This is nothing more than a land grab and shameless commercialisation of one of the rare green spaces we have in the city. It seems that this is the thin edge of the wedge and I fear that once we accede to this "Sydney Modern' expansion, it won't be long before the rest of the Gardens are seen as fair game.

The new stark white building and 'entrance plaza/all-weather gathering place' resembles a second-rate bus terminal, is an eyesore and will completely block significant views, including the city skyline and the corridor towards Woolloomooloo/Potts Point/Navy base. The design is not in keeping with the current sandstone building of the Gallery nor the green vegetation that surrounds it. Additionally, the removal of the green belt that provides a sympathetic interlude between the Gardens and Domain and Woolloomooloo, is devastating.

If the AGNSW needs extra space, as is claimed, then the natural and logical thing to do would be to extend south from where it is currently positioned towards the Domain Carpark, not by establishing a separate and detached wing. Or even better, go to Parramatta or Barangaroo where there is more open space and cultural and tourist hubs are quite obviously in demand.

Part of the reasoning the AGNSW gives for wanting to expand is to keep up "with the cultural precincts of other cities around the country, especially in light of further planned expansion of interstate galleries in Melbourne, Canberra and Brisbane." Sydney is different. Sydney is fortunate to have a magnificent harbour, temperate climes and just enough green space to nullify the high-rise metropolis of the CBD and surrounding suburbs. This is part of what makes Sydney such an attractive city to both live in and visit and we shouldn't try to be all things to all people by commercialising, increasing capacity and developing at all costs.

The irony of the AGNSW plans for expansion is that the natural beauty of the Gardens and the relative lack of commercial activity and artificial embellishments, is one of the most appealing aspects of the Gardens and indeed, that is what draws millions of tourists and locals alike to the Gardens and Domain every year.

The Gardens and Domain were intended to be a place of reflection, solace and of quiet enjoyment. It is also a place of great scientific significance and horticultural education. This is the reason why the Gardens have a ban on dogs and ball games - in the spirit of how the Gardens were meant to be enjoyed. It now seems that the AGNSW wants to alter the identity of the Gardens and Domain, to make it an entertainment and activity hub with "a buzz about it" - the hypocrisy is beyond belief.

The 2+ years it will take to construct the new building will utterly destroy the ambiance of the Gardens and Domain not to mention disrupt the amenity of residents who live and work around the area and who use the Domain/Gardens thoroughfare on Art Gallery Rd to access the CBD and Eastern Suburbs.

The proposed expansion is tantamount to a neighbour building on the other side of their property boundary. Never mind that the Gardens do not need yet another outbuilding, the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain belongs to the people of Sydney, not the Art Gallery of NSW. The sense of entitlement is astonishing.

New York has Central Park, London has Hyde Park, Kensington and Kew Gardens, and Vancouver has Stanley Park. These cities have a proper understanding of how important these sacrosanct areas of parkland are and have the good sense to conserve and respect them. You don't see the Frick or Met in New York City threatening to take over Central Park!

If we are to believe the plans to grow the Sydney CBD skyline over the next 30 years to enhance productivity, as has been reported in the media, with more and more skyscrapers for commercial and residential use, then it is even more important than ever to cherish and preserve the limited open and relatively unspoilt space that we do have. If a decision is taken to expand the AGNSW, effectively transforming a substantial portion of the green space in the Domain into another commercialised, themed and artificial construct - complete with café's and dining experiences, toilets, changing areas, prayer rooms and loading docks- then we are in effect, killing the golden goose.

We implore you to reconsider the location of any additional wing or building for the AGNSW and instead, refocus your attention on what makes the Gardens and Domain so special and inviting - a wide, green open space with a canopy of trees, a peaceful and quiet refuge from the CBD, a place of botanical study and unstructured and informal vantage points free of man-made amenities.

Regards,

I am strongly in favour of the plans for the extension of the AGNSW.
I believe it will significantly enhance the ability of the AGNSW to offer great exhibitions of Art, to greatly enhance its ability to show its fabulous collection which currently has to be stored indefinitely and hardly ever shown. It will greatly enhance the Gallery's educational abilities, and it will provide a wonderful architecturally iconic building on this site which is currently virtually unused . It will become a huge attraction for NSW residents and visitors alike.It will undoubtedly make Sydney a " Destination" place to visit.

I think this is a great opportunity for Sydney and Australia. This will activate a space that does not get used and I believe that the proposed rooftops and landscaping will make for accessible green areas that will be utilised by the community. Congratulations to all involved.

SUBMISSION

I have the gravest reservations about the Sydney Modern proposal as it stands. My reasons are as follows:
1) Significant open green space will be lost at a time when the city needs more, not less.
2) The design clashes with rather than complements the existing building, and has been criticised by some of the country's most eminent architects for that reason.
3) There appears to have been no serious consideration of alternative locations. There is a very strong argument that a satellite gallery should be built in Parramatta instead of relocating the Powerhouse Museum.
4) There is no evidence that the new building can be sustained as a cultural facility without a massive increase in the AGNSW's recurrent annual funding. It may be that the business case, which has not been made public, argues that Sydney Modern can generate sufficient income to be self-sustaining. International experience, particularly since the global financial crisis of 2008-9, suggests that this is a delusion.
5) The efficiency dividend imposed by successive governments has led to a loss of experienced, qualified staff in many departments of the AGNSW. This does not put the Gallery in a good position to prepare for such a major expansion. The money the NSW government is prepared to commit to the building would be better spent on providing adequate annual funding to all the state's cultural institutions.
6) The secrecy surrounding the proposal - the failure to release the business case and to give any details about consideration of alternative sites - means that it has yet to be submitted to the scrutiny of independent arts and museum professionals.
7) The proposal does not fit into any serious evaluation of the overall cultural needs of the state. In particular, Parramatta remains the only major city in Australia without a public art gallery.
Detailed documentation relating to the above considerations can be found in my book Culture Heist: Art versus Money (Brandl & Schlesinger, 2017), of which I am prepared to supply copies for the Department's consideration, and on my website www.cultureheist.com.au/blog/

My following comments were submitted to the Sydney Morning Herald in response to a critical article written by Elizabeth Farrelly.
Whilst the SMH is happy to publish criticism of others, it is very "thin skinned" when the criticism is levelled at their own journalists and consequently my comments were not published.
"Your comment on: Sydney Modern: High-risk move fails to pay off for Art Gallery of NSW

Geoff November 18, 2017, 5:56PM
As neighbour of the AGNSW, I have attended a couple of presentations made by the gallery to gain the approval of local residents. I was very critical of their original proposal which was considerably bigger than what is currently being proposed however it seems that, quite surprisingly, they have listened and have scaled back arriving at what I and most of the other local residents regard as an acceptable compromise.
Farrelly's criticism is entirely based on her own very old-fashioned tastes and her instinctive negative reaction to any modern change e.g. her opposition to the Eastern Suburbs light rail project. Unfortunately, she is not alone. Years ago Leo Schofield was also a SMH columnist and self-appointed arbiter of taste and rubbished the plans to transform the Woolloomooloo Finger Wharf. Not a peep out of him now of course that the wharf transformation is almost universally regarded as a huge success and asset to Sydney and like Farrelly, Leo also thought that pretentious verbosity was a good substitute for sound argument. It is not!

According to the Visual Impact Report - the impact on my current view is going to be about the highest of any of the assessment as I'm on the with floor of the Cowper Wharf Apartments, directly opposite the new building. This is not acceptable to me.

But more to the point, the deforestation is bordering on criminal. Green spaces in cities are at a premium especially one as beautiful as the domain. Therefore ANY encroachment should be resisted - because once it starts there is precedent and where does it then end?

Why on earth don't the build the thing in reclaimed industrial space down on the old wharfs at Barangaroo say.

The 'Conclusion' on page 6 gives inadequate reasons for the alienation of public open space resulting from the development.

All the benefits of a 'Sydney Modern' listed in the conclusion would be met by a similar development elsewhere that did not alienate public land.

Alienation of public open space is the reason this development should be rejected.

Congratulations NSW government.

This will greatly enhance the cultural life of the city and all of NSW.
It makes good use of existing structures and makes even better use of the green space that it is transforming back into public use.

Sincerely,
Helen

I strongly object to the current Sydney Modern proposal SSD6471.
My primary objections are the;
loss of green space
removal of trees
disruption of existing Woolloomoolloo vistas
perfunctory design does not match the status of the site.
An alternative location and plan for the building should be considered.
Yours sincerely
Alan Baynham

Destruction of green space in this iconic part of Sydney is deplorable. The Botanic Gardens and the Domain are already under pressure and have been damaged enough. If the gallery needs more space, why can't it establish a subsidiary gallery say in Parramatta? Most overseas galleries have done this with great success - the Tate is a spectacular example. What possible benefit to Sydney and NSW can come from kicking the Powerhouse out of the city area while expanding the elitist art gallery with its rich and influential backers. This State Government has a deplorable record on open space, planning and the environment and its support for the gallery project is another bad example in all 3 respects. This project must not go ahead.

Please reconsider your thoughts on taking away any of the green space that is what we call the Botanical Gardens in Sydney. I find it so sad that we as a city have to loose anymore open beautiful green spaces to redevelopment. Please don't go ahead with this as I find it very distressing that myself or my daughter and future generations would not know it as it is, Please protect this land.
Surely this is the most important thing and if there is another Site let's look at it and make different plans.
Let's try and protect our beautiful city and think of how lucky we are to call this our home.
Once it's gone it's gone forever!!

Please reconsider your thoughts on taking away any of the green space that is what we call the Botanical Gardens in Sydney. I find it so sad that we as a city have to loose anymore open beautiful green spaces to redevelopment. Please don't go ahead with this as I find it very distressing that myself or my daughter and future generations would not know it as it is, Please protect this land.
Surely this is the most important thing and if there is another Site let's look at it and make different plans.
Let's try and protect our beautiful city and think of how lucky we are to call this our home.
Once it's gone it's gone forever!!

No provision of parking
Enroachment on the Gardens
Gardens loss of road and parking places
In the early days of the Opera House we had to take a bus from Domain Parking,where has it goneArt Gallery in Melbourne has marvellous transport access and available parking
At the Art Gallery today noticed many attendees elderly ,like me,
their access is far from convenient

1.The proposed development removes existing open green space from continual, 24/7, public use by all citizens.
2. This is not unused space as has been claimed.
3. With the planned increase in the population of Sydney we need more open green space, not less.
4. The land to be taken includes 11,000 sqm of priceless land kept in trust for the people of NSW by the Royal Botanic Gardens & Domain Trust. This should not be allowed.

Why does the AGNSW need a "Modern"?. There is the edifice at circular quay. In my opinion no green space should be taken for any reason, particularly for a self-indulgent modern art gallery which will be seen by few, as opposed to open space which can be appreciated by many.

My main objections revolve around these points:
1. loss of green space.
2. The size of the footprint
3. The visual impact on the precinct - particularly the vistas down from Art Gallery Road, Mrs Macquarie's Road and from Woolloomooloo Gate.
4. Tree removals, plantings and relocations.
5. Building heights and the proximity of these buildings to the road.
6. Seawater Heat Exchange System - would require easements as the ducting and pump chamber cut through Trust land with impacts on Trust land from the pipe trenches.
7. Round-a-bout outside Woolloomooloo Gate.
8. The significant disruption to the Garden and Domain during construction.
9. Loss of parking spaces outside the Gallery (owned and controlled by the Trust) . The plan seeks to transfer ownership and / or control of a very significant part of that road to the Art Gallery.
10. No public transport requirement study or plan.

1. The proposed buildings are too large and take far too much
open space from the Domain.
2. The Art Gallery has already been enlarged several times and there is already the Museum of Contemporary Art at Circular Quay. The Sydney Modern Gallery should be located near Parramatta adjacent to the planned light rail and Western Sydney
Metro. This would recognise the booming growth of Western Sydney.

Whilst I believe the Art Gallery needs enlarging, it is vital that it be done well. The current plan typifies the Australian sprawl - a luxury we no longer adhere to. Vastly larger world galleries are more compact in their building footprint. Our green space is precious and can not be increased. This plan - from projecting right onto Art Gallery Road, overshadowing the historic original gallery, and spreading unnecessarily largely down the slope would be fine if land was unlimited. It should be stepped back, and shrunk in floor space but perhaps dug into the slope lower down for more levels. I am not architectural, but anyone can see this lovely plan is very unsuitable for the proposed site.